Iran identifies 35 American targets in region - Commander

[mike2000 is back]

I am not saying anyone would go to War with China , I am saying if the region goes into war ,than it will be a free for all , you can't follow up with every proxy or militia that has Missiles , who will attack who is yet to be seen but mark my words if a war breaks out China and Russia will have to intervene , if they can do it in Syria they can do it in Iran as well .

Russia might provide some military support. China NO CHANCE. The Chinese don't intervene in military conflicts even Syrian crisis they never intervened whatsoever, not even to support Russia. At most they will use VETO in UNSC that's as far a support China will provide. They don't want to be involve in any foreign adventure unlike U.S, U.K, France, Russia, or to a lesser extent even regional powers like Iran, Turkey etc who have a long history of fighting wars or getting involved in military/proxy wars outside their immediate borders. The Chinese by contrast have no such policy/experience.

The ones that should be worried about their country being "completely destroyed" are you lot with that fire at the moment. Those Hollywoodesque scenarios regarding US power are for your entertainment only and not real world reference.

No rival/enemy country in the region or even the world has the capability to target US territory per se.(apart maybe from Russia and some extent China). So the most Iran can do is target some U.S bases in the region close to Iran. However, the problem is that even doing will so will attract massive retaliation from the US, just look at how the U.S retaliated after their base in Iraq was targeted and only 1 U.S military contractor was killed(those Iran backed forces suffered paid 10x more the price). The U.S has complete air superiority over Iran as well. In fact, Iran barely has a credible air force to talk about. Iran should really improve their air-force with modern fighter jets, but i don't see even that happening this decade either.
I think Iran's best strategy will be through proxy by using its militias and fifth columns in the region to attack U.S forces/bases in the region. A direct approach will raise the stakes much higher and embolden the U.S even more to retaliate. At least non state actors makes it difficult or conventional world powers to target/pinpoint them precisely unlike state actors which are more open/easy to target. This is especially even more the case given the massive imbalance of power. So an asymmetrical kind of warfare needs to be used when you know you are weaker and no match to a more powerful enemy in a frontal confrontation. Saddam's military is a very good example of why it's not a good idea to fight the U.S head on or conventional, you will be crush if you do so. No country is a match for the U.S militarily today, not even Russia and China. So Iran needs to use indirect/asymmetrical means.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1213550066390175744

LOL A militias warning a country's military/security forces to stay away from certain parts of a country;s own capital city? lol
Shows how low Iraq's military has fallen(if there is any to speak of. lol ).
It's like Al Shebab warning Somalia's military/security forces to stay away from parts of Mogadishu. Guess Iraq and Somalia are the same level now. lol

 

[Philosopher]

No country in the region has the capability to target US territory per se. The most they can do is target some U.S bases in the region close to Iran. However the problem is that even doing will attract massive retaliation from the US, just look at how the U.S retaliated after their base in Iraq was targeted and only 1 U.S military contractor was killed. The U.S has complete air superiority over Iran as well. In fact Iran barely has a credible air force to talk about. Iran should really improve their air-force with modern fighter jets.
I think Iran's best strategy will be through proxy by using its militias and fifth columns in the region to attack U.S forces/bases in the region. I direct approach will raise the stakes much higher and embolden the U.S even more to retaliate. At least non state actors makes it difficult or conventional world powers to target/pinpoint them precisely unlike state actors which are more open/easy to target. This is especially even more the case given the massive imbalance of power. So an asymmetrical kind of warfare needs to be used when you know you are weaker and no match to a more powerful enemy in a frontal confrontation.

Agreed. I made a thread earlier saying Iranians will only truly be protected once they have nukes with ICBM. At this moment, their economy is too weak to support major development in their airforce etc. They have made respectable progress in areas such as missiles, air defence etc, but their ability to fight a conventional war is limited, especially against the world's sole major power. Asymmetrical warfare will only go so much for them.

The Iranians are proud people, their intentions and desires are beyond what they can achieve right now. Their weak economy is a major issue for them. The US is a debt ridden nation and faced with a ticking time bomb, but at this moment in time, they can print $$ and spend major amounts on their military. Ideally, Iran needed to keep its head down and develop to become much stronger first before challenging the US. A war will not given them anything right now. Lets see how they respond.

 

[FedererExpress]

The ones that should be worried about their country being "completely destroyed" are you lot with that fire at the moment. Those Hollywoodesque scenarios regarding US power are for your entertainment only and not real world reference.

Russia might provide some military support. China NO CHANCE. The Chinese don't intervene in military conflicts even Syrian crisis they never intervened whatsoever, not even to support Russia. At most they will use VETO in UNSC that's as far a support China will provide. They don't want to be involve in any foreign adventure unlike U.S, U.K, France, Russia, or to a lesser extent even regional powers like Iran, Turkey etc who have a long history of fighting wars or getting involved in military/proxy wars outside their immediate borders. The Chinese by contrast have no such policy/experience.


No country in the region has the capability to target US territory per se. The most they can do is target some U.S bases in the region close to Iran. However the problem is that even doing will attract massive retaliation from the US, just look at how the U.S retaliated after their base in Iraq was targeted and only 1 U.S military contractor was killed. The U.S has complete air superiority over Iran as well. In fact Iran barely has a credible air force to talk about. Iran should really improve their air-force with modern fighter jets.
I think Iran's best strategy will be through proxy by using its militias and fifth columns in the region to attack U.S forces/bases in the region. I direct approach will raise the stakes much higher and embolden the U.S even more to retaliate. At least non state actors makes it difficult or conventional world powers to target/pinpoint them precisely unlike state actors which are more open/easy to target. This is especially even more the case given the massive imbalance of power. So an asymmetrical kind of warfare needs to be used when you know you are weaker and no match to a more powerful enemy in a frontal confrontation.


LOL A militias warning a country's military/security forces to stay away from certain parts of a country;s own capital city? lol
Shows how low Iraq's military has fallen(if there is any to speak of. lol ).
It's like Al Shebab warning Somalia's military/security forces to stay away from parts of Mogadishu. Guess Iraq and Somalia are the same level now. lol

If Iran uses their military to attack US bases, US will retaliate with overwhelming force. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will be killed.

If Iran uses terrorist groups to target US bases, Iran confirms to the world that they are the number 1 state sponsor of terror.

 

[YeBeWarned]

Russia might provide some military support. China NO CHANCE. The Chinese don't intervene in military conflicts even Syrian crisis they never intervened whatsoever, not even to support Russia. At most they will use VETO in UNSC that's as far a support China will provide. They don't want to be involve in any foreign adventure unlike U.S, U.K, France, Russia, or to a lesser extent even regional powers like Iran, Turkey etc who have a long history of fighting wars or getting involved in military/proxy wars outside their immediate borders. The Chinese by contrast have no such policy/experience.

I agree with you but I think we may see some different policies from both Russia and China , Syria wasn't that important but Russians came to its rescue which led to US has to pull back and Asshead survive .. If China wants to become a regional Power it has to flex its muscles now, Just like Russia did in last few Years , Crimea and Syria they came out of nowhere and world stand and watch .. US may try to Push France and UK into the war but i think it would be best not to get involved cause this will get messy . I personally hope for no war as I care about the after shocks in Pakistan, but if its inevitable the world should just let the two adversaries fight . I would say even Israel should stay away cause if they do get involved it will drag few Sunni's as well . And Shia Iran can rally their sectarian people from across the Globe to Fight the Evil Juice ..

 

[mike2000 is back]

I agree with you but I think we may see some different policies from both Russia and China , Syria wasn't that important but Russians came to its rescue which led to US has to pull back and Asshead survive .. If China wants to become a regional Power it has to flex its muscles now, Just like Russia did in last few Years , Crimea and Syria they came out of nowhere and world stand and watch ..

Russia is different from China. You need to first know that Russia is a European country as well as such they have always been closed to western countries historical and follow events there much closely which also helped shaped Russia's society be it the industrial revolution that happened in Europe or Industrialisation etc So this has led to Russia also ha-boring the same type of sentiments and ambitions western powers had. Reason Russia has always been an expansionist/imperialistic power as well just like western powers have been during the past centuries. So Russia has the history and has forged that policy of world intervention for centuries from Asia to Scandinavia to the Europe to the Balkans to Central Asia to Middle East to even South Asia(invasion of Afghanistan etc) to even far off as the Americas (with the Cuban missile crisis) to Africa( they are present in Libya and even Central Africa republic etc). So Russia has that history, policy and experience of engaging in conflicts in other countries outside its borders. This has been ingrained in their political and military doctrine for centuries as such they are more used to carrying out such expeditionary military activities.
By contrast China is the opposite, for one it's a East Asian country and has been more of a closed/insulated country the past centuries, so it has obviously shaped their mindset. They don't have that kind of history nor experience in engaging any power or country outside their immediate neighbourhood AT MOST, nor engaging in any proxy warfare. In fact they even barely/reluctantly engage militarily in conflicts in their own neighbourhood forget about in those not in their close neighbourhood. It's not just in their habit, policy, history or mindset. For this to happen there will need to be a radical change in their entire policy/fabric as a country and how they see the world itself. I don't see that happening anytime soon to be honest.

 

[YeBeWarned]

Russia is different from China. You need to first know that Russia is a European country as well as such they have always been closed to western countries historical and follow events there much closely which also helped shaped Russia's society be it the industrial revolution that happened in Europe or Industrialisation etc So this has led to Russia also ha-boring the same type of sentiments and ambitions western powers had. Reason Russia has always been an expansionist/imperialistic power as well just like western powers have been during the past centuries. So Russia has the history and has forged that policy of world intervention for centuries from Asia to Scandinavia to the Europe to the Balkans to Central Asia to Middle East to even South Asia(invasion of Afghanistan etc) to even far off as the Americas (with the Cuban missile crisis) to Africa( they are present in Libya and even Central Africa republic etc). So Russia has that history, policy and experience of engaging in conflicts in other countries outside its borders.
By contrast China is the opposite, it doesn't have that kind of history nor experience in engaging any power or country outside it's immediate neighbourhood AT MOST. In fact they even barely/reluctantly engage militarily in conflicts in their own neighbourhood forget about in those not in their close neighbourhood. It's not just in their habit, policy, history or mindset. For this to happen there will need to be a radical change in their entire policy/fabric as a country and how they see the world itself. I don't see that happening anytime soon to be honest.

Only time will tell my friend, We have seen some Strong statements from China when it comes to Pakistan ..

 

[mike2000 is back]

US may try to Push France and UK into the war but i think it would be best not to get involved cause this will get messy . I personally hope for no war as I care about the after shocks in Pakistan, but if its inevitable the world should just let the two adversaries fight . I would say even Israel should stay away cause if they do get involved it will drag few Sunni's as well . And Shia Iran can rally their sectarian people from across the Globe to Fight the Evil Juice ..

U.S itself doesn't want a war per se. They are more focused in Asia for the moment to keep an eye on China. However that doesn't means they are afraid of one either, especially if their forces are targeted in the region. Make no mistake if U.S forces are targeted there will be retaliation. The U.S is not Saudi Arabia, and they can afford to fight another war even today. They don't need to launch any ground invasion like in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just striking targets will do enough damage since there is no air force that can even compete with them in the region. In short, they can act like Russia is doing in Syria i.e dominate the skies and pummelled their enemies/targets on the ground, they might suffer from some air defence strikes, but they have the capabilities to neutralise them and completely dominate the skies if the conflict drags on thereby dominating the skies anywhere completely. So in case of tit for tat they will still inflict far more damage.

 

[YeBeWarned]

U.S itself doesn't want a war per se. They are more focused in Asia for the moment to keep an eye on China. However that doesn't means they are afraid of one either, especially if their forces are targeted in the region. Make no mistake if U.S forces are targeted there will be retaliation. The U.S is not Saudi Arabia, and they can afford to fight another war even today. They don't need to launch any ground invasion like in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just striking targets will do enough damage since there is no air force that can even compete with them in the region. In short, they can act like Russia is doing in Syria i.e dominate the skies and pummelled their enemies/targets on the ground, they might suffer from some air defence strikes, but they have the capabilities to neutralise them and completely dominate the skies if the conflict drags on thereby dominating the skies anywhere completely. So in case of tit for tat they will still inflict far more damage.

There is no doubt , US is definitely a super Power and have no issues in crippling the Iranians via SOW and Missiles strikes , but thing is Iran got Missiles and Proxies in region , when they would be push around the corner they will use all of the assets to hurt US as much as they can , and If Russian joins in than maybe the war will die down .. Right now the statements from both sides are not helping the situation , actually both are issuing threats one after another which is not good for Region and Global Economy .

 

[XTQ1999]

Iran holds some important cards in region , they can disrupt the Oil supply through Strait of Harmuz , launching Anti Ship missiles on Oil and Cargo ships will create a world wide catastrophe , Plus once the region becomes unstable and insecure China and Russia will be forced to intervene .

you make it sound like that's such an easy task, do you realize closing the Strait of Hormuz will turn not just the entire region but most of the world against Iran? Closing the Strait of Hormuz is not a realistic card unless Iran wants to go to war with the entire region.

 

[YeBeWarned]

you make it sound like that's such an easy task, do you realize closing the Strait of Hormuz will turn not just the entire region but most of the world against Iran? Closing the Strait of Hormuz is not a realistic card unless Iran wants to go to war with the entire region.

No its neither easy nor it will be , but just as soon as few Ships are hit which will be definitely it will stop the Global Oil supply , and hence it will force other Powerful countries to step in and end the war .. but Iran will still have Americans in target all over ME .. Both countries are right now trying to show they are the Victims and if the other country do something they will respond ..

 

[XTQ1999]

hence it will force other Powerful countries to step in and end the war

Lol what powerful countries? The most powerful one of them all would already be in the conflict, and the rest are allied with US, a blockade will just force those allies to enter the conflict along side USA, right now NATO ships are already in Strait of Hormuz due to harassment of oil tankers by Iranian navy. The rest, such as Russia will enjoy high oil prices, while China really has no means to exert power on region such a distance away to "end the conflict".

 

[YeBeWarned]

Lol what powerful countries? The most powerful one of them all would already be in the conflict, and the rest are allied with US, a blockade will just force those allies to enter the conflict along side USA, right now NATO ships are already in Strait of Hormuz due to harassment of oil tankers by Iranian navy. The rest, such as Russia will enjoy high oil prices, while China really has no means to exert power on region such a distance away to "end the conflict".

You know i heard same comments about Syria , but we all know how that turned out .. There are only 2 more big players which can change the outcome of any conflict or war , China and Russia we just now have to wait and see how things turned out .. There is a reason why a war with Iran was avoided by America and Israel in past , the same threats might be there but its just this time if Iran retaliate USA will have the legitimacy to attack .

 

[Trango Towers]

Hmm , all talk till yet.

And I hope it remains so..israel has tried to get america to do its fighting and americans are too stupid to understand

 

[XTQ1999]

You know i heard same comments about Syria , but we all know how that turned out .. There are only 2 more big players which can change the outcome of any conflict or war , China and Russia we just now have to wait and see how things turned out .. There is a reason why a war with Iran was avoided by America and Israel in past , the same threats might be there but its just this time if Iran retaliate USA will have the legitimacy to attack .

Syria is a proxy war, it only took a small Russian force to assist their side, with Iran, there will be a full US force dominating the skies and the seas. Russians can't do anything about that, and neither can China. Like I said, Russia will just enjoy high energy prices, why would they want to stop that? they don't export oil through Strait of Hormuz.