F-16.net

Newbie Joined: Feb 18, 2007 Posts: 1 Status: Offline

This week, Raptors are being deployed to Asia and the White House claims Iranian IEDs have killed Americans In Iraq, a casus belli. This coincidence makes me wonder what difference the Raptor could make in an air war on Iran. I don't want to get into speculating whether an attack will, or should, happen but what difference do you think they could make, given the numbers there are now and in the next year?

I assume they wouldn't be needed for air to air but they could take many ground targets by surprise.

F-16.net Sponsor

Elite 1K Joined: May 10, 2005 Posts: 1124 Status: Offline

Quote:

what difference do you think they could make

They would be better than an F-15.

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 1088 Status: Offline

qubit wrote:

This week, Raptors are being deployed to Asia and the White House claims Iranian IEDs have killed Americans In Iraq, a casus belli. This coincidence makes me wonder what difference the Raptor could make in an air war on Iran. I don't want to get into speculating whether an attack will, or should, happen but what difference do you think they could make, given the numbers there are now and in the next year?

I assume they wouldn't be needed for air to air but they could take many ground targets by surprise.

You might want to check the distance between Kadena and Iran. It's not close even if you do decide you want to overfly China and India (and some how get tankers there too.)

I think he was referring more to a hypothetical attack on Iran and if Raptors were used what effect would they have. Not that the Raptors at Kadena would be sent to Iran. In any case the US could easily go from Langley to Lakenheath to Ramstein then on to Turkey and eventually Iran.

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 22, 2005 Posts: 1088 Status: Offline

PhillyGuy wrote:

I think he was referring more to a hypothetical attack on Iran and if Raptors were used what effect would they have. Not that the Raptors at Kadena would be sent to Iran. In any case the US could easily go from Langley to Lakenheath to Ramstein then on to Turkey and eventually Iran.

Don't know that Iran would be worth wasting Raptors on.

Enthusiast Joined: Jul 30, 2006 Posts: 50 Status: Offline

Why are we even thinking about attacking Iran, especially since our troops are already overstretched?

Why are we thinking about Iran? Because Iran (and to a lesser part Syria) is the cause of conflict in Iraq. Iranian military personnel have been and are being captured in Iraq on a regular basis. Our disagree that our troops are overstretched. The troop build-up in Iraq is specifically aimed at dealing with Iran.....not the conflict in Iraq. The addition of the USS Stenson carrier group in the Indian Ocean is a compliment to dealing with Iran. It is a matter of time (I think within the year) before Iran is the conflict and Iraq is merely the staging point.

Enthusiast Joined: Sep 27, 2006 Posts: 67 Status: Offline

For what it's worth, I bet that a squadron of raptors would have more a2a power than the entire IRIAF.

I think it would scare the crap out of the Iranians if the Raptors came into play over there. Plus it would be a good testing ground for them I think. I could see us launching out of Iraq and into Iran soon if things don't cool down. Course now that we have proof that Iran is supplying Iraq with IEDs, which in all honesty, I have suspected for awhile, I see no reason to hold back on sweeping the floor with them.

Spitfire-FreeBirds-VFW wrote:

Because Iran (and to a lesser part Syria) is the cause of conflict in Iraq.

I beg to differ....The reason of the turmoil in Iraq would be better found in the internal differences of the various clans, groups and other personnel. You can cut Iraq and put it on Mars to isolate it from Iran/Syria and the problems would still be there because Iraq is one of those countries that really has never known the true power of the vox populi and is finding a hard time adapting to it. You can see that, everybody fighting everybody instead of "terrorist insurgents" vs. the coalition. It just happens that the US/UK/whatever forces happened to be there when it happened so they're taken together....

In addition, it's not a nation. You could compare it more to USSR and its absorbed nations. Many small clans, tribes and groups were brought to live together under an oprressive rule. While the regime held well in both cases, everything is good. And then when you start wanting them to be friends with each other and one rule over the other via a democratic way, they cannot adapt to it and start splitting. Splitting them would end the trouble altogether but it would mean that you'd have 57 new countries in the area something that Kuwait, Iran, Iraqi government, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, nobody wants that and most probably the USA don't want either - too many parameters they'd have to control.

Iran or Syria may be supplying everything from anti-aircraft guns to lollipops to the fighting groups, but they're the medium, not the cause. If the groups really wanted to live together, you'd just have what Spain has - a small cell of terrorists that are totally disliked by everybody except themselves - something that I don't think that happens in Iraq, where every clan hates all the others and all together hate the coalition - another way to show that they cannot face democracy yet - they never had anything close to it anyways.
______________________
Too big off-topic...Anyways, Iran vs. the Raptors ? Here USAF on its own cannot beat it, you think an inferior-trained, inferior-equipped, inferior-tactician Air Force will be able to make any difference ? The only difference will be in the news anyways, it will be "F-22s make their first A2A kills" instead of "F-15 kill ratio raised to 250:0". Cool

It wouldn't have much of an effect. Everything we have in the region already out classes everything Iran has.

Spitfire-FreeBirds-VFW wrote:

Why are we thinking about Iran? Because Iran (and to a lesser part Syria) is the cause of conflict in Iraq.

There are two causes of conflict within Iraq. One is sectarian violence, the other is the presence of US troops. IMO the sectarian violence will always be there, it is part of their culture. I could comment on the other, but..... Rolling Eyes

Elite 1K Joined: Jul 26, 2005 Posts: 1455 Status: Offline

afnsucks wrote:

I think it would scare the crap out of the Iranians if the Raptors came into play over there. Plus it would be a good testing ground for them I think. I could see us launching out of Iraq and into Iran soon if things don't cool down. Course now that we have proof that Iran is supplying Iraq with IEDs, which in all honesty, I have suspected for awhile, I see no reason to hold back on sweeping the floor with them.

That would be a huge gamble. It has been calculated that 40% of the US military is concentrated on Iraq and Afghanistan in terms of equipment and effort. Can anybody say "OVERSTRETCH"!!! A guerrilla war in Iraq and Afghanistan and an "action" in Iran. Fighting on three fronts would be a disaster, just ask the Germans.....

Anyway, back on topic for a sentence! The F-22 would certainly enhance the capabilities of US forces in any fracas with Iran but the mess that would ensue is too horrible to contemplate IMO. Get Iraq and Afghanistan sorted out first.

As for Raptors, I wouldn't want one in the middle east at all if a conflict with Iran starts....

...Look at how many ballistic missiles Iran has, hundreds, they will probably be used to target US air force assets in the region.

We're fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, but not fighting a real "front". If we wanted to, we could send a lot more troops to the ME.

F-16.net Editor Joined: Sep 23, 2003 Posts: 2862

Attacking Iraq is a dumb idea all around.

Having said that, for the sake of just mechanics , if the goal was an air campaign only, there wouldn't be any problem taking down their air force. F-22s carrying 2 each JDAM-32s would get through no problem.

Again though it is my opinion attacking Iran is a dumb idea for any number of other reasons.

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Raptors impact on Iran attack