What purpose does IRGC serve?

[SipahSalar]

Are they just the instruments of controlling Iran for the theocracy? Iran's constitution defines them as: "guardian of the Revolution and of its achievements" meaning they are a political force.

They have their own naval and air forces. Conventional wisdom suggests that if you want optimized performance in war, the command and control structure needs to be simple and without any overlapping responsibilities. If they were merged with the Regular army, that would multiply Iran's capability. Instead funding is being wasted on a huge militia that serves no vital purpose. I doubt they are even given war courses like the regular forces.

Even the recent destruction of the mock Aircraft Carrier was carried out by IRGC. How well will these weapons perform in a militia's hands?

 

[Hack-Hook]

Are they just the instruments of controlling Iran for the theocracy? Iran's constitution defines them as: "guardian of the Revolution and of its achievements" meaning they are a political force.

They have their own naval and air forces. Conventional wisdom suggests that if you want optimized performance in war, the command and control structure needs to be simple and without any overlapping responsibilities. If they were merged with the Regular army, that would multiply Iran's capability. Instead funding is being wasted on a huge militia that serves no vital purpose. I doubt they are even given war courses like the regular forces.

Even the recent destruction of the mock Aircraft Carrier was carried out by IRGC. How well will these weapons perform in a militia's hands?

A simple Question how many overlapping Branch US Armed Force does Have .

 

[SipahSalar]

US has marines. I always speak against marines, useless formation, army does everything they do and better, but loved and adored in US by fanboys.

 

[Abii]

US has marines. I always speak against marines, useless formation, army does everything they do and better, but loved and adored in US by fanboys.

Essentially, it is as you said in your first post: they are as their name suggests. In the beginning of the revolution the akhoonds (mullahs) couldn't trust the military, so they created their own SS. With time, the leadership structure within the regular forces has been completely recycled. Today, they both answer to the same leadership. Which begs the question: what's the point of having both? You won't get your answer from people on this forum (too jingoistic and thick headed to give you a proper answer), but in reality there's no need for both. They exist because they're now impossible to get rid of. They own half the country's economy and are a major political force. If you go to Tehran and drive over a bridge, it's almost certain that it was built by the engineering wing of the IRGC. They also control the basij militia and the regime finds them indispensable, as they should. Without the Basiji militia, the regime is vulnerable from the inside.

Perhaps they keep the regular armed forces around for some professionalism. The IRGC is a badly bloated religious and political movement that has its own military wing. Professionalism and traditional military values are nonexistent. If they get rid of the regular military than the entire country will essentially have a bloated Hezbollah like military force protecting it and that't not ideal (not that the regular forces are anything to write home about, they're even worse equipped than the IRGC, but they're at least a regular military force and not a religious gang).

 

[Serpentine]

Essentially, it is as you said in your first post: they are as their name suggests. In the beginning of the revolution the akhoonds (mullahs) couldn't trust the military, so they created their own SS. With time, the leadership structure within the regular forces has been completely recycled. Today, they both answer to the same leadership. Which begs the question: what's the point of having both? You won't get your answer from people on this forum (too jingoistic and thick headed to give you a proper answer), but in reality there's no need for both. They exist because they're now impossible to get rid of. They own half the country's economy and are a major political force. If you go to Tehran and drive over a bridge, it's almost certain that it was built by the engineering wing of the IRGC. They also control the basij militia and the regime finds them indispensable, as they should. Without the Basiji militia, the regime is vulnerable from the inside.

Perhaps they keep the regular armed forces around for some professionalism. The IRGC is a badly bloated religious and political movement that has its own military wing. Professionalism and traditional military values are nonexistent. If they get rid of the regular military than the entire country will essentially have a bloated Hezbollah like military force protecting it and that't not ideal (not that the regular forces are anything to write home about, they're even worse equipped than the IRGC, but they're at least a regular military force and not a religious gang).

A very bad analysis dear, even for someone who hates IRGC.

 

[janon]

US has marines. I always speak against marines, useless formation, army does everything they do and better, but loved and adored in US by fanboys.

Not really, a regular army unit cannot do an amphibious assault as well as a marine expeditionary group can. And as you know, amphibious and expeditionary capability is very important for the US, unlike most other countries.

 

[Abii]

A very bad analysis dear, even for someone who hates IRGC.

Let's hear it then.

 

[Serpentine]

Let's hear it then.

The IRGC is a badly bloated religious and political movement that has its own military wing.

IRGC today is much more than a religious entity, maybe it was the case 32 years ago, but not now.

Professionalism and traditional military values are nonexistent.

Wrong, IRGC is incorporating modern military strategies and tactics, they go after modern weapons and are much quicker to give them to their units than the army and they build most of their own stuff. They have exclusive science and tech centers for their equipment and weapons.

If they get rid of the regular military than the entire country will essentially have a bloated Hezbollah like military force protecting it and that't not ideal

First there is no need to get rid of regular army, secondly IRGC is not a militia group, you simply don't have a militia group with more than 200,000 members, it's basically an army with some different war doctrines, focusing on irregular and unconventional military strategies. Having both army and IRGC has advantages and disadvantages, good part is that IRGC has a more forward thinking leadership when it comes to equipment and tactics and recruits young high ranking commanders, unfortunately army refuses to do so and tends to stick to its old generals. It's getting better though with the army, since they too have understood that they have to give up some rusty and old ways of thinking.

The disadvantage is that there maybe be some parallel projects in both army and IRGC that can have a much better output if they join hands together. Again, it's getting better since they have understood they can do bigger things if they join forces, instead of doing things separately and spending budget on parallel projects.

not that the regular forces are anything to write home about, they're even worse equipped than the IRGC, but they're at least a regular military force and not a religious gang).

Yes regular army needs to go faster to adapt to new military tactics around the world, they are not that bad, but they can do better. For example IRI Navy is doing an excellent job in modernizing its fleet considering the budget burden on their shoulders, they are doing it right, also we can say the same about Air defense forces, we'll see full results of their projects in no more than 5 years.

Unfortunately the ground forces of the army are still lagging behind and not only because of budget, but the old and outdated ways of thinking among some of its commanders, some of them need kicks in their arses. Although, I'm hopeful because I've seen some waves of change among the policies towards the ground troops, maybe it's a bit slow, but at least it exists.

 

[Abii]

IRGC today is much more than a religious entity, maybe it was the case 32 years ago, but not now.

They're more than a religious entity the same way Hezbollah is more than a religious entity. The differences might be enough for you, but in the civilized world, the differences are practically nonexistent. IRGC is a bloated Hezbollah. Both are ultra orthodox religious gangs. One is richer than the other.

Wrong, IRGC is incorporating modern military strategies and tactics, they go after modern weapons and are much quicker to give them to their units than the army and they build most of their own stuff. They have exclusive science and tech centers for their equipment and weapons.

And yet, they just boarded a mock carrier that cost tens of millions to build and ignored the most basic of facts. They left the carrier off the coast, when it should have been 200 km away. They didn't take the 5-10 battleships that escort it, nor the fact that there would be another carrier group beside it and that both carrier groups will have more than the usual 5-10 escorts. They ignored the carrier's own defenses. They ignored the sheer size of the on board crew.

It was a comical show of sheer ignorance and stupidity. We also saw that when they "unveiled" the F313 and the other dozen or so idiotic clown shows they've had over the years.

First there is no need to get rid of regular army, secondly IRGC is not a militia group, you simply don't have a militia group with more than 200,000 members, it's basically an army with some different war doctrines, focusing on irregular and unconventional military strategies. Having both army and IRGC has advantages and disadvantages, good part is that IRGC has a more forward thinking leadership when it comes to equipment and tactics and recruits young high ranking commanders, unfortunately army refuses to do so and tends to stick to its old generals. It's getting better though with the army, since they too have understood that they have to give up some rusty and old ways of thinking.

IRGC is a militia when we consider them one with the Basij. You can't discount the Basij just b/c you don't want to have them be part of the discussion. The biggest danger to the regime is internal strife, NOT foreign armies. Without the basij militia and IRGC leadership, the regime is nothing.

And you're talking as if the IRGC actually has something to boast about. Compared to the regular army they're better equipped, but they still run with 1970's era equipment that are on their last legs.

 

[500]

IRGC = SS
Basij = SA

Ayatulas afraid that in case of revolt regular army soldiers will refuse to shoot crowds. So they created these things.

 

[SOHEIL]

Stupid thread ... stupid comments !

 

[SALMAN F]

IRGC = SS
Basij = SA

Ayatulas afraid that in case of revolt regular army soldiers will refuse to shoot crowds. So they created these things.

Israel = the third reich

 

[SOHEIL]

Congratulations ... you got testosterone !

 

[Hack-Hook]

@Abii f you search it a little deeper you'll see that it was Bazargan who started IRGC not clerics .

 

[SOHEIL]

The same could be applied between you and 500.he never tend to care, though.

I think 500 using gillette unlike Abii ...