Incident in the Gulf or is this a completely unlikely scenario?

NICO

New Member
Heard the same thing with Saddam,,, rivers of fire, or blood or something. Iraqis willing to die for Iraq,,,,,Iraqs not afraid of dieing,,, american cant take casulties.......

Twice, gulf war and Iraq war.
I'm not sure Iraq template works with the Iranians. Far bigger country,bigger population, they have been told by their government that we are the bad guys for 30 years now. If we bomb them first, can't Iran gov. then turn around and tell their population:" we told you so. we gave them documents, we signed their treaty, Israel hasn't, what more were we supposed to do?"

You don't think the population will rally around their government and defend their country? The US has sustained casualties and fighting has been going on for years, one can argue because we have been shielded from the images but what happens like 1805 said if we loss a ship and all its complement? What about couple of jets get shot down? Can Iran really make a mess of things in Iraq, would we have to re-invade Iraq? His scenario was 2015 so we shouldn't have that many troops left then, so the US president would have to take a decision: do we go back in?
 

justone

Banned Member
You hit it on the nail it for me,guys. I have been reading Defence Talk for about 2 or 3 years at least and I have never bothered signing up until now. When I saw this thread, I thought :"here we go again!". Usually, what you get is the US will bury Iran under 5 inches of glass from one side and you hear from the other side: "Iran Navy will sink the entire US Navy." Well, I don't care much for either. You don't get anywhere with scenarios or peoples comments of that nature.

Do I believe 1805 scenario will play out? No, I think it's unlikely but I like that he takes the other side and opens it up.I agree with him that the West is being overconfident, tech is nice but for Iran, could they nullify our tech by other means? And I mean taking heavy casualties by suicide bombers or something similar, yes,it's more than likely. Are we ready to loss 100, 1000 GIs or seaman? What happens to public opinion then? Especially if all the talking heads on TV say Iran's not a tough nut to crack and suddenly we are taking big losses.
American are willing to take heavy casualties not to have a nuclear armed Iran. Remember in the 80's all they use to show us Iran using human bodies to clear mines that was crazy. Iranian will use this tactic to the fullest. So that no problem for Iran to do something like this. Iran is not Iraq you cannot compared them. Iran has been arming the Persian Gulf with anti-ship missile for a long time and also been training for this. They dont have a big navy so they using other ways to fight. This could happen but in a different way. The only problem with taking over Iran is the cost and the casualties. This could happen but in a different way so dont underestimate Iran.
 

Juramentado

New Member
The Kilo attack would be further out in the Indian Ocean as I assume an LHA would not need to come near the Gulf? Would a Kilo be able to get through a ASW screen...or lay in wait for one to sail into it's field of fire?
The tactical limiting factor for any SS/SSK is battery capacity - life support, propulsion, sensor use, all of it is pulling directly from that source. It's the lack of endurance and relatively moderate speeds that influences how it's used.

They could lie in wait outside in the Gulf of Oman, but that would mean having to surface and recharge occasionally. This is very dangerous when the area is being sanitized by ASW. Also, the typical SSK cannot sustain the speed of advance that a task force would use as a further anti-sub measure.

A successful attack would most likely occur if the LHA decided to transit the Strait. This would occur if the landing had to happen at Bandar Abbas or any of the outlying islands. An enhancement for Red Side - Iran illicitly obtains detailed hydrography maps of the area (perhaps through shell companies to avoid alerting intel agencies) and maps out some skulking points. They position all available subs in the points that match up to potential transit paths and highest probability of not being detected by a dedicated ASW sweep. The big dependency on this is advance knowledge that the passage will in fact occur and the advance ASW sweep misses them entirely.
 

Belesari

New Member
American are willing to take heavy casualties not to have a nuclear armed Iran. Remember in the 80's all they use to show us Iran using human bodies to clear mines that was crazy. Iranian will use this tactic to the fullest. So that no problem for Iran to do something like this. Iran is not Iraq you cannot compared them. Iran has been arming the Persian Gulf with anti-ship missile for a long time and also been training for this. They dont have a big navy so they using other ways to fight. This could happen but in a different way. The only problem with taking over Iran is the cost and the casualties. This could happen but in a different way so dont underestimate Iran.
Yes but the question is can iran win? No. Will america use a small ground force to provide this blissfully ignorant force to be annihlatred.

Those anti ship missiles wont last long when they are targeted by hundreds and hundreds of tomahawks, fighters, bombers and other craft.

The US wont send a couple Amphib boats but it will use carrier taskforces, 3 in the gulf last i heard. Thats around 450 or so tomahawks alone not counting any SSGNs or other countries ships. Add to that over 200 fighters just from the carriers alone.

The point is Iran wont face England. It wont face a pier it will face a hammer made to shatter far more than it can throw. And their economy will crash the moment they do.
 

justone

Banned Member
Yes but the question is can iran win? No. Will america use a small ground force to provide this blissfully ignorant force to be annihlatred.

Those anti ship missiles wont last long when they are targeted by hundreds and hundreds of tomahawks, fighters, bombers and other craft.

The US wont send a couple Amphib boats but it will use carrier taskforces, 3 in the gulf last i heard. Thats around 450 or so tomahawks alone not counting any SSGNs or other countries ships. Add to that over 200 fighters just from the carriers alone.

The point is Iran wont face England. It wont face a pier it will face a hammer made to shatter far more than it can throw. And their economy will crash the moment they do.
Everyone who know about American military know that Iran wont win. But they will keep a ground war going for a long time and I mean a long time. The U.S. going to lose some ship that a fact jack. The Iranian know they can't defeat the American Army that why they have alot of miltia. It just going to get nasty if America commit ground troops. Alot professional keep underestimate the Iranian dont be surprise if Iran come out with something no one expect. All Im sayin the cost and casualities are going to be high cause Iran are crazy and they have high morale and they are willin to die. There economy going crash but the Iran already suffer from sanctions. The Iranian still was functioning during the sanctions. They will adapt they been doing it anyway during the Iran-Iraq war and during the arm sanctions from the U.S. so they are ready so remember that. I'm not trying to be on there side everybody alway down playing the Iranians.
 

AMERICANMAN

Banned Member
Everyone who know about American military know that Iran wont win. But they will keep a ground war going for a long time and I mean a long time. The U.S. going to lose some ship that a fact jack. The Iranian know they can't defeat the American Army that why they have alot of miltia. It just going to get nasty if America commit ground troops. Alot professional keep underestimate the Iranian dont be surprise if Iran come out with something no one expect. All Im sayin the cost and casualities are going to be high cause Iran are crazy and they have high morale and they are willin to die. There economy going crash but the Iran already suffer from sanctions. The Iranian still was functioning during the sanctions. They will adapt they been doing it anyway during the Iran-Iraq war and during the arm sanctions from the U.S. so they are ready so remember that. I'm not trying to be on there side everybody alway down playing the Iranians.
Why would the USA commit ground troops,,, I know up till now its said that Air Power alone wont win a war,,, but smart bombs are a force multiplier by 20 times,,,,it just may win a war. realized that it would be a lot cheaper to launch these missiles from a militarized Boeing 747. The freighter version of the latest 747model, the 747-8F, can carry 140 tons of cargo. After militarizing the aircraft, you would still be able to carry about a hundred tons of missiles and bombs.

--- General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems announced today that it has successfully demonstrated the ability to maneuver and guide 81mm air-dropped mortars to a stationary ground target after release from an aircraft. The guide-to-target flight tests verified the ability of the novel General Dynamics guidance system to provide a precision strike capability utilizing low-cost mortars. These test results build on previous pre-programmed maneuver flight tests successfully conducted by General Dynamics in 2007. The shells weight about 50 lbs. Can you imagine what happens when a dozen 747s fly over a city each with 5000 small smart bombs all preprogrammed to take out perhaps all trucks,, buses and military vehicles. and that would happen day after day.
 

BronzePlaque

New Member
Everyone who know about American military know that Iran wont win. But they will keep a ground war going for a long time and I mean a long time. The U.S. going to lose some ship that a fact jack. The Iranian know they can't defeat the American Army that why they have alot of miltia. It just going to get nasty if America commit ground troops. Alot professional keep underestimate the Iranian dont be surprise if Iran come out with something no one expect. All Im sayin the cost and casualities are going to be high cause Iran are crazy and they have high morale and they are willin to die. There economy going crash but the Iran already suffer from sanctions. The Iranian still was functioning during the sanctions. They will adapt they been doing it anyway during the Iran-Iraq war and during the arm sanctions from the U.S. so they are ready so remember that. I'm not trying to be on there side everybody alway down playing the Iranians.
I think, US don`t have any intention to invade Iran..They are very well aware of the fact that Iran is not Iraq..So ground war is not an option here..They just dont want Iran to have nuclear weapons...IF they decide to terminate those nuclear facilities they just need their air and naval forces..

What would Iran`s response to that is a big question mark..I am sure Iran will use her MRBMs or LRICBMs but what else? If Iran fires those missiles to American bases which are located in Saudi Arabia and Turkey, would these countries involve to the conflict? Horns of a dilemma
 

justone

Banned Member
I think, US don`t have any intention to invade Iran..They are very well aware of the fact that Iran is not Iraq..So ground war is not an option here..They just dont want Iran to have nuclear weapons...IF they decide to terminate those nuclear facilities they just need their air and naval forces..

What would Iran`s response to that is a big question mark..I am sure Iran will use her MRBMs or LRICBMs but what else? If Iran fires those missiles to American bases which are located in Saudi Arabia and Turkey, would these countries involve to the conflict? Horns of a dilemma
Iran wil release terror squad all over the Middle East so if it just a air war you still gonna to have hell. Its not just missile you will have to deal with they have (Qom) forces all over Middle East. Overall it not going to be a happy situation if the U.S. do a air strike instead of land operation.
 

justone

Banned Member
Why would the USA commit ground troops,,, I know up till now its said that Air Power alone wont win a war,,, but smart bombs are a force multiplier by 20 times,,,,it just may win a war. realized that it would be a lot cheaper to launch these missiles from a militarized Boeing 747. The freighter version of the latest 747model, the 747-8F, can carry 140 tons of cargo. After militarizing the aircraft, you would still be able to carry about a hundred tons of missiles and bombs.

--- General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems announced today that it has successfully demonstrated the ability to maneuver and guide 81mm air-dropped mortars to a stationary ground target after release from an aircraft. The guide-to-target flight tests verified the ability of the novel General Dynamics guidance system to provide a precision strike capability utilizing low-cost mortars. These test results build on previous pre-programmed maneuver flight tests successfully conducted by General Dynamics in 2007. The shells weight about 50 lbs. Can you imagine what happens when a dozen 747s fly over a city each with 5000 small smart bombs all preprogrammed to take out perhaps all trucks,, buses and military vehicles. and that would happen day after day.
What make you think Iran dont already know this. Having 747 flying with this type of equipment is no joke. Iranian are just going to give up I dont think so. As long as the supreme Iman is alive they will fight against these odds
 

Belesari

New Member
What make you think Iran dont already know this. Having 747 flying with this type of equipment is no joke. Iranian are just going to give up I dont think so. As long as the supreme Iman is alive they will fight against these odds
Its not about there faith or there will. Its about reality.

The US military has the ability to LITTERALY wipe another nation from the face of the earth.

Depending on the act we can do some increadably brutal acts.

Human waves of fanatics? A-10 with naphalm or cluster bombs.

You send in all your fighters we have a neighbor of yalls were we can send in ALOT of aircraft to claim airsuperiority.

Its not about national pride this is reality. The same would have applied if you said that Iran could have stopped cold war russia.

Afghanistan has been able to survive the russians and the US and Nato due to a combination of reasons. Formost among these is

#1 Geography. Iran doesnt have the same its is far easier to attack. Plus the cities are easy to get to.

#2 Willingness to use far more brutal methods. Wana see what the russians can do when you REALLY piss them off look at chechnea. They wiped entire cities off the map.

The US is trying to win over the people of afghanistan to bring peace to the region and to the people of the country. But also think about what that means for Iran. They would be surrounded by US friendly countries.
 

AMERICANMAN

Banned Member
Iran wil release terror squad all over the Middle East so if it just a air war you still gonna to have hell. Its not just missile you will have to deal with they have (Qom) forces all over Middle East. Overall it not going to be a happy situation if the U.S. do a air strike instead of land operation.
How much damage can terror squads do compared to 10,000 smart bombs a day.....day after day. Terrorism does not really do that much damage with few exception.....So what if terror squads blow up 50 or so civlilians every few days or even every few days. Its nothing compared to what war can do. Its nothing like the planned ystamatic destruction of war.......
 

justone

Banned Member
How much damage can terror squads do compared to 10,000 smart bombs a day.....day after day. Terrorism does not really do that much damage with few exception.....So what if terror squads blow up 50 or so civlilians every few days or even every few days. Its nothing compared to what war can do. Its nothing like the planned ystamatic destruction of war.......
Look im talking about the one they using in Iraq that destroyed M1A tanks to nothing. Also the explosives that killed over 100 personnel and that flatten buildings. The whole point Im saying it not going be that easy as you think Iran will strike back and you just dont know what it will be.
 
Last edited:

1805

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #93
How much damage can terror squads do compared to 10,000 smart bombs a day.....day after day. Terrorism does not really do that much damage with few exception.....So what if terror squads blow up 50 or so civlilians every few days or even every few days. Its nothing compared to what war can do. Its nothing like the planned ystamatic destruction of war.......
Well if some of those 50 or so a day are in New York you might not be so keen. Such levels of distruction would lose the US sympath and then the sanction net weakens. Look at the air war stats over Vietnam, if you take he A6 alone:

"Of the 84 Intruders lost to all causes during the war, only 10 were shot down by SAMs, two were shot down by MiGs, 16 were lost to operational causes, and 56 were lost to conventional ground fire and AAA"

Don't compare US performance against Iraq with Iran.
 
Last edited:

jaboyd1

New Member
Well if some of those 50 or so a day are in New York you might not be so keen. Such levels of distruction would lose the US sympath and then the sanction net weakens. Look at the air war stats over Vietnam, if you take he A6 alone:

"Of the 84 Intruders lost to all causes during the war, only 10 were shot down by SAMs, two were shot down by MiGs, 16 were lost to operational causes, and 56 were lost to conventional ground fire and AAA"

Don't compare US performance against Iraq with Iran.
You claim it is inappropriate to compare the US performance against Iraq in the first and second gulf wars, yet it is apparently appropriate to compare the US performance against a Soviet and Chinese backed North Vietnam? Iran's industries could never hope to match the material support provided to the Vietcong by China and the USSR.
 

1805

New Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #95
You claim it is inappropriate to compare the US performance against Iraq in the first and second gulf wars, yet it is apparently appropriate to compare the US performance against a Soviet and Chinese backed North Vietnam? Iran's industries could never hope to match the material support provided to the Vietcong by China and the USSR.
A fair challenge, I really mean Iran is a more determined foe than Iraq. Agreed the the Iranian airforce is really very week, but for a small incident as suggested by the thread, I believe Iran would put up a much better air defence than Iraq. The point about the A6 losses is that comparitively few were by advanced missiles.

I am certainly not claiming in a full scale war with the US, Iran's conventional forces would last very long.
 

Bonza

Super Moderator
Staff member
A fair challenge, I really mean Iran is a more determined foe than Iraq. Agreed the the Iranian airforce is really very week, but for a small incident as suggested by the thread, I believe Iran would put up a much better air defence than Iraq. The point about the A6 losses is that comparitively few were by advanced missiles.

I am certainly not claiming in a full scale war with the US, Iran's conventional forces would last very long.
Do you think there's folly in comparisons with an air war in which the circumstances and methods used were so different, though? The air war conducted over Vietnam bears little resemblance to how an air war would be conducted now - or how it was conducted in 1991, for example. I understand your point re the AAA threat, but I think it would be more instructive to look at AAA threats in Desert Storm or Allied Force, because the air war over Vietnam was fought in such a different way - for example, looking at the type of munitions dropped in Vietnam and flight envelopes necessary for their delivery, the environment in which they were operating and the limitations of sensor systems in said environment - wouldn't that be quite relevant as to why the AAA threat was as pronounced as it was? It's something to think about, anyway.

I think it's also worth remembering that the philosophy behind destroying an IADS, from the US point of view, is what's important in determining its effectiveness against Iranian air defences. Whether or not Iran has more potent air defences than Iraq, I suspect the methods by which the US approach IADS destruction is a more important factor than the size of the IADS itself, as if the method is sound then the amount of force applied by the US can be expanded to suit a larger IADS. I don't know if I'm putting it in quite the right way (it's early and no coffee) but the point I'm trying to make is that the capability to destroy an IADS shouldn't necessarily be judged solely on the size of the IADS but on the attacking force's ability to address the components of the IADS, and gradually dismantle them accordingly.

As I said above these are just things to think about - I don't know enough to say for sure, my thoughts are just straying in this direction.
 

justone

Banned Member
A fair challenge, I really mean Iran is a more determined foe than Iraq. Agreed the the Iranian airforce is really very week, but for a small incident as suggested by the thread, I believe Iran would put up a much better air defence than Iraq. The point about the A6 losses is that comparitively few were by advanced missiles.

I am certainly not claiming in a full scale war with the US, Iran's conventional forces would last very long.
Iranian military will go much longer than Iraq forces. U.S. Air Force will take alot of the Iranian ground forces out but the Iranians will adapt to this. Iranian Air Defense has received advance AD units from other militaries. They going have a little surprise that going catch who decided to launch an attack. Iranian are producing some of there own stuff that what the different between Iran and NVA, Vietcong and Iraq. If you are able to produce your own equipment that a big different. Iranian has mastered the IDE's that where the problem going be in a ground war that why I said that a ground war with Iran will be much longer. This what gonna cause a headache for U.S. Forces and will take alot of equipment and personnel out. They have the prove in Iraq about the Iranian explosives. Like I said before it going to be big mess its still a big possibly of a incident in the Gulf. A nation that train for years for an attack is not going to be an easy foe.
 
Last edited:

SABRE

Super Moderator
Verified Defense Pro
Iranian military will go much longer than Iraq forces. U.S. Air Force will take alot of the Iranian ground forces out but the Iranians will adapt to this. Iranian Air Defense has received advance AD units from other militaries. They going have a little surprise that going catch who decided to launch an attack. Iranian are producing some of there own stuff that what the different between Iran and NVA, Vietcong and Iraq. If you are able to produce your own equipment that a big different. Iranian has mastered the IDE's that where the problem going be in a ground war that why I said that a ground war with Iran will be much longer. This what gonna cause a headache for U.S. Forces and will take alot of equipment and personnel out. They have the prove in Iraq about the Iranian explosives. Like I said before it going to be big mess its still a big possibly of a incident in the Gulf. A nation that train for years for an attack is not going to be an easy foe.
There is nothing (conventional) in Iranian military inventory that US cannot defeat. I think conventionally Iran will only be able to sustain the war for around four to six weeks (my estimation). But even with this fact U.S will not be able to win the war in Iran.

i. Sending ground troops will be the biggest mistake, even if U.S destroyed Iranian military's war fighting capability. The Iranian popular will or will of the people to fight U.S. will prove devastating for U.S and allies in Iran. Remember that Iranian people do train as militia in anticipation of war with U.S.

ii. Iranian ballistic missiles will put entire M.E under a threat. Only good news is that Iran has no nuclear warhead and the conventional impact of these missiles will be limited. Nevertheless, collectively they'll be able to overwhelm capaital of any single state in ME - which more likely to be Tel Aviv.

iii. Iran may negatively influence the Afghan war as well support strikes by Shia militants against US forces in Iraq. Hezbollah and Hamas will also be motivated to launch strikes on Israel. Shia uprising in the oil rich zones of Saudi Arabia cannot be ruled out either.

iv. Disrupting of trade rout and oil supply from the Persian Gulf by Iran is another major option.

v. Wide spread international condemnation and lack of regional support for U.S/Israel attacks. Turkey, China, Russia and even U.S allies like Pakistan and India will not support such a move. While India and Pakistan do not see eye-to-eye on bilateral issues as well as on Afghanistan they do sometimes jump on board the same ship when it comes to international affairs i.e. both supported Palestinian cause against Israel throughout the Cold War. Both states have wider economic and energy interests in Iran. Afghanistan and Iraq other two parties, which regardless of presence of U.S forces, will oppose such an adventure. GCC states will not be able to economically sustain war in Persian Gulf, so don't count on them. So, when you don't have support of the Iran's immediate neighbors, how do you expect to conduct this war?

vi. Finally nothing will unite Iran people more (after the controversial elections) then a U.S led invasion partnered with Israel. U.S will chopping off its own feet in M.E if they attack Iran.

Here is the punchline: U.S can disregard everything I have said above, but the share threat to the oil supply and trade routs in the Persian Gulf and threat of Shia uprising in the oil rich zones of GCC States is enough to deter U.S attacks. Its a no go area. The Iranian dogs have guns and they refuse to take their medicine.
 
Last edited:

justone

Banned Member
There is nothing (conventional) in Iranian military inventory that US cannot defeat. I think conventionally Iran will only be able to sustain the war for around four to six weeks (my estimation). But even with this fact U.S will not be able to win the war in Iran.

i. Sending ground troops will be the biggest mistake, even if U.S destroyed Iranian military's war fighting capability. The Iranian popular will or will of the people to fight U.S. will prove devastating for U.S and allies in Iran. Remember that Iranian people do train as militia in anticipation of war with U.S.

ii. Iranian ballistic missiles will put entire M.E under a threat. Only good news is that Iran has no nuclear warhead and the conventional impact of these missiles will be limited. Nevertheless, collectively they'll be able to overwhelm capaital of any single state in ME - which more likely to be Tel Aviv.

iii. Iran may negatively influence the Afghan war as well support strikes by Shia militants against US forces in Iraq. Hezbollah and Hamas will also be motivated to launch strikes on Israel. Shia uprising in the oil rich zones of Saudi Arabia cannot be ruled out either.

iv. Disrupting of trade rout and oil supply from the Persian Gulf by Iran is another major option.

v. Wide spread international condemnation and lack of regional support for U.S/Israel attacks. Turkey, China, Russia and even U.S allies like Pakistan and India will not support such a move. While India and Pakistan do not see eye-to-eye on bilateral issues as well as on Afghanistan they do sometimes jump on board the same ship when it comes to international affairs i.e. both supported Palestinian cause against Israel throughout the Cold War. Both states have wider economic and energy interests in Iran. Afghanistan and Iraq other two parties, which regardless of presence of U.S forces, will oppose such an adventure. GCC states will not be able to economically sustain war in Persian Gulf, so don't count on them. So, when you don't have support of the Iran's immediate neighbors, how do you expect to conduct this war?

vi. Finally nothing will unite Iran people more (after the controversial elections) then a U.S led invasion partnered with Israel. U.S will chopping off its own feet in M.E if they attack Iran.

Here is the punchline: U.S can disregard everything I have said above, but the share threat to the oil supply and trade routs in the Persian Gulf and threat of Shia uprising in the oil rich zones of GCC States is enough to deter U.S attacks. Its a no go area. The Iranian dogs have guns and they refuse to take their medicine.
I agreed with what you saiding but I've give the Iranian forces three to six months fighting (my opinion) just because no one know what the real numbers of the Iranian Military. The great might of the U.S. FORCES ARE TO MUCH FOR THEM but they will fight against the odds. The guerilla war will go on for a long time that a fact they trained for this for a long time. You gonna have women, children, and just about anyone who can fired a weapon fighting. Training means alot just as U.S. are training for a air war mostly and draw up war plan the Iranian have done the same thing. Iranian already know this and has taken action if there communication is taken out they been training for light infantry warfare and using limited communication. They also can moved alot of there units this is proving in recently operation in the past 5 years. The whole point is they already preparing for an attack they have weapon depot all around the country and unnamed or secret air bases. Another is the history of Iran they are the fighters of Iman Ali the first rightly guided Iman whom personally knew Prophet Muhammad (PNBH). They are bound by this and to defend and died for the 12th Iman you're looking at a long war. Its some of Iran secrets that no one knows about that what scares alot of peoples. This scenario in Gulf can happen but in different way.
 
Last edited:

SABRE

Super Moderator
Verified Defense Pro
Training means alot just as U.S. are training for a air war
Air war is an area where actually see a 3 weeks conflict (speaking only in terms of current air power of US, Israel and Iran). I don't see Iranian victory in the air and sea. I do see Iranian victory (& by victory I mean victory) on the ground for many reasons including some of yours.

In this worst case scenario a ground invasion can result in two things either the fall of US as super power or a WW-III. States with stakes in Iran and states which are against U.S. and see it as an resource hungry imperialist expansionist will probably join hands. Some US allied states may also opt out of US group. But again this is a worst case scenario.

I do believe US has many worst case scenarios on its mind and if it plans to avoid them but still strike Iran it will probably start a war of attrition with Iran primarily destroying its air and naval capability and the focusing on weakening its ground combat capability through air and naval strikes and finally push Iran to the negotiation tables.

Another is the history of Iran they are the fighters of Iman Ali the first rightly guided Iman whom personally knew Prophet Muhammad (PNBH). They are bound by this and to defend and died for the 12th Iman you're looking at a long war. Its some of Iran secrets that no one knows about that what scares alot of peoples. This scenario in Gulf can happen but in different way.
While this can be a factor motivation for Iran, the fact is that the events surrounding Hazrat Ali (Rz), Imam Hassan (Rz) and Imam Hussain (Rz) are not part of Iranian history but instead part of Arab history. & it is no secret that Iran is motivated by the mentioned Imams as Iran is predominantly Shia state (non Arab Sunni states are also highly motivated by the above mentioned Imams). While it will play great role for Iran it will hardly be a factor to deter U.S or Israel.
 
Top