Jump to content
Mohamed1993

How would a war between US and Iran play out?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

US could not invade and occupy Iran without reinstating a draft and you're looking at another Vietnam in that case. But if the goal is to destroy Iran's nuclear program from the air, how successful would it be? A lot of these facilities are deeply underground. How would Iran respond? Would they attack US troops in Iraq and Afghanistan? Would they launch missiles into Israel with the help of Hezb knowing this would probably draw Syria and Lebanon into a whole other war just whilst Syria is looking to end its own "civil war". Would closing Hormuz be an option? This would cripple Iran's economy too, and I assume the Americans would know this would be a last resort for Iran and would send the world into a crisis, so I assume they will plan to seize Hormuz first, and take away this option from Iran. According to former CIA official, Michael Scheuer, who is not in favor of this war, and hates Israel and Saudi Arabia, he says that Iran has the ability to carry out terror operations in the west, which they would not use unless attacked, (I don't actually know if this is true), but if so, would we see such measures to prompt a US invasion which would be very painful for the US no doubt economically? If the US does attack, how does it then ensure a more resilient Iran that has been attacked then does not develop nukes, it looks like to ensure this, they would have to invade and overthrow the Iranian government, which again would be very painful for the US. This war seems like a disaster, but yet, it seems like its the only option the US has if they pull out of the deal, because the other powers will not reinstate UN sanctions. So where does that leave us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

America is playing in the hands of Israel and even if it is forced to declare a war. It won't cos it knows Iran is not like Iraq or Afghanistan which will just take the blows. Iran is very strong and powerful

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, thegoodman81 said:

Hi guys. Matt from America here. Just wanted to let you know that I don't know ANYBODY over here who wants the USA to go to war with Iran. We've got enough problems as it is! :confused:

Thank you man! I hope the saner voices like yours prevail, but I don't think the American government cares about what the people want really. 

Edited by Mohamed1993

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Mohamed1993 said:

Thank you man! I hope the saner voices like yours prevail, but I don't think the American government cares about what the people want really. 

Well, that's true of every government to a degree! :angry:So sad. Still, I don't think even our government wants war with Iran. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Iraq in 2001 was a dictatorship of 24 million with opposition from Kurds in the north and Shias in the south. Most Iraqis complied with the invasion so someone could deal with Saddam and to avoid further bloodshed. American victory.

Afghanistan in 2003 probably didn't even have electricity for the most part. What I've read from books by journalists who went there described it as medieval and backwards. There's really nothing to bomb, and Taliban falls apart. Win again.

Iran. Vast country of 80 million people. Strong national security and overall developed. Majority of the population would support the government in the event of an American attack. How many lives would this cost America?

Lets just keep things where they are (right now they're mainly on twitter, the Trump's natural habitat).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trump cannot afford a war like that, the power balance and struggle versus China &  Russia would be lost.

Also, american soldiers have not fought a proper war in decades, if they think they will be met by farmers with AK47 or fleeing soldiers of the government, they got a new thing coming. It would be their new burial site.

Also, Iran is not stupid, we know where the heart of America lays and it would be flattened to the ground. For the same reason as to why america does not belong to americans, so would the government of the US never attack Iran as long as israel is at risk.

Also, an attack against Iran would never follow the public opinion, increasing the crack between the US and the EU and it would also unite the Iranian people and the division of the people is the only straight that the american government has and is playing on.

I feel sorry for my american brothers and sisters and for the true american people who believe in the founding principles of america, that they now have a government and leaders who could not care less about the people and are only lap dogs of israel. I mean how ridiculous isnt it that every president candidate has to convince the AIPAC during election? And if they dont they will get the whole media in america against them and all the major lobby groups.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

America has won wars against  powerful nations before. 

But there is no reason to start another stupid one. And, you're right, we don't need to be spending $$$$$ for that.

10 hours ago, IbnSina said:

cannot afford a war like that.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, IbnSina said:

.

I feel sorry for my american brothers and sisters and for the true american people who believe in the founding principles of america, that they now have a government and leaders who could not care less about the people and are only lap dogs of israel. I mean how ridiculous isnt it that every president candidate has to convince the AIPAC during election? And if they dont they will get the whole media in america against them and all the major lobby groups.

 

My candidate in the last election skipped the AIPAC meeting.

US presidents and Israel: Always expect the unexpected - Israel National News

 

 

 



 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

America has won wars against  powerful nations before. 

But there is no reason to start another stupid one. And, you're right, we don't need to be spending $$$$$ for that.

 

If you are referring to WW2 then its worth mentioning that it was not America vs Germany, but multiple countries vs Germany and I believe the truth is in the numbers, regardless of what the movies say:

Russian soldiers killed during WW2: 11 000 000 (depending on which historian you wish you believe)

US soldiers killed during WW2: 400 000

So I wouldnt really say that the US did the heavy lifting there.

What other war in recent history? Cold war? Vietnam? Afghanistan? Iraq? 

One of them wasnt a war, the other one was lost and the other two were never a wars and still got lost.

 

8 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

My candidate in the last election skipped the AIPAC meeting.

Yeah, I liked bernie sanders, I liked ron paul too but they never win because they speak common sense but these presidents in recent time just play on peoples fears during their campaign and pay millions in marketing, in fact, it seems like the person that pays most in marketing wins. I liked JFK too but he got shot.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, IbnSina said:

If you are referring to WW2 then its worth mentioning that it was not America vs Germany, but multiple countries vs Germany and I believe the truth is in the numbers, regardless of what the movies say:

Russian soldiers killed during WW2: 11 000 000 (depending on which historian you wish you believe)

US soldiers killed during WW2: 400 000

So I wouldnt really say that the US did the heavy lifting there.

What other war in recent history? Cold war? Vietnam? Afghanistan? Iraq? 

One of them wasnt a war, the other one was lost and the other two were never a wars and still got lost.

 

WWII was multiple countries against multiple countries. I think the US pulled its weight. I was also thinking of the Revolution,WWI,etc.

The more recent fiascos are just that. 

image.jpeg

Edited by LeftCoastMom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LeftCoastMom said:

WWII was multiple countries against multiple countries. I think the US pulled its weight. I was also thinking of the Revolution,WWI,etc.

The more recent fiascos are just that. 

image.jpeg

Hmm okay I see.

I find it funny how uncle sam always points at us when its time for going to war but he never points at himself. Just like how these war mongering politicians never go to the war themselves, they just send poor/lower class people who dont have many options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Well, lol, I'm sure you know it was an old recruitment poster. 

I am sorry I didn't photograph all of the protest-graffiti that was drawn around here when Iraq was invaded. Uncle Sam in various states was a favorite theme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • hi in left picture they divie earth themselves Saudi Arabia wants north that is a wasteland for them The Egypt wants muslim countries & USA wants rest of the world. in right they allied together but Iran wants supremacy Turkey wants more land    & Russia hold this two togther.
    • Once again, lnternet usage, access, and ownership responsibilities are under review. https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/backlash-building-over-plan-gut-net-neutrality-n823436  For the 200+ page Federal Communications document see: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-347927A1.pdf  A lot of this revolves around "service providers". Question: can service providers deny access, say to SC ?    
    • Divorce » Khula' divorce or Talaqul Khula' 2537. The divorce of a wife who develops an aversion from husband and hates him, and surrenders to him her Mahr or some of her property so that he may divorce her, is called Khula' Divorce. The hatred must have reached a proportion where she would not allow him conjugal rights.

      2538. If the husband himself wishes to pronounce the formula of Khula' divorce and his wife's name is, say, Fatima, he should say after receiving the property: "Zawjati Fatimatu Khala'tuha 'ala ma bazalat" and should also say as a recommended precaution: "Hiya Taliq" i.e. "I have given Khula' divorce to my wife Fatima in lieu of what she has given me, and she is free'. And if the wife is identified, it is not necessary to mention her name in Talaqul Khula' and also in Mubarat Divorce.

      2539. If a woman appoints a person as her representative to surrender her Mahr to her husband, and the husband, too, appoints the same person as his representative to divorce his wife, and if, for instance, the name of the husband is Muhammad and the name of the wife is Fatima, the representative will pronounce the formula of divorce thus: "An muwakkilati Fatimah bazalat mahraha li muwakkili Muhammad li Yakhla'aha 'alayh". Then he says immediately: "Zawjatu muwakkili khala'tuha 'ala ma bazalat hiya Taliq".
      And if a woman appoints a person as her representative to give something other than Mahr to her husband, so that he may divorce her, the representative should utter the name of that thing instead of the word "Mahraha" (her Mahr). For example, if the woman gives $500 he should say: bazalat khamsa mi'ati Dollar".   https://www.sistani.org/english/book/48/2361/
    • http://www.muslimpro.com/?date=&convention=Jafari&asrjuristic=Standard you can select other method of calculation based on your region & school of thought http://www.azangoo.com/DefaultLang.aspx its based on Jafari school of thought. for both of them you can find their apps on googleplay & appstore
×