Canada, europe and all the rest of the UN would intervene, hit both of them upside the head, give them a stern warning and leave them in the rut they got themselves into.
What would happen if Iran and the US went to war?
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Gas prices would go up...but mostly for Europe, I think. They're the ones who buy Iranian oil, not the United States. And assuming Iran doesn't possess a nuclear weapon, the war would be swift, brutal and hilariously one-sided. Iran can't get air superiority, so in a straight-up war, they would be annihilated, just like Hussein's regime was. And considering how very, very unpopular the Iranian government seems to be, I doubt there would even be a surge in terrorism there.
So basically, Iran would lose, their enemies (almost the entire Middle East, but especially Israel and Saudi Arabia) would rejoice, China and Russia would loudly protest American foreign policy while not actually doing anything, Iran would probably be improved, Europe's struggling economy would be hard-hit, and America would've wasted a few more trillions on a war that benefited it very little. I guess it's a tradeoff...?
Of course, what if Iran had a nuclear weapon? There's two scenarios, there. The first is that they use it tactically against American forces, which would cause millions of deaths and just piss America off. Pissed-off United States would either devote for more resources to winning the conventional way and getting revenge against the Iranian leaders who launched, or play it safe and retaliate with nuclear weapons. This last scenario - nuclear retaliation - would be the worst thus far, considering the civilian casualties involved.
But the actual worst case scenario, by far? Iran uses the nuke to desperately lash out at Israel. Israel goes into super-revenge mode, which probably consists of flinging a bunch of nukes into Iranian population centers. Genocide occurs on both sides, Israel's neighbors hate it even more, and Iran ceases to exist as a country.
In summary? No matter what, the United States wins by curbstomp, and probably gets thanked for it by all parties save China and Russia, but it'll have a negative effect on the US deficit and Europe's fragile economy. The only thing that could alter this even slightly, if you ask me, would be a nuclear weapon, and even then, all it does is delay the inevitable and/or make the war far deadlier for all involved.
Those are my predictions, anyway.
So basically, Iran would lose, their enemies (almost the entire Middle East, but especially Israel and Saudi Arabia) would rejoice, China and Russia would loudly protest American foreign policy while not actually doing anything, Iran would probably be improved, Europe's struggling economy would be hard-hit, and America would've wasted a few more trillions on a war that benefited it very little. I guess it's a tradeoff...?
Of course, what if Iran had a nuclear weapon? There's two scenarios, there. The first is that they use it tactically against American forces, which would cause millions of deaths and just piss America off. Pissed-off United States would either devote for more resources to winning the conventional way and getting revenge against the Iranian leaders who launched, or play it safe and retaliate with nuclear weapons. This last scenario - nuclear retaliation - would be the worst thus far, considering the civilian casualties involved.
But the actual worst case scenario, by far? Iran uses the nuke to desperately lash out at Israel. Israel goes into super-revenge mode, which probably consists of flinging a bunch of nukes into Iranian population centers. Genocide occurs on both sides, Israel's neighbors hate it even more, and Iran ceases to exist as a country.
In summary? No matter what, the United States wins by curbstomp, and probably gets thanked for it by all parties save China and Russia, but it'll have a negative effect on the US deficit and Europe's fragile economy. The only thing that could alter this even slightly, if you ask me, would be a nuclear weapon, and even then, all it does is delay the inevitable and/or make the war far deadlier for all involved.
Those are my predictions, anyway.
id also like to add
to the people saying that nuclear weapons would assure destruction, uhh... im pretty sure Iran doesnt have that many at all tbh so thats out of the question
and to those saying america would win easily by decimating Iran's armies, i have 3 words for you: Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan
to the people saying that nuclear weapons would assure destruction, uhh... im pretty sure Iran doesnt have that many at all tbh so thats out of the question
and to those saying america would win easily by decimating Iran's armies, i have 3 words for you: Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan
THIS whole issue is why Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon. Without a nuke, Iran either has to negotiate peace, or see itself destroyed. With a nuke, all Iran has to do is say "Attack us, and Israel and Saudi Arabia gets it" (I mention Saudi Arabia because it's a US ally, and a staging ground for much of the US military in the area).
It's almost a certainty that the US would win a war against Iranian forces. The question is whether that victory would be clean and successful, or prolonged and Pyrrhic. Worst-case scenario is the US losing the 5th Fleet in the process of defeating Iran. We can't afford to lose our control of the sea.
It's almost a certainty that the US would win a war against Iranian forces. The question is whether that victory would be clean and successful, or prolonged and Pyrrhic. Worst-case scenario is the US losing the 5th Fleet in the process of defeating Iran. We can't afford to lose our control of the sea.
it would be world war three and Iran would not see the end of it. See if we went to war with Iran then Israel would have a free hand to do what theyve wanted to do for awhile now nuke Iran into beaded glass. Then after Iran is no more the rest of the middle east would attack Israel and then the US and the rest of NATO would get involved. It would be long it would be bloody but no current super power would suport the middle east for fear of one hell of a retailation.(if china got involved India would stop them as India has had a problem with China for awhile now and has always HATED Pakistan. As for Russia they arnt likely to help the people that fought them last time.)Saucycardog said:
Oh BTW who ever said "most of the world doesnt like Israel" needs to do some major research they arnt loved by anyone but they are probably one of the most respected countries in the world.
well in this case there is no reason or plan to occupy iran, so its straight up fighting.
in which case the american casualties will be minimal and iran will get the ass whuppin' they really need from the rest of the world.
only bad part would be the occupation, but since there is no reason to occupy it because its not an insane leader who ran a dictatorship as ruler for life, or a band of terrorist controlling a region, there is no reason to reform the government structure because thats not what the fighting is about. The leader may be forced to step down and someone else would be elected but that about it.
in which case the american casualties will be minimal and iran will get the ass whuppin' they really need from the rest of the world.
only bad part would be the occupation, but since there is no reason to occupy it because its not an insane leader who ran a dictatorship as ruler for life, or a band of terrorist controlling a region, there is no reason to reform the government structure because thats not what the fighting is about. The leader may be forced to step down and someone else would be elected but that about it.
Did you know that Iran has on of the highest ranked militaries in the world? Did you know that the only reason Al Qaeda were in Iraq is because we went there and created a way for them to strike at us through people whose homes were being invaded? Did you know that people like my self and my unit spent the last half of the war not fighting Iraqis or Al Qaeda, but insurgents trained by the people of Iran in military tactics, bomb making, and subterfuge? These are not secrets. We have already been fighting Iran. They've been killing American and British troops without ever actually declaring war. The last half of the Iraq War was spent fighting them and from day one we knew as soon as we broke the balance of power between Suni and Shia in Iraq by switching out the government, once we left the country it became basically Iran's for the taking. This is reality. We don't have the resources, the cash, or the morale to fight another war, specially one with a country that can actually stand up for itself and before anyone gets any illusions about this, they can stand up for themselves. Their army has been training for invasion since we invaded. So here is the truth, they've been invading Iraq since 2002. We've known it. The British troops that held the southern provence knew it. My last tour wasn't spent finding insurgents but training the Iraqis to defend themselves when the tanks come rolling over the borders. This is set in stone. Yes we got rid of Sadam, but who was Sadam a threat to? Not us. We didn't even find any traces of WMDs over there. Now we get to watch a mass ethnic cleansing when they finally do roll over the border because we won't help them, not directly anyways. I think its sad personally but that's how it is over there. Now before anyone starts screaming "MURICA!" at me, know that I love this country, but realistically it would be a third war. Does anyone actually believe that congress would pass it? Even better, does anyone think that the UN would condone us fighting another middle eastern country after we just stomped all over two for them for the sake of finding one guy who was never in either of the countries when we got there?
If the US decided to attack Iran, we would lose. It would be easy for us to destroy most of their armor, naval vessels and military complexes. That would happen quickly and painlessly, but once we broke through their lines and our army would suffer a death from a thousand cuts. Iran is four times the size of Iraq. It's not a small country and trying to hold it would prove disastrous.
To make this worse if we invaded we would have no support in the region while Iran would be supported by warlords in Afghanistan who have experience fighting US troops as well as emigrants from Iraq who want to see our blood. This would produce an endless supply of troops for Iran, while the US military is already having trouble filling quotas for our armies. It should also be noted that Black Water (since renamed) is now based in Saudi Arabia, so those mercenaries that we trained and equipped might be used against us by local warlords.
In addition to the massive costs of the war, which we already couldn't sustain given the shape of the economy, countries like China may choose to exert financial pressure against the US by no longer purchasing US treasury bonds (this is already happening). This would (and has been) result in the US dollar falling in value driving up the price of all imported goods. Unfortunately at this point the US has already lost a lot of our skilled labor base so we would have trouble making up the difference causing even more economic damage.
Once the US withdraws an extremist religious leader would take control, returning the country to the status quo meaning we would have failed to achieve any of our real objectives. In short, we would have lost.
To make this worse if we invaded we would have no support in the region while Iran would be supported by warlords in Afghanistan who have experience fighting US troops as well as emigrants from Iraq who want to see our blood. This would produce an endless supply of troops for Iran, while the US military is already having trouble filling quotas for our armies. It should also be noted that Black Water (since renamed) is now based in Saudi Arabia, so those mercenaries that we trained and equipped might be used against us by local warlords.
In addition to the massive costs of the war, which we already couldn't sustain given the shape of the economy, countries like China may choose to exert financial pressure against the US by no longer purchasing US treasury bonds (this is already happening). This would (and has been) result in the US dollar falling in value driving up the price of all imported goods. Unfortunately at this point the US has already lost a lot of our skilled labor base so we would have trouble making up the difference causing even more economic damage.
Once the US withdraws an extremist religious leader would take control, returning the country to the status quo meaning we would have failed to achieve any of our real objectives. In short, we would have lost.
if they provoked us into a war, i think many americans would be glad. we'd get to bomb their bridges, as opposed to us building bridges for them and then having their insurgents blow it up. a straight-on country-to-country war seems like the best kind of war, given the options. plus it would make us look good. the one problem would be those holy cities, we'd need to be extra careful.
As it was already mentioned: Iran possesses the capacity to restrict the passage of vessels affiliated with the U.S. and her allies though the straits of Hormuz. This would be easily reversible however America's ability to import oil would be severely hampered for a short duration, which would have severe short term economic consequences and may lead directly to a panic which would result in a hit to the struggling U.S. economy. America's Forces deployed in Afghanistan are currently engaged in counter-insurgency operations and would not be capable of putting up a spirited defense. American Air Assets in the region would be the only matter of concern for the Iranians, however surprise coupled with the mobility of Armored, Motorized, or Mechanized units may be able to, despite the terrain, overrun American Airbases. American logistics also rely heavily on various nations in the area; such as Russia, a nation with close ties to Iran. If America didn't prepare for such an engagement the consequences would not be disastrous, but currently America lacks adequate manpower to consider such an engagement in the short term. In Conclusion: if the engagement were to occur without a forewarned U.S. the result could be catastrophic for America, however if the U.S. is prepared it would be similar to Desert Storm(Great American Victory in the Early 90's). Caution must be encouraged, Iran possesses the capacity to do a great deal of damage to the U.S. in the short run, if America is caught off guard. Victory in the long run lies with the Americans though.
WWII style of war or Iraq style of war?
The former, complete and easy victory using air superiority; the latter, a quagmire of incredible proportions.
Either way, it would just fuel hatred for the US.
The former, complete and easy victory using air superiority; the latter, a quagmire of incredible proportions.
Either way, it would just fuel hatred for the US.
That's about as likely as the US finding an ally in Cuba. Actually, that's less likely than the US finding an ally in Cuba.isometry said:
As for the OP's question...
This, pretty much. It's about time this fascination with war ends. War is not cool. War is not awesome. War is not about cool explosions and battlefield heroes.MaximumCrux said:
Would other countries get involved? Definitely, maybe not militarily, but Russia and China would immediately take a more aggressive stance in international politics.
Russia would likely even go "OK now that you shot up another country Europe no longer needs that missile shield you alleged was to protect it from the country you just shot up. GTFO from our borders. NOW." The EU itself would distance itself from USA even more, I think. I wouldn't be surprised if some countries pulled out of NATO.
I thought we were already fighting Iranians.
Oh wait, you mean Iranians who are actually in Iran. Right. Well we would destroy their army, destroying them at a 1000 to 1 ratio. Then we would build bases and once a month or so a soldier or two might die. We mourn those deaths severely, even though it's nothing compared to the loss of civilian life.
Oh wait, you mean Iranians who are actually in Iran. Right. Well we would destroy their army, destroying them at a 1000 to 1 ratio. Then we would build bases and once a month or so a soldier or two might die. We mourn those deaths severely, even though it's nothing compared to the loss of civilian life.
I say that it is time for peace in the world. We have the technology to end our dependence on oil at the present. War solves NOTHING. Human life is valuable. War is murder and is based on greed, cruelty and fear. War is unnecessary. If there is to be a brave new world, we must put an end to global warfare and learn to live in peace. God bless you all.
Billions upon Billions of dollars spent
Unrest and very low approval ratings back home
Thousands upon Thousands of American Casualties
And one completely destroyed country
A war on Iran would be a geopolitical disaster.
Not world destroying, but it would hold everything back for a while.
Unrest and very low approval ratings back home
Thousands upon Thousands of American Casualties
And one completely destroyed country
A war on Iran would be a geopolitical disaster.
Not world destroying, but it would hold everything back for a while.
We can afford anything. We'll just take out another loan. How else do you think we got a few trillion dollars in debt?Spartan448 said:
They only pose a threat because of one nuclear facility. 1.
Fathom that for a few minuites.