DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech exam­ines the inter­sec­tion of tech­nol­ogy and defense from every angle and pro­vides analy­sis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • 'Canes
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the "Buzz"
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT's Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar's Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples' Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward'z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Strategery » Time Fights Iran

Time Fights Iran

For those of you wait­ing for some­thing meaty with details from Time’s cover story on “What War with Iran Would Look Like,” put the steak knives down. The 3,182-word answer: we’re not sure exactly, but it would be really, really hard. Here are some of the choice cuts:
missiles_iran_ali_khamanei_1.jpg

No one is talk­ing about a ground inva­sion of Iran. Too many U.S. troops are tied down else­where to make it pos­si­ble, and besides, it isn’t nec­es­sary. If the U.S. goal is sim­ply to stunt Iran’s nuclear pro­gram, it can be done bet­ter and more safely by air. An attack lim­ited to Iran’s nuclear facil­i­ties would nonethe­less require a mas­sive cam­paign. Experts say that Iran has between 18 and 30 nuclear-​​related facil­i­ties… some in the open, some cloaked in the guise of con­ven­tional fac­to­ries, some buried deep under­ground.
A Pentagon offi­cial says that among the known sites there are 1,500 dif­fer­ent “aim points,” which means the cam­paign could well require the involve­ment of almost every type of air­craft in the U.S. arse­nal: Stealth bombers and fight­ers, B-​​1s and B-​​2s, as well as F-​​15s and F-​​16s oper­at­ing from land and F-​​18s from air­craft car­ri­ers… An oper­a­tion of that size would hardly be sur­gi­cal. Many sites are in highly pop­u­lated areas, so civil­ian casu­al­ties would be a cer­tainty…
U.S. offi­cials believe that a cam­paign of sev­eral days, involv­ing hun­dreds or even thou­sands of sor­ties, could set back Iran’s nuclear pro­gram by two to three years… But it is also likely that the U.S. could carry out a mas­sive attack and still leave Iran with some part of its nuclear pro­gram intact. It’s pos­si­ble that U.S. war­planes could destroy every known nuclear site while Tehran’s nuclear wiz­ards, oper­at­ing at other, undis­cov­ered sites even deeper under­ground, con­tin­ued their work. “We don’t know where it all is,” said a White House offi­cial, “so we can’t get it all.…“
No one who has spent any time think­ing about an attack on Iran doubts that a U.S. oper­a­tion would reap a whirl­wind… Retired Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner… has been con­duct­ing a mock U.S.-Iran war game for American pol­i­cy­mak­ers for the past five years. Virtually every time he runs the game, Gardiner says, a sim­i­lar night­mare sce­nario unfolds: the U.S. attack, no mat­ter how suc­cess­ful, spawns a vari­ety of asym­met­ri­cal retal­i­a­tions by Tehran. First comes ter­ror­ism: Iran’s ini­tial reac­tion to air strikes might be to autho­rize a Hizballah attack on Israel, in order to draw Israel into the war and rally pub­lic sup­port at home.
Next, Iran might try to foment as much may­hem as pos­si­ble inside the two nations on its flanks, Afghanistan and Iraq, where more than 160,000 U.S. troops hold a ten­u­ous grip on local pop­u­la­tions…
Next, there is oil. The Persian Gulf, a traf­fic jam on good days, would become a park­ing lot. Iran could plant mines and launch dozens of armed boats into the bot­tle­neck, chok­ing off the ship­ping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz and caus­ing a mas­sive dis­rup­tion of oil-​​tanker traf­fic…
That kind of retal­i­a­tion could quickly trans­form a rel­a­tively lim­ited U.S. mis­sion in Iran into a much more com­pli­cated one involv­ing regime change. An Iran deter­mined to use all its avail­able weapons to coun­ter­at­tack the U.S. and its allies would present a chal­lenge to American pres­tige that no Commander in Chief would be likely to tol­er­ate for long.… 

UPDATE 6:59 PM: Is the Bush admin­is­tra­tion really gear­ing up for war? Or does the admin­is­tra­tion want “to make the Iranians think an attack is brew­ing in order to pres­sure them into a diplo­matic solu­tion?” Fred Kaplan asks.

Share |

September 18th, 2006 | Strategery | 330539 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/09/18/time-fights-iran/%3Cem%3ETime%3C%2Fem%3E+Fights+Iran2006-09-18+13%3A05%3A12noahmax You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Attack Of The Genius Robot Cockroach Swarm | Rapid Fire 09/​18/​06 » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. reefdiver says:
    September 18, 2006 at 10:17 am

    People keep talk­ing about a “lim­ited” attack on nuclear sites, but I would sus­pect that to pro­tect American forces of all types in the region, the USN and USAF would basi­cally have to first oblit­er­ate com­mu­ni­ca­tions, the Iranian Navy, air force, SAM’s, SS mis­siles and a lot of armor. They’d prob­a­bly destroy refiner­ies as well. While they’re at it they might want to destroy var­i­ous man­u­fac­tur­ing sites. Then they could destroy the nuke sites as will. No way troops would be put on the ground unless the US wanted to take con­trol of the oil fields which would be extremely fool­ish. Bottom line — the US can prob­a­bly rapidly oblit­er­ate all of the above — but will sim­ply have to leave Iran in chaos and anar­chy on the ground after the attacks…

    Reply
  2. campbell says:
    September 18, 2006 at 10:47 am

    One of the rea­sons we have been forced into the quag­mire of Afganistan/​Iraq is becuase we have no legal means of elim­i­nat­ing tar­get lead­ers.…
    If leg­is­la­tion were passed that DID allow such, a sim­ple major­ity vote might mean “regime change” could be accom­plished with a sin­gle sniper team, rather than the bil­lions of dol­lars and untold thou­sands of lives our cur­rent prac­tice eats up.……
    Attacking Iran involves far more than bombs and mis­siles and the poten­tial global increase in vio­lent reac­tions from a bil­lion muslims.…it also involves our friend nations.….“WHAT? the U.S. is attack­ing Iran.…and shut­ting down OUR oil???!!!“
    We close down the Gulf traf­fic, and we’d bet­ter be able to offer a decent alter­na­tive.
    There is no win. And too, doesn’t any­one recall that Iran is chummy with North Korea????

    Reply
  3. JQP says:
    September 18, 2006 at 11:32 am

    Shut down the oil from Iran then Venezuelan oil and Chavez move up a place towards the top of the world oil poro­duc­ers list but hold on in not Chavez a bad guy as well?

    Reply
  4. Haninah says:
    September 18, 2006 at 12:09 pm

    @Campbell:
    A regime is not syn­ony­mous with a head of state. A regime can­not be taken out by a sniper.

    Reply
  5. Robot.Economist says:
    September 18, 2006 at 12:38 pm

    I am dubi­ous about the notion that Iran can use its oil as a weapon for one rea­son: it is incred­i­bly depen­dent on the sale of its oil for the rev­o­lu­tion­ary government’s daily oper­a­tional rev­enue.
    In a sim­ple eco­nomic match-​​up, who do you think would last longer, wealthy Americans who have to put up with $100 dol­lar oil or a finan­cially par­a­lyzed Iranian gov­ern­ment?
    If the Iranians go the other way and try to close the Straits of Hormuz, it wouldn’t take long for the U.S. fleets sup­port­ing OIF and OEF to sink the Iranian Navy in response.
    I think hon­estly buy­ing into hyper­ven­ti­lat­ing over Iran prob­a­bly does us more harm then good. We know we have Iran in a box mil­i­tar­ily. Any threat they make could legit­i­mately be met by an American “Try me” response.
    Their only real options are to hold on to nuclear and ter­ror­ist trump cards to keep the U.S. and the Israelis at bay. Fortunately both trump cards are really only effec­tive as reac­tionary or defen­sive tools.

    Reply
  6. azrael says:
    September 18, 2006 at 12:45 pm

    Reality check. A war with iran does not serve u.s. national inter­ests. Retarding the iran­ian nuclear pro­gram for a cou­ple of years, deter­ing a rival to israeli hege­mony in the lev­ant and slow­ing down the momen­tum of iran’s influ­ence in the region are not worth the blow­back. Any attack on iran would rally the uber-​​nationalist pop­u­lace with their his­tory of xeno­pho­bia and their gen­er­a­tions long per­se­cu­tion com­plex to the gov­ern­ment. The iran­ian nuclear pro­gram would trans­form from a dual use endeavor to sin­gle bloody minded exer­cise in basic engi­neer­ing( they don’t seem to lack the brain­power for this effort). The region would see see the death of west­phalian sys­tem as shia groups and shia-​​friendly groups ( large chunks of sun­nis who con­sider the shia to be cru­cial to islamic eschatology)begin to under­mine u.s. allies like jor­dan, saudi, egypt etc..
    And always keep in mind, the iran­ian rev­o­lu­tion­ary guard was designed from it’s onset as a force to project and expand the iran­ian rev­o­lu­tion glob­ally. It may not be able to spread the rev­o­lu­tion to regions that are unwill­ing to embrace a theological-​​republic but it still retains the ves­ti­gal struc­tures to act on a plan­e­tary scale to dis­rupt the global trade net­work; Highly dis­ci­plined light infantry, guided man-​​portable weapons, a well devel­oped lin­guis­tic pro­gram and a will­ing­ness to to plan and exe­cute one way mis­sions. This cou­pled with a world where anti-​​american is rife pro­vid­ing a large ocean to swim in is a per­fect receipe for a global insur­gency able to strike strate­gic tar­gets result­ing in sys­tem dis­rup­tions that at this time are unimag­in­able beyond the realm of a few web­sites such as these.
    The rev­o­lu­tion­ary guards may be the pro­to­type of future armies, an armed force that is part of state and yet a dis­tinct entity, an armed force that draws it’s rank and file pre­dom­i­nately from one nation yet is able to recruit trans-​​nationally in brigade size, an armed force that is able to ride the air/​sea/​land/​cyber high­ways of the global econ­omy to imple­ment national/​transnational poli­cies.
    The u.s. air force will win the bat­tle over the skies of iran, but no one will win the war that ensues. Maybe the israelis and their neo-​​con fifth col­umn can con­vince some­one else to fight this one? I hear the french want to be con­sid­ered a world power again :)

    Reply
  7. BT says:
    September 18, 2006 at 2:38 pm

    It seems like every­one today is kind on the same page with Iran. That

    Reply
  8. C-Low says:
    September 18, 2006 at 3:01 pm

    I am not going to debate the con­se­quences of let­ting Iran get nukes. Everyone short the most delu­sional LLL

    Reply
  9. campbell says:
    September 18, 2006 at 3:22 pm

    hey hey! right on, BT!
    when will ALL learn that you can make friends and influ­ence peo­ple a lot eas­ier with but­ter instead of bul­lets?
    (and I’m hawk as the rest here)
    but prag­matic more than most, perhaps

    Reply
  10. Noah (the other one) says:
    September 18, 2006 at 9:52 pm

    The price of oil is get­ting dan­ger­ously low — bet­ter ratchet up the rehtoric. If that doesn’t work, there is always a fleet of B-​​52s, B1s, B2s, cruise mis­siles, etc. to fall back on. That should get the oil prices back up where they belong.
    Wondering why Iran wants the bomb? Look at his­tory: we deposed their demo­c­ra­t­i­cally elected gov­ern­ment in 1953 and sup­ported a bloody 8 year war against them with our stooge Hussein. Also look at a map: Iran is sur­rounded, with US troops in to the west in Iraq, east in Afghanistan, south in Qatar, etc.

    Reply
  11. Rate Me says:
    September 18, 2006 at 11:36 pm

    War with Iran would look like one thing — a bloody *MESS*.

    Reply
  12. Na. Ahm. A. says:
    October 3, 2006 at 3:31 am

    Going into war with Iranian will be dis­as­trous for US. Unless the US is will­ing to take heavy casu­alty, US bet­ter not go into war with Iranians. US must be able to sus­tain loss of 10% of its air­crafts, 40% or more of its ground troops, long war, high oil prices, and the war could draw inter­ven­tion of other super­pow­ers like France, Russia, Turkey and China to seize the oppor­tu­nity and cap­i­tal­ize on US weak­ness.
    I am sure the Iranians do not under esti­mate the power of the only World Superpower. But what they will do is take the US down with them. This war will be dis­as­trous to the US if they make any sim­ple mis­take.
    First, mis­take US is under esti­mat­ing the Iranians Power and arm reach to make dam­age to World oil sup­ply.
    Second mis­take US is not pre­pared to fight a dogged in enemy on its ground.
    Third mis­take Iran is a large coun­try com­pared to Iraq and Afghanistan.
    Fourth, US bet­ter be pre­pared for an all open war from Afghanistan to Egypt.
    Assuming US takes care of all above and over­whelms its ene­mies with its fire­power that will be first step toward a vic­tory. The hard part will be next step how can the US con­trol this vast region and sta­bi­lize it when it is not able to sta­bi­lize two small nations, Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Reply
  13. Requiem gold says:
    August 4, 2008 at 9:44 pm

    My friends in order to help me, send me much Requiem gold, I was very thank him.

    Reply
  14. cronous cro says:
    August 4, 2008 at 9:46 pm

    Afterward my sev­eral school­mates forced me to play; I did not want to sweep their inter­ests, and to play, from the very begin­ning they have given me 100,000,000 cro­nous cro.

    Reply
  15. Habbo Coins says:
    August 12, 2008 at 1:41 am

    Perhaps that I should not accept your gift and your Habbo Coins.

    Reply
  16. Habbo Coins says:
    August 12, 2008 at 1:42 am

    Perhaps that I should not accept your gift and your Habbo Coins.

    Reply
  17. LOTRO Gold says:
    August 12, 2008 at 1:44 am

    Finally, I gained have suf­ficed the LOTRO Gold, had the fam­ily. We were in together finally.

    Reply
  18. cheap Hellgate gold says:
    August 12, 2008 at 1:46 am

    But oth­ers actu­ally need to prac­tice the level labo­ri­ously from the first floor, make cheap Hellgate gold to buy the equip­ment labo­ri­ously, all the times upgrade to the high rank.

    Reply
  19. buy last chaos gold says:
    August 12, 2008 at 1:48 am

    If we do not have the good for­tune this life, we will see with each other and that time I will buy last chaos gold enough for you in next life.

    Reply
  20. buy imvu credits says:
    August 12, 2008 at 1:52 am

    Do you know that I am so heart-​​struck? But I still will buy imvu cred­its for your equipment.

    Reply
  21. NosTale money says:
    August 16, 2008 at 2:17 am

    To buy NosTale Gold win you must not only use your strength as a team, with the new fea­tures they plan to add cheap NosTale gold late. So no player will have to worry about ever los­ing their NosTale money account.

    Reply
  22. GHD Straighteners says:
    September 20, 2009 at 5:18 am

    buy cheap nokia n95 expe­ri­ence with­out nokia mobile learn­ing is bet­ter than learn­ing with­out excperi-​​ence. I have nokia 6300 but one lamp wait which my feet are guided; and that bose head­phones is the lamp of expe­ri­ence. I know of no way of judg­ing of the future but by the apple touch past. http://​www​.lead​soft​store​.com/

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Today's Hottest Topics
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    Recent Comments
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
      They are going to have to look at the whole...
      Wembley
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      Just look at this " picture " for a moment. The...
      Zandor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      I know LOSAT seemed awesome but wasn't it cancelled? I...
      JimboJones
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
      Yes you're quite right, I get to witness...
      JimboJones
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
      I'm disappointed. When are they going to make clothes...
      Nadnerbus
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part II : * USMC attempts to make a single seat (no...
      freefallingbomb
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
      Part I : I think we're not the only ones on the...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part III : Guided missiles will also be programmed to...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part II : If a tank shoots at another tank at only 5...
      freefallingbomb
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
      Part I : To the poster "Will" : You wrote:...
      freefallingbomb
    Recent Articles
    • Army Launches Examination of Armor Testing
    • New Camo Pattern on the Block
    • BAE to Market Mantis UAV to North America
    • Pinnacle’s New Armor
    • Zapping Drones from a Truck
    • Northrop Invests Own Money In Fire Scout
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Super Cavitation and the Truth
    • Mantis Begins Search For Prey
    Recent Hot Topics
    • Marines Quiet About Brutal New Weapon
    • The Osprey has Landed
    • UPDATED: Details on Army's New Afghanistan Duds
    • VTOL JSF Arrives at Pax River
    • Iraq Cyber Attack and the DigiSEALs
    • Pinnacle's New Armor
    • (Proof) The Osprey Has Landed
    • Grim Wanat Footage
    • REPLACEMENT ARM, GOOD AS NEW
    • IMINT: French Fashion Mavens Model MultiCam
  • Channels: Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty | Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money | Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network: Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz | SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps | Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program | Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy | User Agreement | © 2009 Military Advantage