William McMichael at Defense News is reporting on the notional details of how the first wave of strikes against Iran would go, and predictably, the initial burden rests on the shoulders of the U.S. Navy.
“The attack would probably come by air,” the article states. “Waves of U.S. cruise missiles and warplanes loaded with smart weapons would swoop into Iran from the sea and land bases to destroy key nuclear facilities.
“Out in the Arabian Gulf, the U.S. Navy would wipe out Irans Navy in a matter of days. Irans air defenses could possibly take out a few higher-flying U.S. Air Force and Navy tactical jets before being located and destroyed.
“In short, the first round would go decisively to the United States.
“But it wouldnt be without serious repercussions. And the U.S. Navy would likely take the brunt of those. Its the unconventional threat that would vex U.S. sailors.”
The article also reminds us that the Iranians still have Tomcats with Phoenix missiles. American intel sources have previously reported that the Iranians successfully employed the Phoenix a number of times during the Iran-Iraq War, which would make the Iranian Air Force the only service to use that legendary missile in combat. (I, on the other hand, have used the Phoenix in the Puerto Rican Op Area to take care of some nasty drones that were threatening San Juan. Just doing my job, m’am.)
Read the entire Defense News story here …
– Ward
Thanks ward!
I’m so afraid of drones.… Real terror-drones they are. Menacing.… scary…
Even with the supposed haul of spare parts Iran was to have landed last year, maintaining even 12 of the 79 thirty year old F-14A’s would likely be beyond the capabilities of IRIAF. The Phoenix missiles would also require like maintenance. They’ve likely reconfigured all the jets that do fly (if any) to launch Russian made weapons. Even if they had a small flyable squadron, they’d need pilots to fly them. Really good ones — which are in short supply in Iran. The air to air threat from Iran is a manageable one. The bigger air threat comes from newly acquired Russian SAMs.
I’m from Tehran.I know Iran can’t stand up against United States but i also think they have prepared themselves most with land forces and the number of troops they have.
United States can’t have enough troops on the ground to face iranians while it’s busy in Iraq and Afghanistan.and thats the reason why iranian mullahs think United States would not attack Iran.
I dream to see the day that mullahs power is destroyed by US attack.and they have to live like their brothers in afghanisatan and …(osama bin ladan and terrorists.)
there is no way for iranian to stand against US and i also know and guess many young iranian troops wich almost all have just basic traning do not go to war and fight against US.many like me even love United States.you may have to know that going to military is forceable for all iranians(2 years in military).they could not own anything and even marry if they don’t go to 2 years military term.
US needs to destroy mullahs facilities as quick as he can,else it comes to furture problems.
Thanks for your post, Mehrdad. Here’s hoping for peace. Perhaps you and your peers can start to change Iranian society for the better from within over time.
This is complete madness -
“Far from setting back Iran’s nuclear programme, a military attack might create the political conditions in which Iran could accelerate its nuclear weapons programme.“
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6418213.stm
Having finally got to the point where we can just about admit that attacking Iraq might have been a mistake, let’s not go repeating it.
If rail guns on ships were availible today, it sounds to be one of the options other than expensive missiles, but only for targets within the reach of rail guns. While Navy might launch missiles and aircrafts from aircraft carriers, and Air Force sending some bombers, I wonder how the ground force in Afghan and Iraq (and from Azerbijan if possible) can contribute, especially GMLRS and ATACMS. I guess ground force advancing into Iran is very unlikely (even with rare chance to hold areas such as Kurdish, and Arab concentrated regions), but guess GMLRS and ATACMS may play a limited role to strike targets within the range from the border. Are there any ATACMS in Iraq at this time?
Wait a minute…I thought the US said they “don’t have a plan to attack Iran”! !
*gasp*
Seems more logical to me for the United States to attack from Iraq and Afghanistan then it is for them to solely attack using naval power. I think it would be all of the above, and maybe if the SHTF some nukes dropped from SPACE. This article is pure propaganda since how we would attack Iran would obviously be classified.
Check out that picture, that’s actually a HAWK hanging under the wing. Good on ‘em for jury rigging a SAM for air to air use, but it’s no Phoenix. Not even a Sparrow, but I’m no expert.
We’re going to crush these clowns in a conventional fight. It’s the unconventional fight that worries me.
S/F
This is never going to happen. Face it, it would be the end of our military’s ability to be combat effective. So neo-con nut jobs keep smoking your pipe and dreamin of wars you will never have to fight in or sacrifice anything for. We see what the profiteering, special interest, war in Iraq has turned into. What makes them think Iran would be any different? Besides I don’t think the Iranians are gonna be such an easy bunch to roll over the way the Iraqis under Saddam were.
Pete says: “This is never going to happen. Face it, it would be the end of our military’s ability to be combat effective. So neo-con nut jobs keep smoking your pipe and dreamin of wars you will never have to fight in or sacrifice anything for. We see what the profiteering, special interest, war in Iraq has turned into. What makes them think Iran would be any different? Besides I don’t think the Iranians are gonna be such an easy bunch to roll over the way the Iraqis under Saddam were”.
Pete, you are a poor misguided soul. The anti-war left based rhetoric that you are spewing is exactly what fuels our enemy into believing that they can win a war against us. People like you, it seems, actually root against the U.S. when it comes to our foreign affairs.
Do all of us a favor and leave our country for France, Germany, Iran or some other country who does not share our views and policies. Stop drinking the Kool-aid and by the way, most of us troops, both dead and alive, actually support our role and mission in the middle-east.
Many people think that President Bush is pushing for war against Iran’s nuclear sites. Let’s face it, it’s the rest of the Arab world (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordon, UAE, for example) who are pressuring the United States to attack Iran’s nuclear sites.
These Arab countries don’t want Iran to develop nuclear weapons because if they do their nations will be at risk of nuclear attack from Iran!
Also, Iran wants a war with the United States because of the unstable thoecratic government and economy which is suffering from high inflation and coruption.
I agree with the article, the majority of the strikes from the Unitied States will be conducted by the U.S. Naval aviation assets and U.S Air Force B-2s, B-1s, F-15Es, and B-52s striking first. Don’t be surprised as part of the battle plans there will be a Marine Corps amphibious assult on Iran’s coast line to secure a beach head.
Iran’s navy and air force will be destroyed within a few days. Thier nuclear sites will be more of a challenge for percesion weapons to destroy without releasing radation into the atmosphere.
When you see F/A-22 Raptors deploy to the Middle East, then, and only then, will you see a strike against Iran!
The F/A-22s will be responsible to knock-out the Iranning F-14s on the first day of battle to make sure and establish total air dominance in the region for the protection of B-2 strike operations!
My question will be how will the (corrupt) United Nations, Russia, and China react when the United States strikes Iran?
When, not if, Iran develops nuclear weapons it will be a matter of time before the theocratic rulers use one to start World War III. Iran is a clear and present danger to the entire region of the Middle East!
However, the real threat is not against Israel (as Iran voes to destroy Israel) but Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, UAE, China, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.
World War III is what Iran wants! Don’t give it to them! A majority of the population in Iran was born after 1979 who wants politcal change with a democratic government. Lets pursue this course first before striking Iran. The United States should pressure Iran politically and economically that will force a change within the government before they have the ability to produce nuclear weapons. However, it might be too late?
Why is anyone concerned too much about the Iranian F-14’s. Two things are important: in an Air to Air fight the better pilot wins — aircraft is secondary. Our Pilots will make quick work of them even if, and this is unlikely they have any F-14’s flyable. And as I understand it we sold the F-14 to them but not the Pheonix Missle system. And we have F-18’s which are more then a match for the 14 when you utilize the AWAC’s to increase their visibility.
Anyhow it is nice to have a plan, and we must have one but I doubt we will need it. Unless we don’t prepare for it, fortune favors the prepared.
Hyperthetically Speaking;
No matter who wins in the Air & Sea Campaigns, it comes down to the ground war in Iraq, Afganistan, & then Iran.
The ground war is taking away the ground forces that could be protecting the continental United States & it’s Allies from terrorism. Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, & North Korea are considered the big threats.
I think by attacking Iran; sooner or later Russia & China will be involved! Russia & China have trade relations with Iran. China has trade relations with the U.S. Russia does not have trade relations with the U.S. Perhaps if we did have trade relations with Russia, it would be easier to negotiate with them in the “Middle East Crisis!” To include Iran & Syria!
Thinking ahead of time, we need all the major powers of the world to have three main missions working together to: stop any nuclear threat; neutralize all threats related to terrorism; & contain terrorism from spreading throughout the world!
Discussions with “All” the major powers agreeing to these goals would help secure the whole world! This needs to be discussed & a plan worked out prior to any agreed attack to Iran; in my opinion!
Terrorism is already spreading to nations in Africa to cause havic there & it is focusing on Great Britian; who is one of our greatest Allies.
Terrorism will not stop there!
It will try to spread to all of our Allies (inside their own country) until it either succeeds or is permanently stopped. It will not stop unless we kill or capture them. No terrorist will surrender because they know if they do they would be killed by their own kind for thinking such a thing.
We aught to be concentrating on terrorism & trying to contain the spread of terorism; instead of discussing attacking Iran. This is & will continue to be the United State’s, Great Britain’s, Austrralia’s, Canada’s, Isreal’s, India’s & the rest of the World’s biggest threat!
All of these ground wars are providing a way for terrorism to spread. They take enormous amounts of man-power & if ground wars continue to rise outside of their country, the people of that country are more at risk from terrorism or terrorist attacks! That is reality!
absolutely insane! no wonder people hate americans!!!
What needs to be realized is that the religious terrorist we are now fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan & maybe soon in Iran will not be defeated. They may not win but they don’t surrender. They’ve taken a 100 year view or longer when condisidering their struggle, not the four year election cycle of the the United States. We are merely the current enemy in their never ending “jihad” . If we stay 10 more minute or 10 more years it will make no difference in the outcome… except the number of Americans that will be killed. The idea that we can protect America here by fight terrorist over there is specious. There are terrorist here right now. They aren’t going anyplace. We could use those 150,000 fighting men & women to fight terror right now, here at home. Help Iraq to help it self? Sure. Help Afganistan with $$$. We will. It’s a no brainer. Continuing to bleed in a civil war that is not ours & we cannot win is just stupid.
Iran tried to stopped Hussein in 1980, but the US helped Hussein not to be defeated. You stupid people. The US gave F-14s, and Phoenix missiles to Iran. How stupid can you get if they are your enemy. You call the Iranians religious fanatics, you are too stupid to see you, the USA, are the religious fanatics. Stupid Americans, Stupid US citizens, bunch of braying Jackasses. What eventually happens to jackasses that destroy the farmer’s crops, and field? If the Jackass won
Dan,
I’ve flown with and against Iranian pilots. They are good. Very, very good.
Zoomie
“Iran tried to stopped Hussein in 1980, but the US helped Hussein not to be defeated. You stupid people. The US gave F-14s, and Phoenix missiles to Iran. How stupid can you get if they are your enemy. You call the Iranians religious fanatics, you are too stupid to see you, the USA, are the religious fanatics. Stupid Americans, Stupid US citizens, bunch of braying Jackasses.“
You obviously know nothing about history, just like every other person who voices the same mindless anti-American nonsense that you just did.
When the US gave Iran f-14s and other weapons it was before the Islamic Fundamentalists had taken over that country. Iran had a secular leader that not just the US, but ALL OF NATO supported with aid, military, political and economic aid. Yet of course, most Europeans, Canadians, Australians and other countries who misguidedly lash out against the US for this are completely unaware of their own country’s involvement with Iran… Nevermind the fact that many European countries STILL provide military cooperation with Iran.
Get your facts straight, because from what you’ve shown, its obviously that you’ve already made up your mind and have no desire to be confused by the facts. Not as long as you can salvage your precious, irrational anti-American bias.
Nothing like telling the Iranians our battle plan in advance. I can’t believe you people. The media is what loses wars, not the troops.
I dont think we should go to Iran, the most probable event of war is that it will lead to other wars. So whats the point, i say pull out now before something bigger happens..
It’s very clear that Iran shall be defeated. If the US don’t bomb Iran, Israel will. Don’t listen to the peace-lovers, they are in fact dictatorship-supporters.
These people in the middle east have been fighting since the begining of time, they will continue to fight with themselves and each other regardless of what the United States does. If you believe other than that you are completly ignorant. those people hate us, they have been raised to hate us from the time they were born, and they would do anything to see us gone. You would be to insane to believe that there is anything we can do to stop these people from fighting, and carrying on the only thing they have ever been tought to irradicate: US!!!
Hey we need to let Jimmy Carter the peanut man lead the charge into Iran, he was so sucessful getting the Hostages out way back when.
We can thank him for all this Iranian mess. I would love to watch him wipe his ass with his Noble Peace Prize.…..
Everyone listen up, dig up a Book “THE CRASH OF 79″, came out in the early 80’s or before.…
Don’t remember the name of the guy who wrote it but he sure knew the Future.…read this and also John Hagee’s book, “Countdown to Jeruselem”.…
It’s obvious there’s not a lot of military experience here, however there
I think Iran is gonna take a part of the battle in to Iraq. As usually the might of US will bring them initial military success but then …?? what next steps US gonna do when an uprise ll be in southern Iraq led by Muktada Al Sadr?? Today Iran-Syria had an military pact. what are its implications?? Iranian Military infrastructures will be crippled but their paramilitary and IRGC those will be transform in to unconventional force equipped with quite credible homemade weapons need to be thought of. Does Iran has got Sunburn Missile with Nukes. I dont think Russians will be that stupid. But US might lose some of their key surface combatant in Navy. Any unplanned break out by US force may cause huge loss of US soldiers. They need to clear all IRGC/Iranina ground force position by successive air strikes. And US to Remember, Iran is a country of 100 millions and its not a flat country as Iraq. Lets wait for another CNN breaking News—
Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.
Sir Winston Churchill
I think the current “situation” in Iraq is yet another example proving Chruchill’s words. Vietnam would be another.
Beware the predictions of “quick and easy victory”.
Add to the mess the unknown and unpredicatable blowback that may occur long after the armed conflict is won.
Even if the planned attack on Iran goes off as planned — then what? What will disgruntled Iranians and their sympathizers get up to for revenge in the next several decades?
Given that development of a nuclear weapon is years away, the best approach now is the diplomatic one.
those F-14’s have no spare parts, they are not in shape for combat at all. the Iranian air defense system will be dismantled, command and control cut off, not to mention the cyber war our geeks are capable of waging. in the air, on the water, it will be a slaughter. they want a ground war, coz thats the ONLY way they will be able to inflict casualties. i think Pakistan is a much bigger problem. the T-ban is not far from seizing power, with the help of the rogue, traitors of the ISI, they will have nuclear weapons. make contingencies for that. even thier population is hostile. nuke p-stan, the world will be a better place.
I don’t undestand why all this madness in between the nations, if by any chance U.S.A goes into IRAN it will be for valuable reasons and don’t mistaken my friends it will not be easy, deffinitely a lot of blood will be lost and the iranians will have wished this never happened, the iranians are been fooled by their dictator and he will be responsible for all their deaths. It is sad to loose these many lives. The U.S.A has too many strategies to fight and will not let this war be another IRAK!
I don’t undestand why all this madness in between the nations, if by any chance U.S.A goes into IRAN it will be for valuable reasons and don’t mistaken my friends it will not be easy, deffinitely a lot of blood will be lost and the iranians will have wished this never happened, the iranians are been fooled by their dictator and he will be responsible for all their deaths. It is sad to loose these many lives. The U.S.A has too many strategies to fight and will not let this war be another IRAK!
In response to Kent’s comment about history:
The U.S. ousted the democratically elected government in Iran and replaced it with a dictator, the Shah of Iran, as he was known from that point onward.
The 1979 revolution was in response to policies of the Shah, the dictator that the U.S. and many other NATO members (as you stated) supported. When he was ousted, they re-established a democratic government. But of course, since the new does not “friendly” to the United States (for obvious reasons—the Shah was rather cruel), it is branded a rogue nation for looking after its own citizens. It probably sponsors terrorism, but then I’m sure the terror organizations headquarters inside the United States and England are just for cookie parties. Isn’t that right? (I can name a few if you are interested.)
There is growing reason (and correctly so) to dislike American policies. America is a threat to world peace. Never mind that kids from a relatively younger age are indoctrinated how it defends Freedom and all, but at the end of the day, it’s just what it is—propaganda.
Why should European nations play into America’s national interests, as it so put? They have their own interests to preserve. Europe SHOULD deal with Iran. Unlike the United States, Iranian missile strikes could hit most of the European nations. They have a reason to favor cooperation over confrontation, aside from economic interests.
Next time you want to refer to history, try not to interpret it selectively.
I just realized that,terrorists are willing to kill their own and some how without bothering them, they will attack foreign countries on a whim!They operate in severe blindness of obscure
conciense etc.Who knows,what kind of signals their
brains are producing? It’s:“The mystery man.”
Sunburn missiles
The Sunburn missile has never seen use in combat, to my knowledge, which probably explains why its fearsome capabilities are not more widely recognized. Other cruise missiles have been used, of course, on several occasions, and with devastating results. During the Falklands War, French-made Exocet missiles, fired from Argentine fighters, sunk the HMS Sheffield and another ship. And, in 1987, during the Iran-Iraq war, the USS Stark was nearly cut in half by a pair of Exocets while on patrol in the Persian Gulf. On that occasion US Aegis radar picked up the incoming Iraqi fighter (a French-made Mirage), and tracked its approach to within 50 miles. The radar also “saw” the Iraqi plane turn about and return to its base. But radar never detected the pilot launch his weapons. The sea-skimming Exocets came smoking in under radar and were only sighted by human eyes moments before they ripped into the Stark, crippling the ship and killing 37 US sailors.
The 1987 surprise attack on the Stark exemplifies the dangers posed by anti-ship cruise missiles. And the dangers are much more serious in the case of the Sunburn, whose specs leave the sub-sonic Exocet in the dust. Not only is the Sunburn much larger and faster, it has far greater range and a superior guidance system. Those who have witnessed its performance trials invariably come away stunned. According to one report, when the Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani visited Moscow in October 2001 he requested a test firing of the Sunburn, which the Russians were only too happy to arrange. So impressed was Ali Shamkhani that he placed an order for an undisclosed number of the missiles.
The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or: a 750-pound conventional warhead, within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern that hugs the deck and includes “violent end maneuvers” to elude enemy defenses. The missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system. Should a US Navy Phalanx point defense somehow manage to detect an incoming Sunburn missile, the system has only seconds to calculate a fire solution not enough time to take out the intruding missile. The US Phalanx defense employs a six-barreled gun that fires 3,000 depleted-uranium rounds a minute, but the gun must have precise coordinates to destroy an intruder “just in time.“
The Sunburn’s combined supersonic speed and payload size produce tremendous kinetic energy on impact, with devastating consequences for ship and crew. A single one of these missiles can sink a large warship, yet costs considerably less than a fighter jet. Although the Navy has been phasing out the older Phalanx defense system, its replacement, known as the Rolling Action Missile (RAM) has never been tested against the weapon it seems destined to one day face in combat. Implications For US Forces in the Gulf
The US Navy’s only plausible defense against a robust weapon like the Sunburn missile is to detect the enemy’s approach well ahead of time, whether destroyers, subs, or fighter-bombers, and defeat them before they can get in range and launch their deadly cargo. For this purpose US AWACs radar planes assigned to each naval battle group are kept aloft on a rotating schedule. The planes “see” everything within two hundred miles of the fleet, and are complemented with intelligence from orbiting satellites.
But US naval commanders operating in the Persian Gulf face serious challenges that are unique to the littoral, i.e., coastal, environment. A glance at a map shows why: The Gulf is nothing but a large lake, with one narrow outlet, and most of its northern shore, i.e., Iran, consists of mountainous terrain that affords a commanding tactical advantage over ships operating in Gulf waters. The rugged northern shore makes for easy concealment of coastal defenses, such as mobile missile launchers, and also makes their detection problematic. Although it was not widely reported, the US actually lost the battle of the Scuds in the first Gulf War termed “the great Scud hunt” and for similar reasons.
http://www.rense.com/general59/theSunburniransawesome.htm
Your all very stupid… Terrorists ahahahahaha, I need a minute to finish laughing… What are you all scared of? A country that’s half way across the world and has never threatened a soul? A sanctioned country that can’t even buy COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT PARTS to keep its citizens safe? You’re all watching too much Fox news my friends. A country that was torn by a war for 8 years that WE FUELED (IRAQ and IRAN war)? If god forbid any sort of attack was to happen, most of you couldn’t even put gas in your cars… Do you realize that? An attack on the second largest oil reserve IN THE WORLD… I say no and so should you! We have to solve our problems through dialogue and REAL leadership not through oppression and anger. Most of the problems in the mid-east are because of Iran-US relations.