Will Iran enter to the war against Israel?

[jhungary]

It will not be effective then, Usa has massive fire power, from air and from the ocean. 200 F35s attacking Iran, backed with missiles. It would cause alot of damage to Iran, they will target and destroy all bases, airports, seaports in Iran.

Iran can only respond with missiles but usa aircraft carriers and destroyers will shoot them down. If Usa aircraft carriers do sink or Tel Aviv is destroyed then a few nukes could be dropped on Tehran, which most likely will lead to Iran surrendering.

Iran certainly needs a strong airforce with BVR missiles, destroyers and submarines with long range ballistic missiles and nukes. So if Tehran is destroyed, they will still have a 2nd strike capability.

Map where Usa aircraft carriers are based. Faar from Iran but capable to strike Iran, Hizbollah and Syria.
View attachment 965057

Israeli will not use nuke unless they are threaten with existence crisis, which in this day and age it meant a second Arab Coalition that aimed at destroying Israel and right at the doorstep of Tel Aviv, otherwise any nuke or even attack launched from Israeli side into any of its Arab neighbor without a legitimate reason would mean the west stop supporting Israel, which means they are going to lose any war. Israeli learnt that from 1973 Yom Kippur War.

The problem with Hezbollah and to some extend Iran now is whether or not the US asset will go to war on Israeli side. The problem as I said is this is not 2006, when it was the IDF entering Southern Lebanon, if Hezbollah want to do anything meaningful (which mean not just lobbing missile/rocket) then they will need to at least launch an incursion into Northern Israel, or even associate with Syria to launch an attack in Israeli and Golan Height at the same time. There are already static defences and the garrison in those area are already being reinforced, which mean the only thing left to cover those area is air power, which Israeli are currently using them in Gaza, which is why these 2 Carrier Battlegroup with about 8 US Destroyer is there for, that 2 group with its associated LHA alone almost doubled Israel Air Power.

The issue with Iran is Iran have a relatively small coast, and one end is a dead end while the other is a choke point in Strait of Hormuz any naval development with Iran cannot be hidden, which mean there are only limited Traffic can pass thru there, that's good in defensive posturing, but it also open to blockade. On the other hand, it would cost Iran an arm and a leg to build up their Air Force at Israel level, There are virtually no chances at all Iranian Air Force can challenge USAF in any sort of numerical or technological advantage in the region. Unless Russia or China intended to support Iran without any condition. Which I very much doubt.

 

[jauk]

Israeli will not use nuke unless they are threaten with existence crisis, which in this day and age it meant a second Arab Coalition that aimed at destroying Israel and right at the doorstep of Tel Aviv, otherwise any nuke or even attack launched from Israeli side into any of its Arab neighbor without a legitimate reason would mean the west stop supporting Israel, which means they are going to lose any war. Israeli learnt that from 1973 Yom Kippur War.

The problem with Hezbollah and to some extend Iran now is whether or not the US asset will go to war on Israeli side. The problem as I said is this is not 2006, when it was the IDF entering Southern Lebanon, if Hezbollah want to do anything meaningful (which mean not just lobbing missile/rocket) then they will need to at least launch an incursion into Northern Israel, or even associate with Syria to launch an attack in Israeli and Golan Height at the same time. There are already static defences and the garrison in those area are already being reinforced, which mean the only thing left to cover those area is air power, which Israeli are currently using them in Gaza, which is why these 2 Carrier Battlegroup with about 8 US Destroyer is there for, that 2 group with its associated LHA alone almost doubled Israel Air Power.

The issue with Iran is Iran have a relatively small coast, and one end is a dead end while the other is a choke point in Strait of Hormuz any naval development with Iran cannot be hidden, which mean there are only limited Traffic can pass thru there, that's good in defensive posturing, but it also open to blockade. On the other hand, it would cost Iran an arm and a leg to build up their Air Force at Israel level, There are virtually no chances at all Iranian Air Force can challenge USAF in any sort of numerical or technological advantage in the region. Unless Russia or China intended to support Iran without any condition. Which I very much doubt.

Wow. Shambolicity in the flesh.

 

[jhungary]

Wow. Shambolicity in the flesh.

You need to admire the quality of one line troll these days, well, I should say "lack of"

 

[HGV]

I do not believe that is the case.
While I doubt it would result in nuclear conflict regardless (Israel is incredibly casualty averse), Israel's nuclear deterrence is hard to be described as watertight - of all the so called "illegal nuclear powers", Israel is the only one that did not conduct >10k TNT equivalent tests, only a ~3k equivalent test that cannot be confirmed to be nuclear in nature. On top of that, the delivery vehicle for their nuclear power, the Jericho III IRBM have seen very few launch tests compared to what other IRBMs traditionally needed to be accepted into service.
Either Israel's nuclear power is fundamentally flawed, or they are doing a really poor job of demonstrating it.

Unfortunately you might be mistaken.
China's traditional diplomatic position have always been calling for "reject unilateral use of force, cease unfair treatment against Palestinians"
Russia have traditionally had a fairly snug relationship with Israel in the last 30 years, unfortunately that ship have sailed last year when Israel decided to follow up with the "west" in striking Russia with sanctions, seizing Russian properties and assets, in the wake of the SMO. Compared to the close ties that Russia have with the "Axis of Resistance" these days (such as the exchange of military technology), I find it hard to assume Russia would support Israel.

Very good summary. Cheers.

There is indeed very little information pointing to Israeli experience with nuclear tests, albeit that France is likely to have provided significant assistance. Also worth noting that Iran already has the ability to quickly construct 'dirty' nuclear bombs + chemical warheads, in extremis.

 

[HGV]

You can't destroy a complete CBG

Why not? Are they invincible wonder weapons capable of reaching the coast of Iran without being targeted?

On the other hand, unless you destroy US bases in Oman, Kuwait, Turkey and Saudi Arabia as well, and drag these 4 countries into a war against Iran, and especially in Turkey case, you will not only bring Turkey into a war, but the entire NATO. US Forces can always invade Iraq and Iran from these 4 opening.

Of those, only Turkey shares a land border with Iran, and Turkey has a long standing policy that it will not allow a US invasion of Iran to go through Turkish soil.

The capability of these plane is not range, although it is one of its advantage. The issue is not these plane per se, but the munition they carries. A F-35 can launch a JASSM from beyond 400km away, that mean for Iran to have to defend their air space, Iran will need to extend that air defensive zone to that level, or Iran are technically going to be attacked by US at will. That's the definition of standoff range.

Unfortunately for you, and what you omit to point out, is that most 'targets' in Iran are not within 400km of its borders.

Now, Iran with limited Air Asset cannot be possibly patrol and defence the entire zone

What is the "entire zone"? The US can only attack via certain vectors.

We don't even need to talk about F-22 and F-35, how does Iran deal with the hundreds of F-15, F-16, F-18 fighters?

Massive decentralised, mobile SAM network spread across a vast and challenging geography of Iran, while targeting the source of those planes (airbases and carriers).

there are virtually no point for any military operation for Israeli to go outside their border.

They are already operating outside their 'borders' (which do not exist) in Gaza and the West Bank. They have operated outside of their 'borders' on many occasions since their supposed creation in 1947.

 

[jhungary]

Why not? Are they invincible wonder weapons capable of reaching the coast of Iran without being targeted?

With what? First of all, they won't be sitting in Iranian Coast like back when USS Vincennes did in 1988, they will be sitting at the edge of their operational limits, that's 650 miles away, and that is before the capability of Aerial Refuelling

Secondly, There are only 3 things that can destroy a CBG.

1.) Anti-Ship Ballistic Missile - That is if you are lucky, and rich, because you will need to go thru the entire CBG defense, and have good enough guidance system to guide that missile to target hundred or even thousand of miles away and that is if you can fire it off at the first place, before F-18 take care of it. You can't launch these LOS missile underground like ICBM.

2.) Air Power with bomb and missile - Well, how many fighter Iran had can make that range and attack a CBG? Between Land base and Naval Base aircraft in the area, US have roughly 600 aircraft in the region, all of them are going to be protecting that 2 CBG Iran have less than 200 Fighter with god knows how many are operational, even if they can some how punch thru the combined Navy and Air Force fighter screen in some divine miracle, and come within 150 nmi of the CBG, whatever that left will be dealing with 5 AEGIS Destroyer, and 1 Cruiser, chances are not good.

3.) Naval Power - Well......Do you really needed me to explain that to you? 1 CBG are tasked with 3 nuclear sub, 5 Arleigh Burke Class AEGIS destroyer, 1 Ticonderoga Class 1 LHA, and you are talking about 2 CBG. With what in Iranian arsenal can repel even 1 CBG in a naval battle??

What you are thinking is US will just ram CBG 10 mile off Iranian coast so a combine of Iranian Air/Land/Sea attack can launch with impunity, Reality is, US CBG don't really need to get this close to Iranian coast and they most likely wouldn't need to get this close, Strait of Hormuz is an enclosed sea, which mean US Navy don't really need to send anything inside that strait, all they need is to hold the choke point, which half of it is owned by Oman.

Of those, only Turkey shares a land border with Iran, and Turkey has a long standing policy that it will not allow a US invasion of Iran to go through Turkish soil.

This will not be the case if Iran attack Turkey, which is what this poster suggested.

Unfortunately for you, and what you omit to point out, is that most 'targets' in Iran are not within 400km of its borders.

Well, and unfortunate for you, that is just one of the example.

How about B-1 dropping air launch 820-mile (1300km) Block III Tomahawk?
How about B-52 dropping air launch 680 mile (1100km) AGM-86B ALCM?

Tomahawk (missile family) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

AGM-86 ALCM - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Also, you need to consider the push/pull effect, even if the US don't use Tomahawk or Air Launch Cruise missile (or naval cruise missile for that matter) then you will still lose out the coastal part of Iran which you put nothing in because they will be destroyed 400 km out. In the military, we have a strategy called "Bite and Hold" which mean you use that 400km buffer to support your ground operation, once you land, you use that gap to provide cover to move your ground component further inland and cut the gap that way.

The fact to the matter is, you need to push your air defence zone out in an area you can't possibly defend, and US simply will overwhelm you with standoff range which you either need to take the strike, which mean taking the damage, or come out and fight so they can annihilate you.

What is the "entire zone"? The US can only attack via certain vectors.

You need to re-read what you type? You are saying there is a limited vectors for Air Strike?

And even if you are talking about approaches, you are talking about 400km, even if we separate 1 degree of air attack per approach, at half the attack zone (which is 180 degree) you are looking at each sector. You are talking about 1400 sq kilometers area per degree (Area = pi R^2, a circle have 360 degree so each degree would cover an area of (3.14*400*400)/360, so you are looking at 252,000 sq kilometers area just the half the approach which is what Iran facing. Tell me with what in Iranian arsenal can defend that?

And that would have been moot because most of those area is covered by a third country, (Oman, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq) which mean unless they allow Iranian fighter to fly over, you can't really defend those approach unless you drag every one of them into the war.

Massive decentralised, mobile SAM network spread across a vast and challenging geography of Iran, while targeting the source of those planes (airbases and carriers).

Well, that's what Saddam said back in 1990.

US military is a master of SAM Suppression, or SEAD, there are number of appraoch US can deal with SAM issue, from decoy to electronic attack. Read up Operation Bolo and Desert Storm.

They are already operating outside their 'borders' (which do not exist) in Gaza and the West Bank. They have operated outside of their 'borders' on many occasions since their supposed creation in 1947.

Dude, the last time Israel venture out of their own border (not counting Gaza and Westbank because that's not international recognized border is 2006 when they went into Lebanon. The scheme and dynamic have change much since 1948, even EU condemned Israeli back in 2006 for their disproportionate use of force, technically only US and more specifically Bush admin supported Israel on that one, and don't forget that war is the lynch pin that elevate Palestine into non-Member Observer status in the UN with that UNGA vote in 2012.

The Israeli knows today if they venture further than what they were supposed to be operate on, they are going to lose international support fast.

 

[Hero786]

None of any Islamic country will attack on Israel.
Reason none of Arab countries have nukes.
Non Arab countries are weak financially and no border dispute with them.

Maximum Iranis can support proxies.

Who will take the risk for Palestine and fight with Israel, US/NATO.
Millions will be dead.

China is strong financially have 300+ nukes, but they are not agressive towards US/NATO, but only defensive.

On other hand Russians with 6000+ nukes are more agressive than Chinese, but not strong financially as Chinese.

No one even Russians, Chinese or any one will take the risk of World Wars 3.

 

[Mr Iran Eye]

Comparing the defense of Iraq in the 1990s and Iran in 2023 is a catastrophe of thought.

Iran is very powerful and well prepared to fight against the big egos of the USA. Iran has a powerful surprise in store and it is very easy to predict

Dreamers really think that the USA is the strongest in the universe. Hollywood films have completely brainwashed US professionals

 

[HGV]

With what? First of all, they won't be sitting in Iranian Coast like back when USS Vincennes did in 1988, they will be sitting at the edge of their operational limits, that's 650 miles away, and that is before the capability of Aerial Refuelling

You said "The entire design of Battlegroup is to use its 2 Marine MEU to make beachhead on any given shore". Now they are 650 miles away? Make your mind up.

What you are thinking is US will just ram CBG 10 mile off Iranian coast so a combine of Iranian Air/Land/Sea attack can launch with impunity, Reality is, US CBG don't really need to get this close to Iranian coast and they most likely wouldn't need to get this close, Strait of Hormuz is an enclosed sea, which mean US Navy don't really need to send anything inside that strait, all they need is to hold the choke point, which half of it is owned by Oman.

You are not saying anything new. Iran can target any US ship within a certain range (confirmed 700-1000km, claimed 2000km) and this has a direct impact on the US' ability to maintain high sortie rates against Iranian territory (let alone "to make beachhead" on Iranian shores).

This will not be the case if Iran attack Turkey, which is what this poster suggested.

Iran will not attack Turkey unless Turkey allows US troops to use Turkish territory to attack/invade Iran, which they will not.

Well, and unfortunate for you, that is just one of the example.

How about B-1 dropping air launch 820-mile (1300km) Block III Tomahawk?
How about B-52 dropping air launch 680 mile (1100km) AGM-86B ALCM?

Iran cannot stop USA from being able to launch missiles at Iranian targets. Just like the US cannot stop Iran from targeting US military bases and targets in the region. That is not the goal. The goal is to make it harder and reduce US options.

You need to re-read what you type? You are saying there is a limited vectors for Air Strike?

Which air bases do you imagine these US jets will use for take off? They will immediately become targets, and Iran has made this clear to those host nations.

Well, that's what Saddam said back in 1990.

No, he didn't. To compare Iraq and Iran (in defence doctrine, AD network, geography) is comedy. Anyway, the USA was not able to detect a single SCUD TEL in Iraq (which is 25% the size of Iran).

not counting Gaza and Westbank because that's not international recognized border

Wrong. Why do EU and US (and UNSC) condemn illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank if it is within Israel's borders?

 

[R2D2]

 

[jhungary]

You said "The entire design of Battlegroup is to use its 2 Marine MEU to make beachhead on any given shore". Now they are 650 miles away? Make your mind up.

Are you serious?

I am talking about the Aircraft Carrier can support that assault group at the edge of their operational limits, which is 400nmi or about 650 miles. You don't need to get close to 10 mile off the coast to support an invasion force, we aren't talking about fighting a campaign in WW2 back in 1945..... they can just send Super hornet and fly CAP or launch Tomahawk missile on target miles away and have the smaller ship (such as LCS or PB) to coast the coast and the Marine will use LCAC and Helicopter to land at Iranian beachhead. Even the LHA that are landing these Marine don't need to be this close, LCAC have up to 350km operational range

You don't need the entire CBG to up close next to the Marine going on shore and follow them every inch of the way and that's my point.

You are not saying anything new. Iran can target any US ship within a certain range (confirmed 700-1000km, claimed 2000km) and this has a direct impact on the US' ability to maintain high sortie rates against Iranian territory (let alone "to make beachhead" on Iranian shores).

Again, Antio-Ballistic missile require a lot of effort to track something that move 30 knots + over 700km (let alone 2000 km) you will have several factors in the entire kill chain to establish. Things like "Can you track the target at neat real time" or "Can you guide the missile toward the target with minimal CEP" those question have to answer for any ballistic missile to work, and this is something even Tech Giant like China fail to demonstrate with their DF-17, DF-21 and DF-26 missile, and you think Iran can?

And that's on top of these missile can be intercepted, failed or even you are assuming they will be able to launch at the first place, as I said, all these missile are LOS, it's not indirect which mean you can't shoot them up to the space and then attack carrier, you will assume in a Iran-US war, US will saturate Iranian coast with fighters.

Iran will not attack Turkey unless Turkey allows US troops to use Turkish territory to attack/invade Iran, which they will not.

Dude, I don't know what to tell you, that's what that guy say, and I respond accordingly, he said Iran can launch missile to attack any US base in surrounding area. Which would include Turkey, you can say what you want, but my post weren't address to you, and I have no interest on whether or not Iran will attack Turkey.

And Turkey is part of NATO, what do you expect? Them leave NATO and expel all US Force there because of Iran? Are you kidding??

Iran cannot stop USA from being able to launch missiles at Iranian targets. Just like the US cannot stop Iran from targeting US military bases and targets in the region. That is not the goal. The goal is to make it harder and reduce US options.

Then you will drag every one of the countries I mentioned into the war, while US loss (if there are) will be minimal, you are talking about 2000 troop in Iraq and similar number in Oman and Kuwait and maybe double that in the Saudi, even if you kill them all (Which most likely it won't) you are talking about losing a small portion of their force to get into a position with all those allies on your side, not to mention attacking US troop North of the Equator and at the Med is a clause for Article 5, this will give more option to US and it will make this easier and not harder for US to invade Iran, assuming Iran attack first.

Which air bases do you imagine these US jets will use for take off? They will immediately become targets, and Iran has made this clear to those host nations.

Again, you can't use missile to decommission an airbase, missile carry a very small payload (between 20-500 kg), which will not dent an armoured runway. You need to follow Ukraine war closely, that war prove whatever you said wrong.

You can try to launch sorties and bomb those runways, again, 1.) It will most definitely drag those country or even NATO into war, and 2.) that is if you can penetrate US Air Defence network.

No, he didn't. To compare Iraq and Iran (in defence doctrine, AD network, geography) is comedy. Anyway, the USA was not able to detect a single SCUD TEL in Iraq (which is 25% the size of Iran).

Well, then either Saddam suddenly decided not to use SCUD in the main event or he can't use it. Nobody, including me, know the final effect of SCUD hunt as to how many were killed, all we know is, SCUD launches dropped significantly during the conflict. You can say SCUD hunt is ineffective, the result suggested otherwise.

On the other hand, SCUD and SAM are two different thing, one is passive tracking, one is active tracking, you need to turn the radar on to lock on to a target with a SAM and put in a solution before you fire, and that provide an opportunities for beam rider strike, and you can't just shoot SAM in the air without turning on the radar and hope they hit something. Again, read how US conduct Operation Bolo back in Nam and how US uses electronic attack to by-pass and attack SAM site during Operation Desert storm.

Otherwise I can't answer make believe statement.

Wrong. Why do EU and US (and UNSC) condemn illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank if it is within Israel's borders?

Wrong what?

UN always try for 2 states solution. and Israel always operate outside this since Arab attack in 1947. Dude, UN is largely ineffective in this, just 2 days ago the UN Sec General said whatever Hamas did on Oct 7 stem from Israel occupation (well, he implied not expressly said) , does that make Israeli backdown?

On the other hand, UNSC never pass any resolution regarding Israeli settlement in Gaza or West Bank as long as US are there to veto it, that is exactly why I said if they went over the line and attack Arab nation he US will most likely withdraw their support and you may see one binding UNSC resolution pass, that would spell doom for Israel. And there is no "Palestinian" border in UN term as Palestinian representative are a NON-MEMBER observer.

What you failed to see is US, not UN nor Interntional community or body supporting Israel, and if that support dry up, Israeli would have to deal with all these alone, worse, the world may even side with Palestinian and force Israeli hand if US is not there to veto any UNSC resolution.

 

[Deez Nutz]

Will Iran enter the war against Israel? NO!​

You must be kidding. These women beating azari pedophiles are so scared of Taliban on the east that they have given up Iranian territory to them.

What really makes you think a buncha women beating azari pedos like these, have the balls to enter war with Israel armed with nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons?
Israel is not a defenseless 16 year old Iranian Kurdish girl that these azari pedos can beat to death for not wearing head scarf.

Israels and US are not an innocent Iranian 16 year girl that these azari pedophiles can trap in a subway cart to beat to death for not wearing head scarf. They beat back hard. So you can take all your missiles and drones, and shove them up where sun doesn't shine. They will not help you much against adversaries with nukes, so put a cork in it.

Can you imagine that these Azari pedophiles get excited at the sight of a little girl's hair, they get these azari beastly urges that they can't control, as a result they beat the poor innocent girl to death just because the sight of her hair makes these azari turkclone mules excited and horny.

Would you like to have any azari in your neighborhood? The answer must be obvious.

 

[Deez Nutz]

None of any Islamic country will attack on Israel.
Reason none of Arab countries have nukes.
Non Arab countries are weak financially and no border dispute with them.

Maximum Iranis can support proxies.

Who will take the risk for Palestine and fight with Israel, US/NATO.
Millions will be dead.

China is strong financially have 300+ nukes, but they are not agressive towards US/NATO, but only defensive.

On other hand Russians with 6000+ nukes are more agressive than Chinese, but not strong financially as Chinese.

No one even Russians, Chinese or any one will take the risk of World Wars 3.

Oh, Please do not underestimate these women beating azari turkclone mules on this forum with their technical knowledge. These women beating azari pedos are so powerful with their drones and missiles, that if Israel attacks, these women beating azari pedos will attack Iranians, and beat to death every young Iranian girl to defeat Israel and US.

 

[AlKardai]

Oh, Please do not underestimate these women beating azari turkclone mules on this forum with their technical knowledge. These women beating azari pedos are so powerful with their drones and missiles, that if Israel attacks, these women beating azari pedos will attack Iranians, and beat to death every young Iranian girl to defeat Israel and US.

@waz

 

[Mehdipersian]

Warning of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran at the United Nations:

If the genocide in Gaza continues, even America will not be safe from the fire of war.

Israel is an aggressor and an occupier. According to international law, Palestinians have the right to armed struggle to gain independence and establish their own country.

The United States and some European countries support the killing of about 7,000 civilians in less than 3 weeks in Gaza and the West Bank.

We tell America that if the genocidal operation in Gaza continues, we will not stand by and watch.

Hamas leaders are ready to release civilian prisoners and deliver them to Tehran, and they are ready to work with Qatar and Turkey in this field, and the world should support the release of 6,000 Palestinian prisoners.