There will be no simple victory. Is US war with Iran postponed?


US Army Unit in the Middle East. Photo US Army


The situation in the Middle East remains difficult. The likelihood of a full-blown conflict between the US and Iran remains. These countries have fundamental disagreements on a number of issues and do not seem to intend to seek a solution through diplomatic means. Nevertheless, Washington and Tehran are not in a hurry to fight, as preparation for the conflict and the conduct of hostilities will be associated with characteristic difficulties and risks.

Correlation of forces


Obviously, the US armed forces are many times greater than the Iranian army in terms of total strength, equipment and combat capabilities. In a direct clash "on paper" they turn out to be a clear favorite, capable of defeating the enemy without much difficulty. However, in practice, everything is much more complicated. A quick and simple victory for the United States or Iran is hindered by a number of objective factors.

The US Army has advantages in strength and equipment, as well as basing capabilities. Washington has several allies in the Middle East region, ready to provide bases for the deployment of various branches of the American troops. Also, a naval force represented by aircraft carrier strike groups will be required to participate in a full-scale operation.


U.S. troops in the region as of fall 2019

The joint work of the Air Force and Navy will allow the United States in several strikes to knock out the main elements of the Iranian defense, and then launch a ground attack. In a similar way, the US was able to deal with the Iraqi army in 2003, and the same strategy may prove useful in the war with Iran.

However, Iran, losing in numbers and equipment, also has significant advantages. In the event of an open conflict, he will have to fight on his territory or in the near abroad, which may be a positive factor. In addition, the armed forces of Iran have sufficiently developed strike systems that are capable of holding objects of the entire region on target.

Finally, ideological issues should be considered. The army and the Guardian Corps of the Islamic Revolution are well prepared, including on the ideological front. The high morale of the army as a whole and the presence of fighters with the makings of fanatics should not be underestimated. They, too, can play an important role in a major land conflict.


Aircraft carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) of 5 fleet US Navy Responsible for the Gulf. Photos National Museum of US Navy

Deployment Issues


In terms of total strength, the US army is superior to Iran, but not all formations and units will be able to take part in battles in the Middle East. Most of the units are housed in the continental United States, the rest - at overseas bases. A certain contingent and fleet of equipment is present in the Middle East, but it is clearly not enough to immediately begin full-scale operations against Iran.

However, the Pentagon has already begun the transfer of additional forces. In the near future, the strengthening of the contingent in Saudi Arabia will be completed. In this country will work approx. 3 thousand US military. Together with the military, air defense systems, combat and auxiliary Aviation.

A few days ago, the transfer of personnel and equipment to Kuwait began. At the very beginning of the year, the first 700 fighters arrived in this country. Then the second stage of transportation started. In total, the Kuwaiti "garrison" of the United States has a population of approx. 4,2 thousand people. Its main part is made up of fighters of the 82nd Airborne Division with the corresponding material part.


The THAAD missile defense system is the main response of the US Middle East to the Iranian missile threat. Photo by US MDA

According to open sources, at the moment the total number of US troops in the Middle East reaches 53-55 thousand people. The largest groups are based in Qatar and Kuwait - about 13 thousand people. In Bahrain, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates, 7000, 6000 and 5000 serve. Respectively. In Jordan and Saudi Arabia - 3 thousand each. Also, troops are present in Turkey, Syria and Oman.

There are several squadrons of tactical combat aircraft at the regional airbases. It is also possible to use long-range bombers from remote aerodromes, including in the continental United States. If necessary, the Pentagon's grouping in the region can be strengthened by warships - aircraft carriers, cruisers and destroyers with an aviation group and missiles for striking at ground targets. The transfer of the AUG to the Persian Gulf will take several days.

It is easy to see that the existing contingent of the US armed forces in the Middle East does not allow full-scale military operations against any country in the region. To start a military operation requires a significant strengthening of the group. The transfer of the required number of troops will take noticeable time and will require appropriate efforts. Without this, only individual operations of a limited scale with the same results are possible.

There will be no simple victory. Is US war with Iran postponed?

Iranian Army Day Parade 2016 Photo by Tasnimnews.com

Rocket factor


A few days ago, Iran launched a missile attack on American targets in Iraq. By this, he confirmed the presence of ballistic missiles with sufficient characteristics, and also showed his intention to use them in case of armed conflict. It should be noted that at the beginning of a full-scale war, Iranian missiles can become an additional factor that can significantly affect the situation. In addition, these weapons can be a deterrent.

Iran has in service with ballistic missiles of almost all main classes, up to medium-range products. The most advanced Iranian-made ballistic missiles have a range of up to 2-2,5 thousand km. Also developed ground-based cruise missiles with a significant flight range. There is a large fleet of operational-tactical missile systems. All this can be used against the enemy in all strategic directions.

Third countries


With the help of existing weapons, Iranian missile forces can attack various objects in several neighboring countries. Almost all US bases in the region fall into their area of ​​responsibility. In addition, there is the possibility of striking Israel or Saudi Arabia, Tehran’s longtime geopolitical opponents.


Operational and tactical missile "Fateh-313". Photo Militaryedge.org

In fact, Iran has the ability to launch a massive missile strike against the targets of all potential opponents and significantly reduce their offensive capabilities. Not only the United States, but also its allies will have to participate in the conflict. However, the opportunity to settle accounts with all geopolitical opponents has its drawbacks: in this case, Iran will have to wage war against a real coalition.

It is important that the risk of a massive strike - an attack with fewer forces was demonstrated a few days ago - can be a deterrent. An open attack on Iran threatens with unpleasant consequences for several countries at once. And the theoretical ability to disarm or defeat the Iranian army does not compensate for the risks involved.

The war is canceled?


At the moment, in the context of relations between Iran and the United States, a very specific situation is observed. After recent events, the two countries are almost ready to fight with each other, but so far they are limited to only individual attacks on some targets - albeit with the most severe consequences - as well as aggressive statements.


BRMS "Khorramshahr" on a self-propelled launcher. Photo Tasnimnews.com

Recent actions of the two countries show their readiness to fight, but direct preparations for full-scale hostilities have not yet been observed. For example, the United States is increasing its contingent in the Middle East, however, even after additional troops are dispatched, it remains insufficient to wage war. Iran promised to take revenge on its potential adversary - and so far everything has been limited to one blow with mixed results.

Obviously, Tehran and Washington will not be able to find a common language and solve the accumulated problems in the framework of negotiations and mutually beneficial agreements. However, war is also not an acceptable solution. Both sides of the conflict face the most serious risks of all kinds - they hardly want these risks to turn into real damage.

The situation in the Middle East as a whole remains extremely difficult, and the confrontation between the United States and Iran only worsens the overall situation. Now there is another aggravation, the result of which has already become an exchange of blows. What will happen next is not yet clear. The risk of new attacks remains and the possibility of a war cannot be ruled out. Nevertheless, the specifics of the confrontation is such that neither side will be able to solve its military-political tasks without unacceptable risks and losses. This fact is unlikely to make Tehran and Washington reconcile, but it is quite capable of preventing a war.
Author:
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

71 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. thanks 15 January 2020 05: 58 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    Quote: Military Review * Analytics
    The risk of new attacks remains and the possibility of a war cannot be ruled out. Nonetheless, the specifics of the confrontation is such that neither side will be able to solve its military-political tasks without unacceptable risks and losses. This fact is unlikely to make Tehran and Washington reconcile, but it is quite capable of preventing a war.

    It is unlikely that war is possible. The elections in the USA and the great opposition of the Democrats ...
    1. Hunter 2 15 January 2020 06: 04 New
      • 16
      • 9
      +7
      Iran is not a banana republic! It may well not only show teeth, but also cause the United States - unacceptable damage, which in particular he demonstrated with his last missile attack!
      In addition to the military component, the economic one can also be added - the Persians can almost paralyze the oil trade from the Gulf countries ... such a blow to the wallet, the world economy may not be able to withstand!
      Conclusion: There Will Be No War! Attempts will continue to undermine the situation from within, but ... I think they are doomed to failure!
      1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 06: 12 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Good morning! hi
        Let's see who Trump will sponsor the election. But, since then, it certainly will not be.
        1. Hunter 2 15 January 2020 06: 31 New
          • 10
          • 7
          +3
          Good morning hi I think it will not be there later either ... The mattresses are not used to fighting not only with an equal opponent, but with those who can stand up for themselves at all. This is not their role ...
          1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 06: 37 New
            • 9
            • 5
            +4
            Iraq seemed to be able to fend for itself. In addition, there will be no ground operation here - air-sea.
            1. Hunter 2 15 January 2020 07: 18 New
              • 10
              • 5
              +5
              Iraq, or rather its military leadership, was stupidly able to buy ... the strategy of a Donkey loaded with gold worked ... I do not think that this can give a result in Iran!
              1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 07: 35 New
                • 6
                • 3
                +3
                That bought intelligence information - one hundred pounds. As for the purchase of generals - why? )) Amers had complete superiority in the air, in the desert this is critical - not the jungle of Vietnam. There were situations when the Americans were left without aviation cover due to sandstorms, incurring losses and finding themselves in difficult situations - but, nevertheless, they also got out of them, and this had an advantage both in technique and in preparation. Different level of armies. So Americans who know how to count grandmothers are unlikely to buy anyone there. The Arabs miscalculated another war - nothing new or surprising.
                1. Hunter 2 15 January 2020 07: 57 New
                  • 9
                  • 6
                  +3
                  A controversial statement, oh well ... I do not want to go into the debate.
                  Persians are not Arabs ... let us agree on this. hi
                  1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 08: 03 New
                    • 9
                    • 2
                    +7
                    The Persians fought with formidable Iraq for 10 years. Did not win. They requested a truce after three successful large-scale Iraqi operations. Let's just say - according to the results of the Syrian company - before the arrival of the VKS and the MTR of the Russian Federation they were very uncomfortable from the Arabs. )))
            2. Sergey1987 15 January 2020 10: 49 New
              • 4
              • 0
              +4
              Quote: Krasnodar
              Iraq seemed to be able to fend for itself. In addition, there will be no ground operation here - air-sea.

              In the 91st, but not in 2003. Then it was already greatly weakened after the Iran-Iraq war and Desert Storm. And Iraq, unlike Iran, did not develop its fuel dispensers and air defense systems. They did not build anything of their own, but they could not buy new ones.
              1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 10: 50 New
                • 4
                • 0
                +4
                I agree, in 2003 they were much weaker than Iran
                1. Sergey1987 15 January 2020 10: 53 New
                  • 1
                  • 0
                  +1
                  Quote: Krasnodar
                  I agree, in 2003 they were much weaker than Iran

                  I forgot. Iraq as such did not have a fleet, but Iran still has something. Mining the Persian Gulf will be very strong.
                  1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 10: 53 New
                    • 4
                    • 0
                    +4
                    We are better - oil up))
                    1. Sergey1987 15 January 2020 10: 55 New
                      • 0
                      • 0
                      0
                      Quote: Krasnodar
                      We are better - oil up))

                      What is the paradox. The war between them is also beneficial for us and the lifting of sanctions against Iran.
                      1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 11: 04 New
                        • 5
                        • 0
                        +5
                        And what about the lifting of sanctions?
                      2. Sergey1987 15 January 2020 11: 07 New
                        • 0
                        • 0
                        0
                        Quote: Krasnodar
                        And what about the lifting of sanctions?

                        Sale of S-400, Su-35, Su-30, T-90, BMPT, Bastion, Superjet, in the future, MS-21 and IL-96-400.
        2. rocket757 15 January 2020 06: 40 New
          • 3
          • 3
          0
          Quote: Hunter 2
          not accustomed to the Matrasniki fighting not only with an equal opponent, but with those who can even stand up for themselves.

          Если противник может нанести полосатым существенный потери солдат, полосатые не готовы воевать с таким противником совсем.
          In short, now not then, now the balance of expenditure-income should be completely different.
          1. Hunter 2 15 January 2020 07: 16 New
            • 8
            • 6
            +2
            Iran - Definitely Can! On a nearby branch - a new US Base missile attack! A subtle hint - Yankee go home ...
            1. rocket757 15 January 2020 07: 20 New
              • 2
              • 0
              +2
              Striped leave when they want to leave or can not leave! The situation, so far, is ambiguous.
        3. Evil543 15 January 2020 07: 41 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Well, only if they do not put together a coalition, for example, as in Iraq 1 and 2, or Yugoslavia. Some definitely will not climb.
        4. Cyrus 15 January 2020 18: 12 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          And I think that you are very mistaken.
    2. SovAr238A 15 January 2020 07: 36 New
      • 7
      • 7
      0
      Quote: Hunter 2
      Iran is not a banana republic! It may well not only show teeth, but also cause the United States - unacceptable damage, which in particular he demonstrated with his last missile attack!
      In addition to the military component, the economic one can also be added - the Persians can almost paralyze the oil trade from the Gulf countries ... such a blow to the wallet, the world economy may not be able to withstand!
      Conclusion: There Will Be No War! Attempts will continue to undermine the situation from within, but ... I think they are doomed to failure!


      All the same words were about Iraq.
      Nothing has changed in words.
    3. Nyrobsky 15 January 2020 10: 30 New
      • 3
      • 1
      +2
      Quote: Hunter 2
      Iran is not a banana republic! It may well not only show teeth, but also cause the United States - unacceptable damage, which in particular he demonstrated with his last missile attack!

      Как то так. В принципе, Иран непреднамеренно и действуя исключительно в рамках ответных мер, уже нанёс США неприемлемый ущерб в имиджевом плане. Матрасы как "мировые решалы", в противостоянии с КНДР и Ираном сильно подмочили свою репутацию. Если бы "гегемон" не чувствовал полноценной опасности, он бы давно раскатал эти страны в руины, но даже тот не великий потенциал, который имеется в их распоряжении для оказания сопротивления США, вгоняет "гегемона" в тоску.
      1. Cyrus 15 January 2020 18: 14 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Nonsense, the tendency to underestimate the enemy is a sign of a near mind, usually leading to a military catastrophe.
        1. Nyrobsky 15 January 2020 20: 29 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Cyrus
          Nonsense, the tendency to underestimate the enemy is a sign of a near mind, usually leading to a military catastrophe.

          Here are the mattresses and showed their poor mind by underestimating Iran. No, they can ruin everything and everything, of course, but they won, no.
    4. Cyrus 15 January 2020 18: 10 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Iran will not be able to cause unacceptable damage (a phrase is somehow flawed); the rest of the states will be wrapped up for their own benefit with the help of propaganda.
      1. Nyrobsky 15 January 2020 20: 33 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: Cyrus
        Iran will not be able to cause unacceptable damage (the phrase is somehow flawed),
        Not inferior than your statement that "Iran will not be able to inflict." We are not talking about military damage. We are talking about image damage. Until Iran, no one had turned missiles at American bases, that the mattresses were almost gratefully swallowed and were not even symbolically missed by the returning Tomahawk.
  2. Evil543 15 January 2020 07: 35 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Elections are a factor pushing for war in the history of the United States, but another thing saves them is that they are led by a trader, not a politician.
    1. Cyrus 15 January 2020 18: 15 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Watching what goals he set for himself.
  • vomag 15 January 2020 06: 11 New
    • 1
    • 7
    -6
    Никакой войны не будет это все пустая возня..Americans убили кого хотели..Иран отстрелялся по пустому да еще взял вину за якобы сбитый самолет ..который кстати взорвали возможно Евреи..
    1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 07: 08 New
      • 8
      • 0
      +8
      Quote: vomag
      Никакой войны не будет это все пустая возня..Americans убили кого хотели..Иран отстрелялся по пустому да еще взял вину за якобы сбитый самолет ..который кстати взорвали возможно Евреи..

      It’s like the Jews blew up. To discredit Iran, they carried out a terrorist attack in their own communal house in Buenos Airos. Moreover, they persuaded Ayatollah Khomeini to take 52 American diplomats in Tehran hostage!
      1. Evil543 15 January 2020 07: 39 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        But what about you then? In Vasnetsov’s painting, “Three Heroes” are there Jews? Only honestly angry
        1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 07: 41 New
          • 7
          • 1
          +6
          Among the three heroes is Ilya Muromets Jew.
          I go out on the track
          There a Jew was digging potatoes
          Karl Marx, the father of ideas, was also a Jew in childhood! am
          1. Evil543 15 January 2020 07: 43 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            And why Ilya without pace? We won’t beat for honesty good
            1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 07: 45 New
              • 9
              • 1
              +8
              I hid it under the helmet. He looks at Alyosha Popovich and speaks maliciously - oh you goy, good fellow ... negative
              1. Evil543 15 January 2020 07: 46 New
                • 1
                • 1
                0
                Come on? Also a rainbow? belay
                1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 07: 47 New
                  • 5
                  • 1
                  +4
                  Not ... from the series, a record is playing on the gramophone
        2. Mordvin 3 15 January 2020 07: 47 New
          • 4
          • 0
          +4
          Quote: Evil543
          In Vasnetsov’s painting, “Three Heroes” are there Jews? Only honestly

          But what about! Not everyone can lie on the stove for 33 years. wink
          1. Evil543 15 January 2020 07: 48 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Yes, here such historical details from the Jewish epic are revealed recourse
          2. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 07: 49 New
            • 7
            • 1
            +6
            That's right - this means that until 33 he lived with his mother)).
  • Far B 15 January 2020 06: 11 New
    • 4
    • 4
    0
    In a similar way, the US was able to deal with the Iraqi army in 2003, and the same strategy may prove useful in the war with Iran.
    In Iraq, "donkeys loaded with gold" played a huge role. But Iraq was largely a secular country, and with Iran, such a feint is unlikely to pass - just because of the ideology and
    fighters with the makings of fanatics
    .
    1. maksbazhin 15 January 2020 06: 40 New
      • 8
      • 5
      +3
      At one time they said that the Yugoslavs would show them their ears, then Iraq wouldn’t say Yugoslavia wouldn’t have an easy walk, then in Libya they said that Gaddafi would suit them, now they say Iran will impose a full-fledged war on them, in fact, who should be bombed. And unfortunately such a feint will pass with Iran, and then with the DPRK, and then they will reach us with their democracy (and Putin’s departure will not help).
      1. Far B 15 January 2020 06: 46 New
        • 5
        • 2
        +3
        This is when it was said that
        Yugoslavs will show them
        do not remind? By that time, Yugoslavia was crushed by a ten-year civil war, moreover, NATA acted against it, so everything was clear from the very beginning. About Iraq - yes, they did. But I wrote above that
        "donkeys loaded with gold" played a huge role
        Otherwise, the war would be much longer and bloody there.
        1. maksbazhin 15 January 2020 07: 27 New
          • 1
          • 1
          0
          spoke before the start of the ground phase
          1. Far B 15 January 2020 07: 34 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            What is the ground phase ???
            1. maksbazhin 15 January 2020 07: 51 New
              • 2
              • 1
              +1
              It did not reach her, but the information was this: NATO bombed bridges and barracks, and the army of Serbia is intact and ready. We are not talking about that, my answer was to
              and with Iran such a feint is unlikely to pass
              .
        2. Cyrus 15 January 2020 18: 18 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          If it were, it wouldn’t be, history does not know the subjunctive mood.
      2. Mordvin 3 15 January 2020 07: 56 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        Quote: maksbazhin
        At one time they said that the Yugoslavs would show them

        Who spoke? Maybe our unfortunate patriots, who did not have the courage to deliver the S-300 to the Serbs?
  • bessmertniy 15 January 2020 06: 24 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Iran’s chances to win are practically zero. He can fight only in the hope that the aggressor, having received resistance, will simply stop "punishment". The special question is, at what cost can the USA get this victory and what will it get from it? Even if the Americans can change the regime in this country, it will be a Pyrrhic victory, since the mass consciousness of the Iranians will remain in patriotic positions. By introducing troops into Iran, the United States will receive a guerrilla war against them in approximately the Afghan version, and this is a huge cost and, ultimately, forced withdrawal. Another point is if Iran does not hit its geopolitical opponents, and focuses only on the "infidels." Then in the long run - improving relations with neighbors. hi
    1. Krasnodar 15 January 2020 07: 10 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      The fact of the matter is that no one will send troops there. Everything from the sea and air - in oil, defense industry, industry, navy, energy. But - this is if Redhead wins.
      1. bessmertniy 15 January 2020 07: 32 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Well, the Yugoslav option regarding Iran for the United States is also unlikely to be successful. A simple undermining of Iran’s economy can cross out bilateral relations for a very large future. And this is also unlikely to be beneficial for Americans.
        1. IS-80_RVGK2 15 January 2020 12: 18 New
          • 2
          • 3
          -1
          Quote: bessmertniy
          Well, the Yugoslav option regarding Iran for the United States is also unlikely to be successful. A simple undermining of Iran’s economy can cross out bilateral relations for a very large future. And this is also unlikely to be beneficial for Americans.

          And how is it not beneficial to the Americans?
      2. IS-80_RVGK2 15 January 2020 12: 17 New
        • 2
        • 2
        0
        Quote: Krasnodar
        The fact of the matter is that no one will send troops there. Everything from the sea and air - in oil, defense industry, industry, navy, energy. But - this is if Redhead wins.

        That's it. But some people were stuck in the 20th century and their war is dashing tank attacks and scooters running with a cry of cheers. laughing
  • rocket757 15 January 2020 06: 42 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    There will be no kina, the “kicker” is not satisfied with the price / income!
  • parusnik 15 January 2020 07: 00 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    To start a war is a war, in the region of the main oil production .. TNCs will not allow it ... it is not profitable for them ... Nor will the potential US allies in the Persian Gulf be profitable if they become real, where the chances are that Iran will not launch missile strikes the oil industry of these countries, besides, the United States still needs to secure shipping in the bay ... Iran will also strike the tanker fleet ... It’s fraught to light the oil sea .. It will be like in the poem of K. Chukovsky Confusion: And the chanterelles took matches, went to the blue sea, lit the blue sea ....
  • Vladimir_2U 15 January 2020 07: 03 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Obviously, Tehran and Washington will not be able to find a common language
    Yeah, a common language with Amerts can only be found in the hands of a club, but more, to find.
  • Nitarius 15 January 2020 07: 06 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    the question is different .. but what will the United States again fight on credit?)))
  • paul3390 15 January 2020 07: 18 New
    • 1
    • 5
    -4
    If the Iranians competently work on American logistics, with their somewhat painful attitude to supply, a war with Iran will not be a repetition of a freebie with Saddam's rhenium ..
  • Astra wild 15 January 2020 07: 38 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Уважаемые коллеги, а кроме перечисленных средств можно добавить религиозный фактор: в Ираке, Иордании, Сирии большинство шииты им не понравится,что бьют Иран
    1. Altai72 15 January 2020 09: 13 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: Astra wild
      Уважаемые коллеги, а кроме перечисленных средств можно добавить религиозный фактор: в Ираке, Иордании, Сирии большинство шииты им не понравится,что бьют Иран

      So Shiites themselves beat themselves ..
      1. Cyrus 15 January 2020 18: 07 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        And you can add carpet bombing and bombs do not care what and how Shiites beat themselves.
  • Altai72 15 January 2020 08: 57 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    Quote: Hunter 2
    but also to inflict US - unacceptable damage, which in particular he demonstrated the last missile attack!
    Plus to the military component, you can add economic

    Alexei, what did Iran demonstrate with its latest missile attack?
    And what economic component are you talking about, 1 $ = 42 555 IRR
  • Altai72 15 January 2020 09: 10 New
    • 6
    • 0
    +6
    Quote: paul3390
    If the Iranians competently work on American logistics, with their somewhat painful attitude to supply, a war with Iran will not be a repetition of a freebie with Saddam's rhenium ..

    ... in logistics from which direction?)))
    1. IS-80_RVGK2 16 January 2020 18: 57 New
      • 0
      • 2
      -2
      Good illustration. The map clearly shows that without us and China, Iran will have to be tight.
  • Jarserge 15 January 2020 09: 35 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    Yes, everything is simple. What was the reason for the victory over Iraq? The purchase of Iraqi generals, wholesale and retail. Apparently Iranian generals are in no hurry to sell their homeland even after the assassination of Kassem Suleymani
  • Basarev 15 January 2020 09: 56 New
    • 2
    • 3
    -1
    As I predicted. Again, a wave of threats that Iran will still take the United States. How many times have I heard ... First Iraq, then Libya ... And each time the Americans still achieved their goals with very modest losses. And Iran will be swept away and not even sweated. No one can defeat the United States.
    1. UltraRed 15 January 2020 11: 27 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      Vietnam still managed ...... :) Yes, and the DPRK yuska crap crap .......
      And stopping China’s economic growth, far exceeding their own, the Yusovites cannot ....
      Yes, and to blame Putin after some of his decision in 2011, which categorically did not suit Yuska, also failed ....
      "Invincible ...." ?? Oh well..... :)
  • Old26 15 January 2020 17: 08 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    BRMS "Khorramshahr" on a self-propelled launcher.

    On a towed launcher.

    A simple war never happens, especially when it comes to a war with a state that has an army, and even more so with a state with an 80 millionth population.

    The only thing that can be done is to minimize losses using a non-contact method of warfare. Any invasion of personnel on the territory of Iran is a war with huge losses for the invasion army and is almost endless.
    But "rolling out" Iran, blocking it is a more realistic option. Not without losses, but nonetheless.

    Quote: Mersi
    It is unlikely that war is possible. The elections in the USA and the great opposition of the Democrats ...

    If Trump manages to arrange a “Small Victorious War” with a minimum of losses, while showing himself to be a tough guy, this will be a plus for him, a plus that his competitors will not have
    Remember our last election. A few days earlier, in his address, the President announced several new "revolutionary" weapon systems. And that’s all. The remaining time, the country discussed only this, without going into the reality of what it was told. But the main thing for the opponents was not such a "heavy" trump card.

    Quote: Hunter 2
    Iran is not a banana republic! It may well not only show teeth, but also cause the United States - unacceptable damage, which in particular he demonstrated with his last missile attack!

    Unacceptable damage - is it necessary to understand several destroyed light shelters for aircraft and a damaged helicopter ?? Good for yourself "unacceptable damage"

    Quote: Hunter 2
    In addition to the military component, the economic one can also be added - the Persians can almost paralyze the oil trade from the Gulf countries ... such a blow to the wallet, the world economy may not be able to withstand!

    Alexei! do not use information from 30-35 years ago during the “tanker wars” in the Gulf. Since then, much has changed. In particular, oil pipelines appeared in the Gulf countries, which have terminal terminals both in the Red Sea and in the Gulf of Oman. They may not be able to compensate for 100% of the oil supply due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, but they can paralyze the oil trade only at home. a typical "shot in one's own leg." None of Iran’s oil pipelines has transit through neighboring countries for free access. All of them end on the borders of national territory.

    Quote: Hunter 2
    Good morning hi I think it will not be there later either ... The mattresses are not used to fighting not only with an equal opponent, but with those who can stand up for themselves at all. This is not their role ...

    Ирак вы уже не считаете? Две войны - в начале 90-х и начале 2000-х?

    Quote: Hunter 2
    Iraq, or rather its military leadership, was stupidly able to buy ... the strategy of a Donkey loaded with gold worked ... I do not think that this can give a result in Iran!

    And how do Iranians differ in this respect from Iraqis? The donkey strategy here will work just as well ...

    Quote: Sergey1987
    Quote: Krasnodar
    Iraq seemed to be able to fend for itself. In addition, there will be no ground operation here - air-sea.

    In the 91st, but not in 2003. Then it was already greatly weakened after the Iran-Iraq war and Desert Storm. And Iraq, unlike Iran, did not develop its fuel dispensers and air defense systems. They did not build anything of their own, but they could not buy new ones.

    Almost all medium-range missiles are North Korean developments. Short-range or operational tactical - yes, Iranian.
    Air defense is a hodgepodge of everything that is possible. Soviet and Russian, British and French, Chinese and their own complexes. But only air defense air defense will not do the weather. Aviation is even more in a deplorable state than air defense. Training? The latest tragedy casts doubt on the high level of air defense air defense

    Quote: Sergey1987
    Quote: Krasnodar
    I agree, in 2003 they were much weaker than Iran

    I forgot. Iraq as such did not have a fleet, but Iran still has something. Mining the Persian Gulf will be very strong.

    There is really something. You can mine the bay, but to your own detriment. I don’t think that they will be able to sow the entire bay every 20-100 meters with the “square-nesting method” of mines. And do not think that the Americans are so stupid that they will rush to the Gulf immediately. The downside will be that it will hit not so much the Americans as Europe, and therefore it will be easier for the Americans to put together a coalition against Iran

    Quote: Krasnodar
    We are better - oil up))

    Для государства - да, для обычного народа - нет. Почему-то всегда поднятие цен на нефть на мировом рынке тут же касается внутренних цен на продукты, даже если они к этому не имеют никакого отношения. Даже бабуся, торгующая на рынке зеленью или овощами из собственного парника в таких случаях говорит? "так цены же на нефть в мире поднялись"....

    Quote: rocket757
    If the enemy can inflict significant losses on the striped soldiers, the striped are not ready to fight such an enemy at all

    The Americans lost almost 300 people, 33 tanks, 28 infantry fighting vehicles, 1 self-propelled guns, several armored personnel carriers, 40 aircraft and 23 helicopters in that war in the Gulf. Not counting at least fifty UAVs. Are these significant losses or not?
    And this is taking into account the ground operation.

    Quote: Hunter 2
    Iran - Definitely Can! On a nearby branch - a new US Base missile attack! A subtle hint - Yankee go home ...

    A few (6-8) RSs of unknown caliber is a subtle hint? laughing If full-fledged missiles did not cause significant damage, what will rockets from MLRS do?

    Quote: Nyrobsky
    Something like this. In principle, Iran, unintentionally and acting solely as part of the retaliatory measures, has already inflicted unacceptable image damage on the United States

    Damage in the image plan would be effective and effective if not for the Ukrainian liner ...

    Quote: parusnik
    Start a war, a war, in the region of the main oil production .. TNCs will not allow ... it is not profitable for them ....

    If it's not American companies

    Quote: parusnik
    The war is not beneficial to potential US allies in the Persian Gulf, if they become real, where the chances are that Iran will not launch rocket attacks on the oil industry of these countries ....

    Of course, the Gulf countries are not profitable. And Iran can strike at their oil industry. But they are not “toothless”. Saudi Arabia has Chinese missiles. A blow to the nodal points of Iran and its oil industry is provided.

    Quote: parusnik
    In addition, the United States still needs to secure shipping in the Gulf ... Iran will also strike at the tanker fleet ....

    But this is unlikely. Above explained Comrade Hunter 2 why.
  • Fishery 15 January 2020 17: 22 New
    • 0
    • 3
    -3
    damn) and I wanted to look at the batch)
  • Cyrus 15 January 2020 18: 06 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    If the United States needs this war, it will begin and a ground operation is possible but not obligatory; Yugoslavia was brought to its knees without it.
    Further, if the United States is really preparing for TMV, then they are simply obliged to check its aircraft and Iran for the role of the training ground is almost perfect, strong but not so much as to harm the states well, etc.
  • Aleks2000 15 January 2020 23: 31 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    And what war is that ???
    The United States will fight for the downed Boeing with the Iranians and a dozen helicopters specially removed from the field ???
    Rather, gratitude will be expressed for the early warning of the place and time of the strike.

    I missed somehow, from the NATO, someone died ???