Israel vs Iran.....

[MMC]

Like the title says. I know I put up Irans Military and Defense in another thread. But I will get it pasted up here to. I have been trying to find comparisons to put up. but none may be available.

Looks like 2012 is going to be a year full of Chaos. I do not see the Brews moving out before this year's End. Specially not around the Holidays. What I do know is we have 120 troops that do man a Missile Defense system somewhere in Israel. Thats not Counting the Usual Compliment of Marines at the US Embassy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces

Israel Defense Forces
Founded 1948
Service branches Israeli Army
Israeli Air Force
Israeli Navy
Leadership
Defense Minister Rav Aluf (ret.) Ehud Barak
Chief of General Staff Rav Aluf Benny Gantz
Manpower
Military age 18
Conscription 18
Available for
military service 1,499,186 males, age 17–49 (2000 est.),
1,462,063 females, age 17–49 (2000 est.)
Fit for
military service 1,226,903 males, age 17–49 (2000 est.),
1,192,319 females, age 17–49 (2000 est.)
Reaching military
age annually 50,348 males (2000 est.),
47,996 females (2000 est.)
Active personnel 187,000[1] (ranked 34th)
Reserve personnel 565,000[1]
Expenditures
Budget $16 billion (Israeli defence budget 2011)[2]
Percent of GDP 6.9% (2011)[3]
Industry
Domestic suppliers Israel Aerospace Industries
Israel Military Industries
Israel Weapon Industries
Elbit Systems
Elisra
Elta
Rafael Advanced Defense Systems
Soltam Systems
Plasan
Automotive Industries
Hatehof
Israel Shipyards
SimiGon
BUL Transmark
Aeronautics Defense Systems
Israel Ordnance Corps
Meprolight
Foreign suppliers United States[4]
Germany[5]
United Kingdom[6]
France[7]
Italy[8]
South Korea[9]
Spain[7]
Czech Republic[9]
Slovakia[7]
Canada[7]
Slovenia[7]
Bosnia and Herzegovina[7]
Austria[7]
Australia[7]
Romania[7]
Hungary[7]
Serbia[7]
India[7]
Colombia[7]
Brazil[7]
Related articles
History War of Independence (1948–1949)
Retribution operations (1950s–1960s)
Sinai War (1956)
War over Water (1964–1967)
Six-Day War (1967)
War of Attrition (1967–1970)
Yom Kippur War (1973)
Litani (1978)
First Lebanon War (1982)
South Lebanon conflict (1982–2000)
First Intifada (1987–1993)
Second Intifada (2000–2005)
Second Lebanon War (2006)
Gaza War (2008–2009)
Other

[MMC]

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1295887250689&id=b63b3bd4540e022b1e9a2fcfcea46f1f&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.chinadaily.com.cn%2fenglish%2 fdoc%2f2005-12%2f06%2fxin_031202060859929308333.jpg

This is just One Mobile Missile launcher we know they have. Given to the Iranians by the Russians. Also I believe the Iranians not only have the 3 Kilo Subs. But they also have their own as well as their Riverboat like Navy.

Defense industry
Main articles: Defense industry of Iran and List of military equipment manufactured in Iran.

Under the last Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, Iran's military industry was limited to assembly of foreign weapons. In the assembly lines that were put up by American firms, such as Bell, Litton and Northrop, Iranian workers put together a variety of helicopters, aircraft, guided missiles, electronic components and tanks.[21] In 1973 the Iran Electronics Industries (IEI) was established.[22] The company was set up in a first attempt to organize the assembly and repair of foreign-delivered weapons.[23] The Iranian Defense Industries Organization was the first to succeed in taking a step into what could be called a military industry by reverse engineering Soviet RPG-7, BM-21, and SAM-7 missiles in 1979.[23]

Nevertheless, most of Iran's weapons before the Islamic revolution were imported from the United States and Europe. Between 1971 and 1975, the Shah went on a buying spree, ordering $8 billion in weapons from the United States alone. This alarmed the United States Congress, which strengthened a 1968 law on arms exports in 1976 and renamed it the Arms Export Control Act. Still, the United States continued to sell large amounts of weapons to Iran until the 1979 Islamic Revolution.[24]

After the Islamic revolution, Iran found itself severely isolated and lacking technological expertise. Because of economic sanctions and a weapons embargo put on Iran by the United States, Iran was forced to rely on its domestic arms industry for weapons and spare parts since there were very few countries willing to do business with Iran.[25]

The Islamic Revolutionary Guards were put in charge of creating what is today known as the Iranian military industry. Under their command Iran's military industry was enormously expanded, and with the Ministry of Defense pouring investment into the missile industry, Iran soon accumulated a vast arsenal of missiles.[21] Since 1992, it also has produced its own tanks, armored personnel carriers, radar systems, guided missiles, submarines, military vessels and fighter planes.[26][27]

In recent years, official announcements have highlighted the development of weapons such as the Fajr-3 (MIRV), Hoot, Kowsar, Fateh-110, Shahab-3 missile systems and a variety of unmanned aerial vehicles, at least one of which Israel claims has been used to spy on its territory.[28] In 2006, an Iranian UAV acquired and allegedly tracked the American aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan for 25 minutes without being detected before returning safely to its base.

[MMC]

The Iranian Military consists of the Islamic Republic of Iran Army, Islamic Republic of Iran Navy, Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force, and the Iranian Air Defense Force. The regular armed forces have an estimated 545,000 personnel: the Islamic Republic of Iran Army, 465,000 personnel; the Islamic Republic of Iran Navy, 28,000 personnel, and the Islamic Republic of Iran Air Force, 52,000 airmen.[5] Iranian Air Defense Force is a branch split off from the IRIAF.[6]
The Army of the Guardians of the Islamic Revolution, or Revolutionary Guards, has an estimated 120,000 personnel in five branches: Its own Navy, Air Force, and Ground Forces; and the Quds Force (Special Forces).[5]
The Basij is a paramilitary volunteer force controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards. Its membership is a matter of controversy. Iranian sources claim a membership of 12.6 million, including women, of which perhaps 3 million are combat capable. There are a claimed 2,500 battalions of which some are full-time personnel.[7] Globalsecurity.org quotes a 2005 study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimating 90,000 active-duty full-time uniformed members, 300,000 reservists, and a total of 11 million men that can be mobilized if need be.[8]
Iran's military was called the Middle East's most powerful by General John Abizaid chief of United States Central Command (U.S. forces' commander in the region). However General Abizaid said he did not include the Israel Defense Forces as they did not fall into his area of operations.....snip~

Irans Numbers..... :-\

[MMC]

Lets get some visual perspectives with this.....http://politirant.com/Smileys/oldrant/m1helmet.gif

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1290701905191&id=404a53d462fd1b3f643f75f87eb9e64a&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.i-love-china.net%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2f2011%2f03%2fmap-middle-east2.gif http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1290504776298&id=f8b1c73cd89901401a40bbda6c57e493&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.ezilon.com%2fmaps%2fimages%2f middle_east_phy.gif

The Israelis would have to get permission from the Other Countries surrounding them to enter their Air Space. Syria we know that isn't going to happen. The Sunni will bow out due to their Crisis with the Shia. Then that Sharia law about Arab brothers comes into play. Which leaves Iraq and Turkey as access points. The Israelis will not be able to send a fleet to the Persian Gulf.

The Iranians would have the same set of complications other than they Could be given permission from Syria and Iraq. Much easier for them than it is for Israel. http://politirant.com/Smileys/oldrant/studying.gif

[Peter1469]

RUMIT (rumor intel) has it that Saudi Arabia has already granted Israel overflight rights.

RUMIT also has it that Israel has given up on the US under Obama and is seeking allies elsewhere- such as Saudi Arabia.

[Conley]

As I understand it the Israelis are going to have a hard time refueling. They have a long way to fly and with heavy armament they won't be able to get as far.

They claim to have 8 of the 707s but that number is debated.

With the threat of a conflict with Iran looming, the Israeli air force has augmented its fleet of KC-707 (“Re’em”) aerial refueling aircraft with an eighth tanker, bolstering the strike capacity the country would have if it tries to undertake a raid on Teheran’s nuclear facilities.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/awst/2010/01/11/AW_01_11_2010_p22-194785.xml

[Conley]

RUMIT (rumor intel) has it that Saudi Arabia has already granted Israel overflight rights.

RUMIT also has it that Israel has given up on the US under Obama and is seeking allies elsewhere- such as Saudi Arabia.


Yes, I was reading Saudi Arabia likely would grant airspace. They have also been pushing for the U.S. to take out the Iranian sites per some of the classified docs that were released via Wikileaks. They don't want a nuclear arms race in the ME..

[Peter1469]

What if Saudi Arabia allowed Israeli war planes to land and refuel?

I agree their in-flight refueling capacity is most likely inadequate.

[Conley]

What if Saudi Arabia allowed Israeli war planes to land and refuel?

I agree their in-flight refueling capacity is most likely inadequate.


I think if the Saudis go that far then they will risk being targeted themselves by the Iran response. Truthfully though Iran may target them anyway.

For example the blog I was just reading points out Iran should "attack the Saudi oil installation at Ras Tanura, 100 miles across the Persian Gulf from Bushehr. Forty percent of the world's oil passes through this port daily".

I don't know that it could be protected adequately; it seems there would be many ways to set it off.

[MMC]

Yeah the Saud will assit but their big bitch is Iran having the Nuke. They will be the one to seek a nuke in return and without hesitation.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/72/F-15I_Ra%27am.jpg/220px-F-15I_Ra%27am.jpg

Israelis F-15s would need to refuel even more than those bombers.

If the Saudis grant them access then You know the Syrians will grant Iran's......

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9d/Phantoms_are_fueling_from_Boeing_747.jpg/220px-Phantoms_are_fueling_from_Boeing_747.jpg

F-14's and F-4's.....not Counting any Russian Migs or their own planes.

[MMC]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/ZulfiqarFront-2.jpg/220px-ZulfiqarFront-2.jpg
Iranian Tank.....

[MMC]

Ballistic programMain article: Iran's missile forces
On November 2, 2006, Iran fired unarmed missiles to begin 10 days of military simulations. Iranian state television reported "dozens of missiles were fired including Shahab-2 and Shahab-3 missiles. The missiles had ranges from 300 km to up to 2,000 km. Iranian experts have made some changes to Shahab-3 missiles installing cluster warheads in them with the capacity to carry 1,400 bombs." These launches come after some United States-led military exercises in the Persian Gulf on October 30, 2006, meant to train for blocking the transport of weapons of mass destruction.[30] Iran is also believed to have started the development of an ICBM/IRBM missile project, known as Ghadr-110 with a range of 3000 km; the program is paralleled with advancement of a satellite launcher named IRIS.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Iran

Weapons of mass destructionMain articles: Iran and weapons of mass destruction and Science and technology in Iran
Iran ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention in 1997. Iranian troops and civilians suffered tens of thousands of casualties from Iraqi chemical weapons provided by western countries specifically Germany during the 1980-88 Iran–Iraq War. As a result, Iran has publicly stood against the use of chemical weapons, making numerous vitriolic comments against Iraq's use of such weapons in international forums.

Even today, more than eighteen years after the end of the Iran–Iraq War, about 30,000 Iranians are still suffering and dying from the effects of chemical weapons employed by Iraq during the war. The need to manage the treatment of such a large number of casualties has placed Iran’s medical specialists in the forefront of the development of effective treatment regimes for chemical weapons victims, and particularly for those suffering from exposure to mustard gas.[31]

Iran ratified the Biological weapons Convention in 1973.[32] Iran has advanced biological and genetic engineering research programs supporting an industry that produces vaccines for both domestic use and export.....snip~

If the Saud allow the Israel to fly over them.....then Palestine will begin launching rockets into Israel. The Shia in Iraq will attack the Sunni in Iraq. Think Syria is doing any damage now to the Sunni. Let the Saud or any Sunni Country that assists, and the Syrians will begin wiping out the Sunni enmasse. Hamas will become active. Worst of all, Hezbollah will come out from hiding and go full force at the Israelis. http://politirant.com/Smileys/oldrant/m1helmet.gif

[Mister D]

Palestinian rockets are but a nuisance at best. Israel could effectively demolish any and all Palestinian resistance in a war time scenario pretty quickly. Once the shit really hits the fan the kid gloves come off, Israel tells the world community (like their is such a thing) to fuck off, and Hezbollah is finished.

[MMC]

Palestinian rockets are but a nuisance at best. Israel could effectively demolish any and all Palestinian resistance in a war time scenario pretty quickly. Once the shit really hits the fan the kid gloves come off, Israel tells the world community (like their is such a thing) to fuck off, and Hezbollah is finished.


Which would require the Israelis declaring War on the Palestinians. Then Syria is in! Israel kicking the shit out of the Egypt, and Syria is one thing. Not Iran and Syria. Not All the Shia. Plus Iran isn't worried if the Sunni Jump in.

[Conley]

Palestinian rockets are but a nuisance at best. Israel could effectively demolish any and all Palestinian resistance in a war time scenario pretty quickly. Once the shit really hits the fan the kid gloves come off, Israel tells the world community (like their is such a thing) to fuck off, and Hezbollah is finished.


Which would require the Israelis declaring War on the Palestinians. Then Syria is in! Israel kicking the shit out of the Egypt, and Syria is one thing. Not Iran and Syria. Not All the Shia. Plus Iran isn't worried if the Sunni Jump in.


If / when it got to that point I think U.S. forces would become involved, at least air support. Not as if our forces aren't already there. I don't see China or Russia doing anything.

[Conley]

What about Israel using U.S. controlled airfields in Iraq? They could refuel and rearm there if we ended up as a coalition.

[Mister D]

Palestinian rockets are but a nuisance at best. Israel could effectively demolish any and all Palestinian resistance in a war time scenario pretty quickly. Once the shit really hits the fan the kid gloves come off, Israel tells the world community (like their is such a thing) to fuck off, and Hezbollah is finished.


Which would require the Israelis declaring War on the Palestinians. Then Syria is in! Israel kicking the shit out of the Egypt, and Syria is one thing. Not Iran and Syria. Not All the Shia. Plus Iran isn't worried if the Sunni Jump in.


They've done it before.

[Mister D]

What about Israel using U.S. controlled airfields in Iraq? They could refuel and rearm there if we ended up as a coalition.


That's probably one reason we retain those bases. Better still, the Sauds must know that.

[Conley]

What about Israel using U.S. controlled airfields in Iraq? They could refuel and rearm there if we ended up as a coalition.


That's probably one reason we retain those bases. Better still, the Sauds must know that.


Yes. As Peter mentioned, it seems possible the Israeli AF could refuel at bases in Saudi Arabia with permission, but they'd still have to get back to Israel to rearm. Using bases in Iraq would change everything and make quick repeated runs a real possibility.

The problem for those that want peace is that for both Israel and Iran it makes sense to hit extremely hard when they decide to strike, and the confrontation appears inevitable.

[MMC]

Palestinian rockets are but a nuisance at best. Israel could effectively demolish any and all Palestinian resistance in a war time scenario pretty quickly. Once the shit really hits the fan the kid gloves come off, Israel tells the world community (like their is such a thing) to fuck off, and Hezbollah is finished.


Which would require the Israelis declaring War on the Palestinians. Then Syria is in! Israel kicking the shit out of the Egypt, and Syria is one thing. Not Iran and Syria. Not All the Shia. Plus Iran isn't worried if the Sunni Jump in.


They've done it before.


Not with the Iranians they didnt.

[MMC]

What about Israel using U.S. controlled airfields in Iraq? They could refuel and rearm there if we ended up as a coalition.


Than Al-Sadr attacks those Iraqi bases.....with just the Shia in Iraq. Then AQ comes at us full Tilt. So how do the Israelis take out the Iranian missile Defense? Then what stops the Shia from rising up in Oman, Yemen, Bahrain. Forcing the Saudis to play D-fense.

Course if any of our troops get killed in Israel that bring us in. But we no longer have to wait. The IAEA report is out. The UN has what it needs to Mandate Action against Iran. Again, shit just got Real Serious!

[MMC]

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1252925320775&id=7d715225fc82429f175c126645b21d79&url=http%3a%2f%2fabetter-design.com%2fwp-content%2fuploads%2fIransBoatPlaneThingWouldStrike FearIntoOt_AB60%2fIran_bavar_2_abetter_design_com. jpg http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1291202075675&id=07592bd2a2d5b8761e16f44f95ecfc47&url=http%3a%2f%2fimg180.imageshack.us%2fimg180%2f5 327%2f610xyf.jpg


Heres some of those Boats CL and their Surface to Surface Fatah110.....

[Mister D]

Palestinian rockets are but a nuisance at best. Israel could effectively demolish any and all Palestinian resistance in a war time scenario pretty quickly. Once the shit really hits the fan the kid gloves come off, Israel tells the world community (like their is such a thing) to fuck off, and Hezbollah is finished.


Which would require the Israelis declaring War on the Palestinians. Then Syria is in! Israel kicking the shit out of the Egypt, and Syria is one thing. Not Iran and Syria. Not All the Shia. Plus Iran isn't worried if the Sunni Jump in.


They've done it before.


Not with the Iranians they didnt.


The US more than cancels out Iran. Better still, Syria is falling apart.

[Mister D]

What about Israel using U.S. controlled airfields in Iraq? They could refuel and rearm there if we ended up as a coalition.


Than Al-Sadr attacks those Iraqi bases.....with just the Shia in Iraq. Then AQ comes at us full Tilt. So how do the Israelis take out the Iranian missile Defense? Then what stops the Shia from rising up in Oman, Yemen, Bahrain. Forcing the Saudis to play D-fense.

Course if any of our troops get killed in Israel that bring us in. But we no longer have to wait. The IAEA report is out. The UN has what it needs to Mandate Action against Iran. Again, shit just got Real Serious!


AQ is a spent force and will need a long while to recover. Attacks, particularly by irregulars, are a non-issue.

[Mister D]

Not one of the Mideast states has a viable military machine. Worse still, Syria and Egypt are in political turmoil while the Palestinians and AQ are non-factors. If Israel wants to do this the time is nigh...

[MMC]

What about Israel using U.S. controlled airfields in Iraq? They could refuel and rearm there if we ended up as a coalition.


Than Al-Sadr attacks those Iraqi bases.....with just the Shia in Iraq. Then AQ comes at us full Tilt. So how do the Israelis take out the Iranian missile Defense? Then what stops the Shia from rising up in Oman, Yemen, Bahrain. Forcing the Saudis to play D-fense.

Course if any of our troops get killed in Israel that bring us in. But we no longer have to wait. The IAEA report is out. The UN has what it needs to Mandate Action against Iran. Again, shit just got Real Serious!


AQ is a spent force and will need a long while to recover. Attacks, particularly by irregulars, are a non-issue.


With the Shia.....attacks on Air Bases that have no hardened defenses and minus the troops to defend them. Opens them up to attacks by irregulars. Considering Obama is removing those troops out of Iraq. Even more of a probability.

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1291912154462&id=24c75dcb8900895af4fa09da0170d977&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.popularmilitary.com%2fgallery %2fdata%2f531%2fthumbs%2fmilitary_tm31_iran_iraq_w ar_1_.jpg

Tm 31 Tank Iran.....

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1345250927089&id=a85653d8bf81979f0c6cfc9e65043924&url=http%3a%2f%2f4.bp.blogspot.com%2f_mmBw3uzPnJI% 2fTH5RnoRhMfI%2fAAAAAAABkOE%2fovHNEW2qs9g%2fs400%2 fcrazy_military_parades_10.jpg

Moreover the Iranians even have Squads of these guys as well. As fighting forces. Probably Security Forces.

[Conley]

Yes, the timing is perfect for Israel. None of the traditional M.E. powers are in any position to stop them. Syria could fall into civil war any day.

As far as Al Queda, the U.S. would like nothing more than to flush them out and crush them. They won't be making any head on attacks because 1) they've been crushed in that area and 2) that is not their style of attack.

I don't see us sitting on the sidelines for long. Iran will attack Saudi oil plants and ports (right across the Gulf) as part of their response. They are not going to down without a fight and they won't have a lot of options in terms of where they can hit and make it hurt.

[MMC]

Not one of the Mideast states has a viable military machine. Worse still, Syria and Egypt are in political turmoil while the Palestinians and AQ are non-factors. If Israel wants to do this the time is nigh...


Globalsecurity.org quotes a 2005 study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimating 90,000 active-duty full-time uniformed members, 300,000 reservists, and a total of 11 million men that can be mobilized if need be.[8]
Iran's military was called the Middle East's most powerful by General John Abizaid chief of United States Central Command (U.S. forces' commander in the region).....snip~

;) :)

Thats 11 million.....if need be!!!!!

[Captain Obvious]

Ironically, I see our role as being that of convincing Israel to not strike, thus defending Iran in a sense.

[Mister D]

Granted, this will get ugly and while it's foolish to underestimate anyone let's not pretend that Iran or anyone else (remember Iraq's military machine? lol) has a military anywhere near Israel's standards.

[Conley]

Ironically, I see our role as being that of convincing Israel to not strike, thus defending Iran in a sense.


Right, and I believe the U.S.'s motives for that are purely economical. If oil spikes again our economy will go even more into the crapper.



Granted, this will get ugly and while it's foolish to underestimate anyone let's not pretend that Iran or anyone else (remember Iraq's military machine? lol) has a military anywhere near Israel's standards.


That's exactly what I thought of too. Let's not forget that Iran has had some civil unrest recently as well. 11 Million is a pipe dream.

[Mister D]

Not one of the Mideast states has a viable military machine. Worse still, Syria and Egypt are in political turmoil while the Palestinians and AQ are non-factors. If Israel wants to do this the time is nigh...


Globalsecurity.org quotes a 2005 study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimating 90,000 active-duty full-time uniformed members, 300,000 reservists, and a total of 11 million men that can be mobilized if need be.[8]
Iran's military was called the Middle East's most powerful by General John Abizaid chief of United States Central Command (U.S. forces' commander in the region).....snip~

;) :)

Thats 11 million.....if need be!!!!!


MMC, mobilizing 11 million men and getting them to where they can do anything useful are two very different things. So is having 11 million potential conscripts on paper and the means to actually equip and move them.

Yes, after Iraq's military was destroyed virtually overnight Iran had the next best. So?

[Captain Obvious]

Iran is also heavily supported by Russia and China - both for energy/economic purposes.

That's a valid factor also.

[Conley]

Granted Iran has been doing business with China, but also keep in mind the decades of sanctions. We saw the effect that had on Iraq's military.

[MMC]

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1337554378678&id=deb77aa2b510e36801a4b9fc50e01c33&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.defencetalk.com%2fpictures%2f data%2f4698%2fmedium%2fSaeqeh-iran-airforce-06.jpg

Kinda like the French's Mirage.....no that was 11 million in 2005. US CenCom/CIA Intel There is no mistaking it. On the Mobilization. Sounds about right for 75 million people.

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1264383830791&id=c301fd3e6c524022cd988113bc459690&url=http%3a%2f%2fi.ytimg.com%2fvi%2fC-ZqNZQk9y0%2f0.jpg http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1294940973145&id=f8e3ce70880ec325c44999c20533ea37&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.bangkokpost.com%2fmedia%2fcon tent%2f20110416%2f256688.jpg http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1358867074303&id=2cd5d431f51643cf7518da91c50450c6&url=http%3a%2f%2fnews.xinhuanet.com%2fenglish%2f20 07-09%2f22%2fxin_36209042219354062336052.jpg

Not quite D.....the shit on Iraq. Always was propaganda. Lets not forget the Iranians smoked Saddams ass and that was one brigade and some security forces. They didn't even break a sweat. Saddams troops.....well we know what happened there.

[Mister D]

Iran took a beating in the Iran-Iraq War. They suffered far worse than the Iraqis did. Worse still, they were fighting on Iranian soil. Logistics are a little easier in your own country. I'm not sure what history of the Iran-Iraq War you've been reading...

[Mister D]

And I didn't say 11 million was not an accurate number. I said it's not an easy task to put 11 million men in the field.

[Captain Obvious]

Granted Iran has been doing business with China, but also keep in mind the decades of sanctions. We saw the effect that had on Iraq's military.


I recall reading somewhere during Desert Strike that Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world. I doubt I can come up with that stat at this point but I wonder what effect sanctions really have when you consider that there are those like Russia and China ready and willing to negate any real sanctions that are put into place.

Any Middle East country is going to be supported by one major power or another for obvious reasons, which makes any political action such a risk in this region.

[Mister D]

BTW, if in the Year of Our Lord 2011 you see soldiers marching around parade ground style like it's 1933 chances are that that country has a low quality military force. ;) That's a show for the public. Nothing more.

[Conley]

Granted Iran has been doing business with China, but also keep in mind the decades of sanctions. We saw the effect that had on Iraq's military.


I recall reading somewhere during Desert Strike that Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world. I doubt I can come up with that stat at this point but I wonder what effect sanctions really have when you consider that there are those like Russia and China ready and willing to negate any real sanctions that are put into place.

Any Middle East country is going to be supported by one major power or another for obvious reasons, which makes any political action such a risk in this region.


But don't you think the sanctions had an effect on the Iraqi military regardless of that? The sanctions on Iraq didn't start until after the invasion of Kuwait. By the time of the second Gulf War they had taken effect with great results IMO.

[MMC]

Iran took a beating in the Iran-Iraq War. They suffered far worse than the Iraqis did. Worse still, they were fighting on Iranian soil. Logistics are a little easier in your own country. I'm not sure what history of the Iran-Iraq War you've been reading...


The real one.....just using wikipedia. Not sure what you mean by taking a beating.

The Iran–Iraq War, also known as the Imposed War (جنگ تحمیلی, Jang-e-tahmīlī) and Holy Defense (دفاع مقدس, Defā'-e-moqqaddas) in Iran, Saddām's Qādisiyyah (قادسيّة صدّام, Qādisiyyat Ṣaddām) in Iraq, and the (First) Persian Gulf War, was an armed conflict between the armed forces of Iraq and Iran, lasting from September 1980 to August 1988, making it the longest conventional war of the twentieth century.[12][13][14] It was initially referred to in English as the "Persian Gulf War" prior to the "Gulf War" of 1990.[citation needed]

The war began when Iraq invaded Iran, launching a simultaneous invasion by air and land into Iranian territory on 22 September 1980 following a long history of border disputes, and fears of Shia insurgency among Iraq's long-suppressed Shia majority influenced by the Iranian Revolution. Iraq was also aiming to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state. Although Iraq hoped to take advantage of the revolutionary chaos in Iran and attacked without formal warning, they made only limited progress into Iran and within several months were repelled by the Iranians who regained virtually all lost territory by June 1982. For the next six years, Iran was on the offensive.[15] Despite calls for a ceasefire by the United Nations Security Council, hostilities continued until 20 August 1988. The war finally ended with a United Nations brokered ceasefire in the form of United Nations Security Council Resolution 598, which was accepted by both sides. It took several weeks for the Iranian armed forces to evacuate Iraqi territory to honor pre-war international borders between the two nations (see 1975 Algiers Agreement). The last prisoners of war were exchanged in 2003.[15][16]

The war came at a great cost in lives and economic damage—half a million Iraqi and Iranian soldiers as well as civilians are believed to have died in the war with many more injured—but it brought neither reparations nor change in borders. The conflict is often compared to World War I,[17] in that the tactics used closely mirrored those of that conflict, including large scale trench warfare, manned machine-gun posts, bayonet charges, use of barbed wire across trenches, human wave attacks across no-man's land, and extensive use of chemical weapons such as mustard gas by the Iraqi government against Iranian troops and civilians as well as Iraqi Kurds. At the time, the UN Security Council issued statements that "chemical weapons had been used in the war." However, in these UN statements it was never made clear that it was only Iraq that was using chemical weapons, so it has been said that "the international community remained silent as Iraq used weapons of mass destruction against Iranian as well as Iraqi Kurds" and it is believed[18][19][20] that the "United States prevented the UN from condemning Iraq".[18]


;) :)

[Conley]

Granted Iran has been doing business with China, but also keep in mind the decades of sanctions. We saw the effect that had on Iraq's military.


I recall reading somewhere during Desert Strike that Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world. I doubt I can come up with that stat at this point but I wonder what effect sanctions really have when you consider that there are those like Russia and China ready and willing to negate any real sanctions that are put into place.

Any Middle East country is going to be supported by one major power or another for obvious reasons, which makes any political action such a risk in this region.


But don't you think the sanctions had an effect on the Iraqi military regardless of that? The sanctions on Iraq didn't start until after the invasion of Kuwait. By the time of the second Gulf War they had taken effect with great results IMO.


Sorry for quoting myself but to keep things clear instead of going back and editing my post I'll say that if you're talking about Desert Storm I am fairly certain that was before any sanctions had been put into place. Well, they had been but only for the time between Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and our military response (a couple of four months)

[Captain Obvious]

Granted Iran has been doing business with China, but also keep in mind the decades of sanctions. We saw the effect that had on Iraq's military.


I recall reading somewhere during Desert Strike that Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world. I doubt I can come up with that stat at this point but I wonder what effect sanctions really have when you consider that there are those like Russia and China ready and willing to negate any real sanctions that are put into place.

Any Middle East country is going to be supported by one major power or another for obvious reasons, which makes any political action such a risk in this region.


But don't you think the sanctions had an effect on the Iraqi military regardless of that? The sanctions on Iraq didn't start until after the invasion of Kuwait. By the time of the second Gulf War they had taken effect with great results IMO.


When you are dealing with rogue states, sanctions have an effect on the innocent - not the perpetrators.

[Conley]

Granted Iran has been doing business with China, but also keep in mind the decades of sanctions. We saw the effect that had on Iraq's military.


I recall reading somewhere during Desert Strike that Iraq had the 4th largest military in the world. I doubt I can come up with that stat at this point but I wonder what effect sanctions really have when you consider that there are those like Russia and China ready and willing to negate any real sanctions that are put into place.

Any Middle East country is going to be supported by one major power or another for obvious reasons, which makes any political action such a risk in this region.


But don't you think the sanctions had an effect on the Iraqi military regardless of that? The sanctions on Iraq didn't start until after the invasion of Kuwait. By the time of the second Gulf War they had taken effect with great results IMO.


When you are dealing with rogue states, sanctions have an effect on the innocent - not the perpetrators.


There is no doubt that many innocents are hurt by sanctions. That is why there were humanitarian efforts like Oil for Food with Iraq. I think the entire nation suffers, but those in positions of power certainly have the means to live better.

[Captain Obvious]

Which is why I think sanctions against Iran are all jerkoffology. It's not harming their ability to be a rogue state, it's harming the innocent Iranian.

Russia, China - they know that, they don't give a shit as long as Iran is giving them cheap oil. You think China is worried about the average Iranian? Fuck no, they don't give a rats ass about their own citizens, they're going to lose sleep over Iranians?

They just keep pumping Iran money and technology and Iran keeps progressing toward a nuclear state for the sole purpose of threatening Israel - which is why I think Israel will hit them.

Israel is on an island. They have US support to the extent that we are trying to avoid conflict - but conflict is immanent. BO isn't smart enough to mediate this issue nor does he care at this point. He's focused on re-election, not international conflict.

It's going to happen, I'm fairly sure of that.

[MMC]

Here ya go D.....
Iran
1,000,000 soldiers,
100,000 to 150,000 Pasdaran and Basij, 100,000 militia,
1,000 tanks,
6,000 armored vehicles,
9,090 artillery pieces,
1747 aircraft,
1750 helicopters
Iraq
[2] 850,000 in 1980,
1,500,000 by 1988,
2,500 tanks,
6,630 armored vehicles,
10,330 artillery pieces,
1000+ aircraft,
900+ helicopters[3]

Saddam attacks with 850 and by the end of the War he has the 4th largest Army in the World. Those numbers didnt pan out so well with Iraq. Such will be different with the Iranians.

Moreover the 11 million to mobilize won't even have to leave the Country to defned against any Israeli Air attacks. Also lets not forget that the Iranian nukes sites are Spread out. That Iran is 5 times larger than Israel.

[Mister D]

Iran took a beating in the Iran-Iraq War. They suffered far worse than the Iraqis did. Worse still, they were fighting on Iranian soil. Logistics are a little easier in your own country. I'm not sure what history of the Iran-Iraq War you've been reading...


The real one.....just using wikipedia. Not sure what you mean by taking a beating.

The Iran–Iraq War, also known as the Imposed War (جنگ تحمیلی, Jang-e-tahmīlī) and Holy Defense (دفاع مقدس, Defā'-e-moqqaddas) in Iran, Saddām's Qādisiyyah (قادسيّة صدّام, Qādisiyyat Ṣaddām) in Iraq, and the (First) Persian Gulf War, was an armed conflict between the armed forces of Iraq and Iran, lasting from September 1980 to August 1988, making it the longest conventional war of the twentieth century.[12][13][14] It was initially referred to in English as the "Persian Gulf War" prior to the "Gulf War" of 1990.[citation needed]

The war began when Iraq invaded Iran, launching a simultaneous invasion by air and land into Iranian territory on 22 September 1980 following a long history of border disputes, and fears of Shia insurgency among Iraq's long-suppressed Shia majority influenced by the Iranian Revolution. Iraq was also aiming to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state. Although Iraq hoped to take advantage of the revolutionary chaos in Iran and attacked without formal warning, they made only limited progress into Iran and within several months were repelled by the Iranians who regained virtually all lost territory by June 1982. For the next six years, Iran was on the offensive.[15] Despite calls for a ceasefire by the United Nations Security Council, hostilities continued until 20 August 1988. The war finally ended with a United Nations brokered ceasefire in the form of United Nations Security Council Resolution 598, which was accepted by both sides. It took several weeks for the Iranian armed forces to evacuate Iraqi territory to honor pre-war international borders between the two nations (see 1975 Algiers Agreement). The last prisoners of war were exchanged in 2003.[15][16]

The war came at a great cost in lives and economic damage—half a million Iraqi and Iranian soldiers as well as civilians are believed to have died in the war with many more injured—but it brought neither reparations nor change in borders. The conflict is often compared to World War I,[17] in that the tactics used closely mirrored those of that conflict, including large scale trench warfare, manned machine-gun posts, bayonet charges, use of barbed wire across trenches, human wave attacks across no-man's land, and extensive use of chemical weapons such as mustard gas by the Iraqi government against Iranian troops and civilians as well as Iraqi Kurds. At the time, the UN Security Council issued statements that "chemical weapons had been used in the war." However, in these UN statements it was never made clear that it was only Iraq that was using chemical weapons, so it has been said that "the international community remained silent as Iraq used weapons of mass destruction against Iranian as well as Iraqi Kurds" and it is believed[18][19][20] that the "United States prevented the UN from condemning Iraq".[18]


;) :)


From the same article:

The Iran–Iraq War was extremely costly in lives and material, one of the deadliest wars since World War II[citation needed]. Both countries were devastated by the effect of the war. It cost Iran an estimated 1 million casualties, killed or wounded, and Iranians continue to suffer and die as a consequence of Iraq's use of chemical weapons[citation needed]. Iraqi casualties are estimated at 250,000–500,000 killed or wounded. Thousands of civilians died on both sides in air raids and ballistic missile attacks.[151]


;) ;)

[MMC]

Equally important, in April 1982 the rival Baathist regime in Syria at the request of Iran closed the Kirkuk–Banias pipeline that allowed Iraqi oil to reach tankers on the Mediterranean, which reduced the Iraqi budget by $5 billion US/month.[62] The effects of the Syrian move was to place Iraq under dire financial pressure.[62] The British journalist Patrick Brogan wrote:

"From the time the southern front stabilized at the end of 1980, Iran was able to prevent all Iraqi oil exports through the Shatt. In April 1982, as the tide of war turned against Iraq, Syria closed Iraq's pipeline to the Mediterranean, and it appeared for a while that Iraq would be strangled economically before it was defeated militarily".[63]

After Syria closed the pipeline, Iraq's only means of exporting oil was the pipeline to Turkey that had a capacity of only 500,000 barrels per day (79,000 m3/d) that was quite insufficient to pay for the war.[64] Only generous financial support from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the other Gulf states, who feared the consequences of an Iranian victory saved Iraq from bankruptcy.[65] It was estimated that the Gulf states provided Iraq with an average of $60 billion US in subsides/per year.[63] Brogan wrote in 1989:

"The other Arab states came to the rescue. Iraq has one of the most unpleasant governments in the region and had shown constant hostility to the monarchies in Jordan, the Gulf and Saudi Arabia. However, the threat of Persian fundamentalism was far more to be feared, and thus the conservative Arab states could not afford to let Iraq be defeated."[63]

The Gulf states were especially inclined to fear an Iranian victory after Khomeini announced that monarchy was an illegitimate and un-Islamic form of government.[65] Khomeini's statement was widely understood as a call for the overthrow of the Gulf monarchies.[65] Both Kuwait and Saudi Arabia had less than friendly relations with Iraq before 1982, and the reluctant decision to support Iraq was taken only because the consequences of an Iranian victory were considered worse than the continued existence of Saddam's regime.[66] The British journalists John Bulloch and Harvey Morris wrote:

"The virulent Iranian campaign, which at its peak seemed to be making the overthrow of the Saudi regime a war aim on a par with the defeat of Iraq, did have an effect on the Kingdom, but not the one the Iranians wanted: instead of becoming more conciliatory, the Saudis became tougher, more self-confident, and less prone to seek compromise".[67]

Saudi Arabia was said to provide Iraq with $1 billion US/month starting in mid-1982.[64]

Which goes with what CL was talking about.

[Mister D]

Here ya go D.....
Iran
1,000,000 soldiers,
100,000 to 150,000 Pasdaran and Basij, 100,000 militia,
1,000 tanks,
6,000 armored vehicles,
9,090 artillery pieces,
1747 aircraft,
1750 helicopters
Iraq
[2] 850,000 in 1980,
1,500,000 by 1988,
2,500 tanks,
6,630 armored vehicles,
10,330 artillery pieces,
1000+ aircraft,
900+ helicopters[3]

Saddam attacks with 850 and by the end of the War he has the 4th largest Army in the World. Those numbers didnt pan out so well with Iraq. Such will be different with the Iranians.

Moreover the 11 million to mobilize won't even have to leave the Country to defned against any Israeli Air attacks. Also lets not forget that the Iranian nukes sites are Spread out. That Iran is 5 times larger than Israel.


Iran lost at least twice as many casualties as Iraq and perhaps as many as 4 times as many.

In any case, as a former soldier I'm surprised you don't understand the difference between between potential manpower and manpower that can brought to bear effectively. 11 million men can defend against Israeli air strikes? Huh? By the time they even know what's going on those air strikes will be long over.

[MMC]

Iran took a beating in the Iran-Iraq War. They suffered far worse than the Iraqis did. Worse still, they were fighting on Iranian soil. Logistics are a little easier in your own country. I'm not sure what history of the Iran-Iraq War you've been reading...


The real one.....just using wikipedia. Not sure what you mean by taking a beating.

The Iran–Iraq War, also known as the Imposed War (جنگ تحمیلی, Jang-e-tahmīlī) and Holy Defense (دفاع مقدس, Defā'-e-moqqaddas) in Iran, Saddām's Qādisiyyah (قادسيّة صدّام, Qādisiyyat Ṣaddām) in Iraq, and the (First) Persian Gulf War, was an armed conflict between the armed forces of Iraq and Iran, lasting from September 1980 to August 1988, making it the longest conventional war of the twentieth century.[12][13][14] It was initially referred to in English as the "Persian Gulf War" prior to the "Gulf War" of 1990.[citation needed]

The war began when Iraq invaded Iran, launching a simultaneous invasion by air and land into Iranian territory on 22 September 1980 following a long history of border disputes, and fears of Shia insurgency among Iraq's long-suppressed Shia majority influenced by the Iranian Revolution. Iraq was also aiming to replace Iran as the dominant Persian Gulf state. Although Iraq hoped to take advantage of the revolutionary chaos in Iran and attacked without formal warning, they made only limited progress into Iran and within several months were repelled by the Iranians who regained virtually all lost territory by June 1982. For the next six years, Iran was on the offensive.[15] Despite calls for a ceasefire by the United Nations Security Council, hostilities continued until 20 August 1988. The war finally ended with a United Nations brokered ceasefire in the form of United Nations Security Council Resolution 598, which was accepted by both sides. It took several weeks for the Iranian armed forces to evacuate Iraqi territory to honor pre-war international borders between the two nations (see 1975 Algiers Agreement). The last prisoners of war were exchanged in 2003.[15][16]

The war came at a great cost in lives and economic damage—half a million Iraqi and Iranian soldiers as well as civilians are believed to have died in the war with many more injured—but it brought neither reparations nor change in borders. The conflict is often compared to World War I,[17] in that the tactics used closely mirrored those of that conflict, including large scale trench warfare, manned machine-gun posts, bayonet charges, use of barbed wire across trenches, human wave attacks across no-man's land, and extensive use of chemical weapons such as mustard gas by the Iraqi government against Iranian troops and civilians as well as Iraqi Kurds. At the time, the UN Security Council issued statements that "chemical weapons had been used in the war." However, in these UN statements it was never made clear that it was only Iraq that was using chemical weapons, so it has been said that "the international community remained silent as Iraq used weapons of mass destruction against Iranian as well as Iraqi Kurds" and it is believed[18][19][20] that the "United States prevented the UN from condemning Iraq".[18]


;) :)


From the same article:

The Iran–Iraq War was extremely costly in lives and material, one of the deadliest wars since World War II[citation needed]. Both countries were devastated by the effect of the war. It cost Iran an estimated 1 million casualties, killed or wounded, and Iranians continue to suffer and die as a consequence of Iraq's use of chemical weapons[citation needed]. Iraqi casualties are estimated at 250,000–500,000 killed or wounded. Thousands of civilians died on both sides in air raids and ballistic missile attacks.[151]


;) ;)


Also Included was the Kurds in those numbers. But Iran did win the war. They were almost econimcally strangled out. They stayed in Iraq until 82. Also they took more prisoners than Saddam did. Moreover if you check it out. This all took place after Iran depeleted its military in 76-78.

[Mister D]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.

[Conley]

I can't see any measure by which one could say Iran won the Iraq-Iran war. It was a stalemate...Iran can be proud of the fact that they fought to a draw considering the international support Iraq had both in arms and aid, but they didn't win anything so far as I can tell.

[Mister D]

I can't see any measure by which one could say Iran won the Iraq-Iran war. It was a stalemate...Iran can be proud of the fact that they fought to a draw considering the international support Iraq had both in arms and aid, but they didn't win anything so far as I can tell.


I have to admit that was a pretty vicious conflict. It was really a major war at least in terms of its human cost yet few people are know much about it.

[Conley]

I can't see any measure by which one could say Iran won the Iraq-Iran war. It was a stalemate...Iran can be proud of the fact that they fought to a draw considering the international support Iraq had both in arms and aid, but they didn't win anything so far as I can tell.


I have to admit that was a pretty vicious conflict. It was really a major war at least in terms of its human cost yet few people are know much about it.


It might provide further incite into what the Iranians are prepared to do in the event of war with Israel.

[MMC]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.


Truthfully neither side did. Again in defense of the Iranians its as I said. They were depleted down. Then had to take Saddam on with less forces than what they would have normally had under the Shaw.

I thought it was the win for the Iranians. Less troops. Expel an invader, then take his ground and hold it for 6 yrs and only leave by agreement. Costs were about the same for both. Except in deaths.

[Mister D]

I can't see any measure by which one could say Iran won the Iraq-Iran war. It was a stalemate...Iran can be proud of the fact that they fought to a draw considering the international support Iraq had both in arms and aid, but they didn't win anything so far as I can tell.


I have to admit that was a pretty vicious conflict. It was really a major war at least in terms of its human cost yet few people are know much about it.


It might provide further incite into what the Iranians are prepared to do in the event of war with Israel.


This was at a stage when fanaticism was high (the Shah was expelled in 1979) and Iran itself had been invaded and Iranian soil occupied. I don't see either the religious or the nationalist impulse being as much of a factor in the Iranian will to fight if attacked by Israel.

[Mister D]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.


Truthfully neither side did. Again in defense of the Iranians its as I said. They were depleted down. Then had to take Saddam on with less forces than what they would have normally had under the Shaw.

I thought it was the win for the Iranians. Less troops. Expel an invader, then take his ground and hold it for 6 yrs and only leave by agreement. Costs were about the same for both. Except in deaths.


I certainly wouldn't characterize that as a win nit, in any case, my point is that the Iranian military simply isn't the fighting force you're making it out to be. It never was.

[MMC]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.


Truthfully neither side did. Again in defense of the Iranians its as I said. They were depleted down. Then had to take Saddam on with less forces than what they would have normally had under the Shaw.

I thought it was the win for the Iranians. Less troops. Expel an invader, then take his ground and hold it for 6 yrs and only leave by agreement. Costs were about the same for both. Except in deaths.


I certainly wouldn't characterize that as a win nit, in any case, my point is that the Iranian military simply isn't the fighting force you're making it out to be. It never was.


lol and my point is they arn't the push-over you think they are. I was quoting CenCom from 2005. Not to mention that War with Iraq was 25 yrs ago. Since then they have acquired some other technologies. ;)

Thats not to say Israel hasnt either. First the Iranians are using F14's and F4s. The Israelis are using F-15s and 16s. Also we don't know how many Russian or Chinese Migs they got.

[Mister D]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.


Truthfully neither side did. Again in defense of the Iranians its as I said. They were depleted down. Then had to take Saddam on with less forces than what they would have normally had under the Shaw.

I thought it was the win for the Iranians. Less troops. Expel an invader, then take his ground and hold it for 6 yrs and only leave by agreement. Costs were about the same for both. Except in deaths.


I certainly wouldn't characterize that as a win nit, in any case, my point is that the Iranian military simply isn't the fighting force you're making it out to be. It never was.


lol and my point is they arn't the push-over you think they are. I was quoting CenCom from 2005. Not to mention that War with Iraq was 25 yrs ago. Since then they have acquired some other technologies. ;)

Thats not to say Israel hasnt either. First the Iranians are using F14's and F4s. The Israelis are using F-15s and 16s. Also we don't know how many Russian or Chinese Migs they got.


The Iranian military is inferior to the Israeli military both in terms of technology, and training/skill. It's even more of a paper tiger than Iraq's was. You can quote from CenCom all you want. There job is not to underestimate an enemy but the fact is that Iran without nuclear weapons is a joke in military terms barring a ground invasion of Iran which Israel would never launch.

[Conley]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.


Truthfully neither side did. Again in defense of the Iranians its as I said. They were depleted down. Then had to take Saddam on with less forces than what they would have normally had under the Shaw.

I thought it was the win for the Iranians. Less troops. Expel an invader, then take his ground and hold it for 6 yrs and only leave by agreement. Costs were about the same for both. Except in deaths.


I certainly wouldn't characterize that as a win nit, in any case, my point is that the Iranian military simply isn't the fighting force you're making it out to be. It never was.


lol and my point is they arn't the push-over you think they are. I was quoting CenCom from 2005. Not to mention that War with Iraq was 25 yrs ago. Since then they have acquired some other technologies. ;)

Thats not to say Israel hasnt either. First the Iranians are using F14's and F4s. The Israelis are using F-15s and 16s. Also we don't know how many Russian or Chinese Migs they got.


Another problem for Iran is that those F14s and F4s are hard to keep operational without parts.

Maybe they're able to jury rig something together?

Knowledge about F-14 use by Iran is limited; deteriorating relations led to an arms embargo being imposed on Iran, including the last Tomcat built for Iran, which was embargoed and eventually turned over to the United States Navy. Large shipments of spares were held back, and many Iranian aircraft were cannibalized for spare parts. Iran had an estimated 44 F-14s,[51] with some 20 operational by 2009.[52] However, Iranian military sources say that, through building of spare parts and refurbishment, they now have 60 operational F-14s.[53]

In January 2007, the US Department of Defense announced that sales of spare F-14 parts would be suspended over concerns of the parts ending up in Iran.[54] In July 2007, the remaining American F-14s were shredded to ensure that any parts could not be acquired.[49] In summer of 2010, Iran requested that the United States deliver the 80th F-14 it had purchased in 1974, but delivery was denied after the Islamic Revolution.[55][56] In October 2010, an Iranian Air Force commander claimed that the country overhauls and optimizes different types of military aircraft, mentioning that Air Force has even installed Iran-made radar systems on the F-14.[57]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F-14_Tomcat#Iran

[MMC]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.


Truthfully neither side did. Again in defense of the Iranians its as I said. They were depleted down. Then had to take Saddam on with less forces than what they would have normally had under the Shaw.

I thought it was the win for the Iranians. Less troops. Expel an invader, then take his ground and hold it for 6 yrs and only leave by agreement. Costs were about the same for both. Except in deaths.


I certainly wouldn't characterize that as a win nit, in any case, my point is that the Iranian military simply isn't the fighting force you're making it out to be. It never was.


lol and my point is they arn't the push-over you think they are. I was quoting CenCom from 2005. Not to mention that War with Iraq was 25 yrs ago. Since then they have acquired some other technologies. ;)

Thats not to say Israel hasnt either. First the Iranians are using F14's and F4s. The Israelis are using F-15s and 16s. Also we don't know how many Russian or Chinese Migs they got.


The Iranian military is inferior to the Israeli military both in terms of technology, and training/skill. It's even more of a paper tiger than Iraq's was. You can quote from CenCom all you want. There job is not to underestimate an enemy but the fact is that Iran without nuclear weapons is a joke in military terms barring a ground invasion of Iran which Israel would never launch.


Is Israeli technology Superior to Russian? Highly unlikely. Training wise I give it to the Israelis. Lets be a little realistic. CenCom and the Joints Chiefs wouldnt call them the most powerful without a nuke in the ME for no reason. their job is also to gage the enemy's strenths and weaknesses. The Israelis havent fought anybody either. Not anybody who is somebody. Yet they have trained with the best in the World. You dont see the Iranians training with the Russians or Chinese.

Both countries cant fight a ground war. But I do think the Iranians have more missiles and More RPGs and or ground to air type of units. Meaning hand held units.

[Mister D]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.


Truthfully neither side did. Again in defense of the Iranians its as I said. They were depleted down. Then had to take Saddam on with less forces than what they would have normally had under the Shaw.

I thought it was the win for the Iranians. Less troops. Expel an invader, then take his ground and hold it for 6 yrs and only leave by agreement. Costs were about the same for both. Except in deaths.


I certainly wouldn't characterize that as a win nit, in any case, my point is that the Iranian military simply isn't the fighting force you're making it out to be. It never was.


lol and my point is they arn't the push-over you think they are. I was quoting CenCom from 2005. Not to mention that War with Iraq was 25 yrs ago. Since then they have acquired some other technologies. ;)

Thats not to say Israel hasnt either. First the Iranians are using F14's and F4s. The Israelis are using F-15s and 16s. Also we don't know how many Russian or Chinese Migs they got.


The Iranian military is inferior to the Israeli military both in terms of technology, and training/skill. It's even more of a paper tiger than Iraq's was. You can quote from CenCom all you want. There job is not to underestimate an enemy but the fact is that Iran without nuclear weapons is a joke in military terms barring a ground invasion of Iran which Israel would never launch.


Is Israeli technology Superior to Russian? Highly unlikely. Training wise I give it to the Israelis. Lets be a little realistic. CenCom and the Joints Chiefs wouldnt call them the most powerful without a nuke in the ME for no reason. their job is also to gage the enemy's strenths and weaknesses. The Israelis havent fought anybody either. Not anybody who is somebody. Yet they have trained with the best in the World. You dont see the Iranians training with the Russians or Chinese.

Both countries cant fight a ground war. But I do think the Iranians have more missiles and More RPGs and or ground to air type of units. Meaning hand held units.


US technology is superior to Russian technology and the Israelis have some of our technology. In addition, let's face it. The Russian military has seen better days.

Iraq's armed forces were treated the same way and they collapsed virtually overnight. I agree that it's not a good idea to underestimate an enemy but puffing them up into something they are clearly not does you no good either.

[Conley]

The war was a stalemate for all intents and purposes. My point is that the Iranian did not perform very well.


Truthfully neither side did. Again in defense of the Iranians its as I said. They were depleted down. Then had to take Saddam on with less forces than what they would have normally had under the Shaw.

I thought it was the win for the Iranians. Less troops. Expel an invader, then take his ground and hold it for 6 yrs and only leave by agreement. Costs were about the same for both. Except in deaths.


I certainly wouldn't characterize that as a win nit, in any case, my point is that the Iranian military simply isn't the fighting force you're making it out to be. It never was.


lol and my point is they arn't the push-over you think they are. I was quoting CenCom from 2005. Not to mention that War with Iraq was 25 yrs ago. Since then they have acquired some other technologies. ;)

Thats not to say Israel hasnt either. First the Iranians are using F14's and F4s. The Israelis are using F-15s and 16s. Also we don't know how many Russian or Chinese Migs they got.


The Iranian military is inferior to the Israeli military both in terms of technology, and training/skill. It's even more of a paper tiger than Iraq's was. You can quote from CenCom all you want. There job is not to underestimate an enemy but the fact is that Iran without nuclear weapons is a joke in military terms barring a ground invasion of Iran which Israel would never launch.


Is Israeli technology Superior to Russian? Highly unlikely. Training wise I give it to the Israelis. Lets be a little realistic. CenCom and the Joints Chiefs wouldnt call them the most powerful without a nuke in the ME for no reason. their job is also to gage the enemy's strenths and weaknesses. The Israelis havent fought anybody either. Not anybody who is somebody. Yet they have trained with the best in the World. You dont see the Iranians training with the Russians or Chinese.

Both countries cant fight a ground war. But I do think the Iranians have more missiles and More RPGs and or ground to air type of units. Meaning hand held units.


I think Israeli tech is American tech, we shower them with weapons and military aid. So I do think it's superior to second generation Russian arms.

Any talk of a ground war is moot IMO because that's not what the Israelis are after and Iran would never get mobilized and to the Israeli border before the U.S. stepped in (GAME OVER).

Also, the most powerful military in the Middle East isn't saying very much considering the ease with which the formerly most powerful military was dispatched. I agree in not underestimating them but a land invasion of Iraq is again very different from the combat we're likely to see.

[MMC]

Yes US Tech is better than Russian in some things. But the Israelis do have their own as well. Course some things were simple like the AK. Which is why after some time I will have some pics up to see some of Irans War machine and the Israelis.

Either way the talk is getting tuff on both ends of the spectrum.

Plus now with Israel having to listen to Sarkosy's disgusting ass. I guess they can count on the French trying to get up all in their buisness. Sarkosy didnt like the fact that after he shafted Israel with their little play in the UN with the Palestinians. That Netanyahu then ordered the building of another settlement in East Jerusalem. See Natanyahu don't go for all that Double-talk by the French. The Brews won't accept any chastisement by the French. Nor should they.

Now D.....there is your papertiger that always was and always will be. IMO we should have bitchslapped the French years ago. AT least Obama Chided the French and Sarkosy over that UN play with the Palestinians. Plus it also showed that French failed once again to be upfront with us. That makes two Strikes. Althought technically we had their first back in the 60s. Which would give them 3. 3 and out!

[MMC]

http://news.yahoo.com/ahmadinejad-iran-wont-retreat-nuclear-path-084255717.html
AP – 19 mins ago.....


TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran won't retreat "one iota" from its nuclear program, but the world is being misled by claims that it seeks atomic weapons, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Wednesday in his first reaction since a U.N. watchdog report that Tehran is on the brink of developing a nuclear warhead.

In Paris, Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said France would support boosting sanctions against Tehran to an "unprecedented scale" if Iran stonewalls investigations, even as Israel and others say that military options are still possible. Meanwhile, Iran's chief allies, China and Russia, have issued cautious statements calling for diplomacy and dialogue.

The U.N. Security Council has passed four sets of damaging sanctions on Iran, but veto-wielding members China and Russia oppose further measures and are unlikely to change their minds despite the report's findings.....snip~

Don't look like the Iranians will be complying with any inspections. As for the Frecnh Speaking out. Why is it that the French Speak First yet are the last to do anything when it comes time to man up? Anyone else noticing that all this Year France has been the one stepping out and leading the way with their Feeble Words and Weak Ass Statements? Any other time.....France sits on their azz

Should France be saying anything at all? In truth, shouldnt we be Standing UP and telling the French. Hey.....STFU! Time to Bitch slap the French as they are all up into trying to get us to spend money to bail their ass out. Worse is the French promising others they will get money to help them with their Elections. Like Egypt. Who the french promised to get them 70 mil for their upcoming Election. Then the French want to give the libyan Rebels more money. Then They worked a deal out with Oman to get a Bank up and running for the Rebels. Which all know the French have their hand in that cookie jar.

The Russians and the Chinese know whats in the report but they are playing it off that they will need to see more before responding back. So they are not going to support stricter sanctions. Looks like this is goign to spiral out even more now.

[MMC]

http://ts3.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1281019215930&id=1f6ff432c82b4600d152783404bf5d63&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.wlu.edu%2fimages%2fspecial_pr ograms%2f2010abroad%2fMaps%2fIsrael-map.jpg

Map of Israel.....

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/israel/images/map-army.gif

Israel Army Bases
■Beit Lead army base
■Hadera Northern Infantry Training Base
■Mishmar HaNegev army base
■Shomryyi Southern Infantry Training Base
■Shrga army base
■Shizafon Armor Corps Training Base

Map of Israel's Military bases.....

[MMC]

http://ts2.mm.bing.net/images/thumbnail.aspx?q=1296124153497&id=a7103204d72913a42c7add5c8b852893&url=http%3a%2f%2fwww.globalsecurity.org%2fmilitary %2fworld%2fisrael%2fimages%2fnaval-base.jpg

Israel's Naval Ports.....

MISSILES
Air-to-Air Air-to-Surface
Shafrir-2
Python 3
Python 4
Python 5
Alto
Derby
Gabriel
Harpy
NT-Dandy
SPICE bomb

Surface-to-Surface Surface-to-Air
Gil ATGM
Mapatz ATGM
Spike ATGM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAR 160 mm MRL
240-mm Rocket
MAR-290 MRL
MAR-350 MRL
Barak
Barak NG
Barak 8
SPYDER


Israeli Missiles.....

[Conley]

Yep, China and Russia will stop any attempt to strengthen the sanctions. They are calling Israel's bet. So we'll see if they'll raise or fold. I don't know much about the various holidays involved but I would think with the Jewish calendar a January strike would be about right. Maybe 2012 really will be our last year. :o

[MMC]

Yep, China and Russia will stop any attempt to strengthen the sanctions. They are calling Israel's bet. So we'll see if they'll raise or fold. I don't know much about the various holidays involved but I would think with the Jewish calendar a January strike would be about right. Maybe 2012 really will be our last year. :o


Yeah it would have to come after the Holidays.....while all talk about Nukes. Iran could use chemical weapons. They are the foremost in that field having to deal with the effects of Mustard gas. Who knows what other ocktail they discovered with that shit. :-\

[Conley]

Yep, China and Russia will stop any attempt to strengthen the sanctions. They are calling Israel's bet. So we'll see if they'll raise or fold. I don't know much about the various holidays involved but I would think with the Jewish calendar a January strike would be about right. Maybe 2012 really will be our last year. :o


Yeah it would have to come after the Holidays.....while all talk about Nukes. Iran could use chemical weapons. They are the foremost in that field having to deal with the effects of Mustard gas. Who knows what other ocktail they discovered with that shit. :-\


If Iran uses chemical weapons on Israeli cities, then Israel will use their 200 some nuclear weapons on Iran. It will be destroyed. That is definitely WCS. I am not sure Iran would go that far - the whole reason they are pursuing the nukes is to preserve their existence. They have seen how it worked for North Korea.

[MMC]

Yesterday they stated the Iraqis took over the Second largest Air Base in Iraq. If the Israelis wait until next year. All our troops will be out of Iraq. So there will be no cover there.

[Conley]

Well we will still have troops and bases in the region. Combat troops out of Iraq but are we really pulling everyone out?

[Mister D]

Yes US Tech is better than Russian in some things. But the Israelis do have their own as well. Course some things were simple like the AK. Which is why after some time I will have some pics up to see some of Irans War machine and the Israelis.

Either way the talk is getting tuff on both ends of the spectrum.

Plus now with Israel having to listen to Sarkosy's disgusting ass. I guess they can count on the French trying to get up all in their buisness. Sarkosy didnt like the fact that after he shafted Israel with their little play in the UN with the Palestinians. That Netanyahu then ordered the building of another settlement in East Jerusalem. See Natanyahu don't go for all that Double-talk by the French. The Brews won't accept any chastisement by the French. Nor should they.

Now D.....there is your papertiger that always was and always will be. IMO we should have bitchslapped the French years ago. AT least Obama Chided the French and Sarkosy over that UN play with the Palestinians. Plus it also showed that French failed once again to be upfront with us. That makes two Strikes. Althought technically we had their first back in the 60s. Which would give them 3. 3 and out!


They have their issues with us as well stemming from our control of the continent during the Cold War. I have nothing against the French.

[MMC]

Well we will still have troops and bases in the region. Combat troops out of Iraq but are we really pulling everyone out?


Acording to what I hear All but the Marines in the Embassy and possibly some trainers. Which that has to be worked on. Did you know the Iraqis want to Charge Any Americans they can for Crimes against their country now? Meaning our troopers in Uniform.

Thats some will go to Kuwait. Where we got like 23k already. Again this may change things with Afghanistan. For Obama was going to try and get the majority of them out by 2013. Yesterday the Pakis agreed to go after the Haqqani.(dont know if that can be trusted) But I don't see how he can if Israel goes thru with this alledged hit.

Didnt the Iranians send a fleet of ships to Syria about a month ago? I have not heard anything on their return. Are they still sitting in Club Med? That could prove interesting. http://politirant.com/Smileys/oldrant/thinking.gif

[Conley]

Good point about the Iranian fleet, I'll have to look that up.

The Pakistanis have shown time and again they cannot be trusted. I would not believe them.

[Mister D]

Good point about the Iranian fleet, I'll have to look that up.

The Pakistanis have shown time and again they cannot be trusted. I would not believe them.


You'd hope our leadership would be a little cynical about the Pakis.

[Conley]

Good point about the Iranian fleet, I'll have to look that up.

The Pakistanis have shown time and again they cannot be trusted. I would not believe them.


You'd hope our leadership would be a little cynical about the Pakis.


I am sure by now they are. Osama was the smoking gun if there weren't enough already.

[MMC]

Good point about the Iranian fleet, I'll have to look that up.

The Pakistanis have shown time and again they cannot be trusted. I would not believe them.


You'd hope our leadership would be a little cynical about the Pakis.


I am sure by now they are. Osama was the smoking gun if there weren't enough already.


Uhm.....wonder how much the Dems paid-em off with or will get them? Some more of our Humaniterrorism.

[Conley]

The Democrats paid them off? Who and for what reason?

[Mister D]

Good point about the Iranian fleet, I'll have to look that up.

The Pakistanis have shown time and again they cannot be trusted. I would not believe them.


You'd hope our leadership would be a little cynical about the Pakis.


I am sure by now they are. Osama was the smoking gun if there weren't enough already.


true.

[MMC]

The Democrats paid them off? Who and for what reason?


The Pakis for going after the Haqqani.

[MMC]

http://news.yahoo.com/irans-top-leader-warns-us-israel-against-strike-103513091.html

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran's supreme leader on Thursday warned Israel and the United States that Tehran's response will be tough should its archenemies choose a military strike against Iran over the country's controversial nuclear program.

"Anybody who takes up the idea of an attack on Iran, should get ready to receive a strong slap and an iron fist" by the Iranian armed forces, said Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Israel sees Iran as an existential threat, citing Ahmadinejad's calls for Israel's destruction and Iran's support for Arab militant groups. Ahead of the IAEA report's release on Tuesday, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak had said that without effective sanctions, Israel would not take any option "off the table," a reference to possible military action.

"The enemies, particularly the United States and its pawns and the Zionist regime, should know that the Iranian nation does not seek to invade any country or nation," Khamenei said, addressing officers at a military academy in Tehran.

"But Iran will strongly respond to any invasion or attack with such power and in a way that the aggressors and invaders will be smashed from the inside," said Khamenei, who has final say on all state matters in Iran. His remarks were quoted by state radio.

"The Iranian nation is not a nation that only sits and watches threats coming from straw powers, which are internally eaten by worms," he added.....snip~

Khamenei speaks out and Warns all again. What are these lines, smashed from the inside. Straw Power??? Is this guy delusional. One thing is for sure the Iranians need to start listenting to some rap music on the dis or something. These are the dumbest responses I have seen, and this is suppose to be their Leader.

The one thing that gets me with these guys is that they want to talk shit. But dont know how to. Still they forget the most important part of Talking the Talk. Thats Walking the Walk. Which they obviously cannot due.

So why antagonize the 800lb gorilla in the room?

[MMC]

http://news.yahoo.com/israeli-firm-says-costs-too-high-iran-strike-134053743.html

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A leading Israeli investment firm said on Thursday any military strike on Iranian nuclear facilities would exact an economic price too high for the world to accept, and as a result, it would likely acquiesce to a nuclear Iran.

A sharp rise in the price of oil, the costs of war and the damage to global trade would be too great and deter world powers from taking any serious action, said Amir Kahanovich, chief economist at Clal Finance, one of Israel's largest brokerage houses.

Even for Israel the economic cost of a military confrontation that could include retaliatory missile attacks by Tehran and proxies in Gaza and Lebanon would be too high, Kahanovich wrote.

"Unfortunately, it appears that a nuclear Iran is the most reasonable scenario," he added.

Kahanovich said even a threat of attack on Iran could take an economic toll by raising risk premiums in Israel.

If Iran were backed into a corner it could take action, such as blocking the Strait of Hormuz, causing the price of oil to jump above $250 a barrel, the report said.

And the burden of funding a military confrontation would be too great with so many countries already hurting in the world economic crisis, it added.

"The most we may see is another round of light sanctions," he said.....snip~

[MMC]

http://news.yahoo.com/irans-ali-khamenei-threatens-u-israel-big-slap-225800740.html

http://news.yahoo.com/irans-khamenei-warns-u-israel-against-attack-102546219.html

2 More links on Irans response back..... ;)

[MMC]

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/envoy/israeli-uk-media-report-increased-planning-confrontation-iran-211736856.html

"Britain's armed forces are stepping up their contingency planning for potential military action against Iran amid mounting concern about Tehran's nuclear enrichment programme, the Guardian has learned," a separate Guardian report Wednesday said. The UK Defense Ministry "believes the US may decide to fast-forward plans for targeted missile strikes at some key Iranian facilities. British officials say that if Washington presses ahead it will seek, and receive, UK military help for any mission, despite some deep reservations within the coalition government."

American officials also indicated this week that it is with an eye to containing Iran that Washington plans to boost the U.S. troop presence in the Persian Gulf as it withdraws from Iraq by the end of the year.....snip~

The Brits are in plus now Sarkosy came out and stated France will not stand idly by if Israel is attacked. Still says preventive strike should only be last resort.

[Peter1469]

Have the Brits replaced their depleted two-week stock of cruise missiles yet? :o

[MMC]

Have the Brits replaced their depleted two-week stock of cruise missiles yet? :o


:D ;D

[jgreer]

Everyone agrees it is just a matter of time until Iran gets nuclear bombs. Sooner or later it will happen.

So why do we keep fighting them? We should start the peace process now so that by the time they get the bombs they dont want to use them on us. Besides they are a much bigger threat to Israel then they are to us.

[Mister D]

Everyone agrees it is just a matter of time until Iran gets nuclear bombs. Sooner or later it will happen.

So why do we keep fighting them? We should start the peace process now so that by the time they get the bombs they dont want to use them on us. Besides they are a much bigger threat to Israel then they are to us.


Would you be OK with a nuclear war in the Mideast? ???

[jgreer]

No dingus I am against war didnt you get that yet?

I am saying it just a matter of time til the whole area has nukes just like they got gunpowder and every other weapon technology

You cant stop the technology so you better start preparing for what happens next

[gitazz]

Iran's leaders are the problem, not the people in fact the younger generations in Iran hate the elders, [those who still rule with the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's regime (his son's in power now with Ahmadinejad) in which a theocracy has been in place the Shah of Iran's exile in 1979]. Russia's not going to defend Iran, they have no reason to neither does Japan. Israel can handle itself, Netanyahu is tough, he's not going to put up with any crap from Iran or let President Obama tell him what to do either.
The US NAVY are still monitoring PERSIAN GULF (we always have been since the GULF WAR).The NEWS just says all this to get you to watch it, RATINGS it doesn't matter if it's true or it panics people they just want you to watch. Ahmadinejad is a mouthpiece, he can't do ANYTHING without consent of the Ayatollah or the Clerics who run the country. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not going to wait for something to happen though and that's why they're preparing for trouble as a precautionary measure based on Iran's attitude towards them in the past/present (IRAN FOUNDED the HEZBOLLAH in LIBYA and SUPPORTS HAMAS, which have BOTH been doing suicide attacks on Israel since 1982.)