Iran Super Thread- Merged

[FormerEnlisted]

If you touch their water, what's stopping them from touching all the desalination plants in the gulf?

In theory nothing. I am against an invasion for reasons I have already posted. But as a hypothetical...

Supplying allies with fresh water would be one of the easier logistical challenges a war would face. We would need proper stockpiling of domestic reserves (one 1000L container per person, filled locally and stored locally), pre-positioning of desalination components for repairs, massive hardening/dispersal of critical infrastructure, and evacuation of all non-essential demographics from water restricted areas.

This would be a population movement of millions of people and impossible to conceal.

If the decapitation of Tehran was successful, and a new national army could be formed, and these measures were observed rigorously in target areas, then the subsequent war would be more of a brushfire fighting exercise and less of the Somme.

If there is no choice but to invade, then it should be as fast and as brutal as possible. Emptying the entire region of population shifts the infrastructure burden into areas without the same vulnerabilities and frees up logistic channels for fighting. It also eliminates the possibility of rear area violence because only people who have been screened and declared essential would be present. For soldiers this would give them the mental reprieve they need when away from the front lines, and provide instantly accessible housing facilities etc. for billeting.

Iran is using the entire region as its own human shield. The solution is simple: move them somewhere else and then deal with it.

As a hypothetical.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Your argument for immediate action is heavily weighted toward factors which affect Israel. What do they have to do with us as Canadians? Or as North Americans? Or as members of NATO?

See after next.

If Israel can't be trusted to behave rationally, and they are confident in their own ability to defend themselves (which is demonstrable), the inevitable outcome is that they nuke Iran themselves.

We should be focused on preparing for the consequences of that decision. Adding our own men to the mix just means we bleed resources before the inevitable fallout hits the fan.

I expect the consequences of that decision to explode into a multi-national, multi-continental war roughly along religious majority lines, if the conflict hasn't already done so before anyone even starts threatening nukes.

The Islamic demands of Israel aren't that it sit quietly behind its borders and suffer through rocket and terrorist attacks, or even that it merely cease settling in areas supposedly set aside for non-Israelis. The core Islamic demand is that Israel cease to exist.

It took several rounds of war for most of Israel's immediate neighbours to make peace. Iran hasn't even tried one round; I doubt they're going to go straight to some kind of accord without trying their hand at war at least once, when they feel ready. If Israel is occupied, the kinds of people who will occupy it will not be moderates; I expect them to conduct themselves approximately as Hamas did recently. I expect remaining non-Islamic cultural artifacts to be destroyed, and the region to be ethnically cleansed of non-Muslims. The resulting flood of refugees will not be trying to enter other Islamic nations or make transoceanic journeys to the Americas, southern Africa, or Asia.

So there's going to be a war to decide the issue, if this one isn't somehow obviously and definitively the last one, and Israel knows a loss means approximately the great ethnic cleansings of the 1990s, multiplied. So Israel isn't going to be particularly restrained, and irrespective of that its attackers are going to easily frame it as a religious war anyways. The resulting economic disruption will make everything so far look like a modest hiccup, which may tempt others to pile on. Iran will have backers (eg. Russia, China) whose contributions might tip a balance, and I doubt public sentiment in western countries will allow governments to stay out and let Israel go down. (Again, no-one is going to be able to reasonably claim "It'll be OK; it won't be like when Hamas attacked".) Stir all those together and I expect a number of countries not in the region to be drawn in. Then they're going to resent anyone they consider part of their "in-group" who is still sitting on the sidelines.

All that is apart from any other troublemakers who decide to kick off another crisis while they figure everyone is distracted/committed.

I'd rather avoid all that. Sure, it might never happen - but Iran's government wants Israel gone, and Iran's government is going to continue pursuing a working nuclear arsenal unless it is forcibly stopped. They already have delivery systems. I don't expect the horse to learn to sing.

 

[Altair]

In theory nothing. I am against an invasion for reasons I have already posted. But as a hypothetical...

Ah, as a thought exercise.

Gotcha.

Supplying allies with fresh water would be one of the easier logistical challenges a war would face. We would need proper stockpiling of domestic reserves (one 1000L container per person, filled locally and stored locally), pre-positioning of desalination components for repairs, massive hardening/dispersal of critical infrastructure, and evacuation of all non-essential demographics from water restricted areas.

Yeah, not to mention the economic hit on the effected region. The USA would need to bankroll it, seeing as the cheaper option for nations in the gulf would be to deny America the ability to use their bases to support such an operation, trying to get themselves off Irans retaliation list.

This would be a population movement of millions of people and impossible to conceal.

If the decapitation of Tehran was successful, and a new national army could be formed, and these measures were observed rigorously in target areas, then the subsequent war would be more of a brushfire fighting exercise and less of the Somme.

As long as the US learned from Iraq on how to build an army. If they dismantle the entire Iranian military to start from scratch the remaining army wont have time to constitute itself. Especially if they are going up against remenants of the IRGC, which I imagine wouldn't be spared or allowed to play any part in a future Iran.

If there is no choice but to invade, then it should be as fast and as brutal as possible. Emptying the entire region of population shifts the infrastructure burden into areas without the same vulnerabilities and frees up logistic channels for fighting. It also eliminates the possibility of rear area violence because only people who have been screened and declared essential would be present. For soldiers this would give them the mental reprieve they need when away from the front lines, and provide instantly accessible housing facilities etc. for billeting.

With the cultural makeup of Iran, I doubt this is possible. Persians make up 40-50 percent of the entire population, with the other 50-60 percent making up other groups, including the kurds. You would be moving a different culture grouping into lands of other culture groupings. That's going to explode.

Iran is using the entire region as its own human shield. The solution is simple: move them somewhere else and then deal with it.

Read above

As a hypothetical.

A fun excercise.

We all know the Americans don't have the stomach for it though.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Their primary weakness is reliance on 5 individual dams for drinking water. Tehran is their centre of power and cannot sustain itself without water. No offense to your broad front proposal, but I think the easiest way to invade would be to blow those dams and then attack directly from the west to capture Tehran. A naval blockade would do the rest. At this point a new national army could be formed etc. in a classic state building exercise.

Any strategy which doesn't involve seizing control of their fresh water day 1 leaves a lot of leverage on the table. Thirst is more powerful than propaganda. People will surrender for a glass of water.

Those dams are almost empty and it was seriously suggested they evacuate the capital due to the lack of water, prior to the protests and war. So the impact might be less than hoped for.

 

[Altair]

Trump says Mideast allies have reached outlines of deal to end Iran war, says US to stop new strikes

President Donald Trump is claiming that Mideast allies have reached the parameters of a deal to end the Iran war and says that he would hold off on ordering new strikes in the five-month old conflict for now.

apnews.com

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump in a Saturday evening social media post claimed that Mideast allies have reached the parameters of a deal to end the Iran war and said that he would hold off on ordering new strikes in the five-month old conflict for now.

Trump added that the emerging deal “would include the Immediate, Complete, and Total OPENING OF THE HORMUZ STRAIT, and an end to Iran’s nuclear threat.”

“Based on this request, I have agreed, for the future benefit of the WORLD and, likewise, the survival of a successful and prosperous Iran, to cancel the attack, subject to being able to rapidly make a DEAL,” Trump said.

He said that Israel has agreed to join the U.S. in the commitment to try to complete the agreement with Iran that would bring about an end to the war.

Iran did not offer any immediate public reaction to Trump’s announcement.

Ok, this time with feeling.

For the record, I think bombs will be falling and drones will be hitting ships within 3 weeks.