F-16.net

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

Night wrote:

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.

How.?.. the "surge" for Iraq is all we have. No more. And considering it would take 500,000 boots on the ground to pacify Iraq... it isn't ever going to happen. .... our Army is broke dick and out of troops. Way over tasked. This isn't the Army of 1985. Most of the brigades are stressed out from current ops. The peace dividend stupid idea as it was ( downsizing of the 1990s ) was not smart.

We don't have the numbers for a land campaign and Iran isn't a land campaign solution anyway.

F-16.net Sponsor

We have a lot of army and marine troops over here at home. Out of our 1-2 million troops only 100,000 are in Iraq IIRC. We aren't as over stretched as some want you to believe.

Yeah a lot of Army and Marine troops that aren't in combat possitions. Those in combat posistions are going on there 3rd or 4th tour by now. We are going through equipment like crazy and the money to replace just the avg. wear and tear isn't there.

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

Night wrote:

We have a lot of army and marine troops over here at home. Out of our 1-2 million troops only 100,000 are in Iraq IIRC. We aren't as over stretched as some want you to believe.

Good luck on that. The Guard is near broken and the Army has tons more commitments than just Iraq. The theory that we can send anything more than the extra 20k over there .....(and not for very long by the way) is wishful thinking.

I think you're all missing the point, America has a high tech military that will smash that of Iran into the ground in an instant with our without Raptors.

But that doesn't mean it's over, just like in Iraq... Dealing with the Official military is the easy part which can be considered a mild introduction to what is to come. America possibly has the Military that is worst trained and worst equiped for the kind of war we're seeing in Iraq and will see in Iran to an even greater extent then in Iraq.

Im sorry to say it but the Americans still deam themselves in the Cold War and adjust their Military to that... No way America can deal with both Iraq and Iran without economic trouble and military moral taking a dive.

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

Not really "cold war". But using second generation warfare to solve a 4th generation warfare problem. We will ALWAYS need second generation warfare solutions for our defense. 4th generation warfare solutions don't always require kinetic solutions.
Problem is Iraq contributes nothing to the national defense of the United States. Breaking our Army to be a foreign occupation force on useless dirt, for a dumb no gain mission, is a dumb idea.

Quote:

Breaking our Army to be a foreign occuation force on useless dirt, for a dumb no gain mission, is a dumb idea.

You forgot what's under that "useless dirt" Cool

Enthusiast Joined: Nov 20, 2005 Posts: 67

Iran atack isn;t a problem to be solved with F-22's, the main problem is the uranium enrichment installations, destroy these installation require something like the DeepDigger or Nukes(no case), Just B-2A work, F-22A maybe as Scort, but not in attack role (well a coupe equiped with SLAM just in case some opportunity target is seen).

Some people believe DeepDiggers are close to be "usable", also Israel may have they own version., DeepDigger requies fisrt to clean the zone of AAA (TOR-M1) because it lands with a parachute, Also multiple rounds of "diggers" on the same hole maybe required, not easy work.

Enthusiast Joined: Nov 20, 2005 Posts: 67

Followef by the Attack on Iran is the Iran Response, they may send they land forces over Iraq, that means high intensity war on the Iran-Iraq border, may require about 40K troops to crack Iranians and lots of PGMs Clusters, etc (just like the IraquiFreedom campaing but in defensive role).

Iran ISN'T ONLY A USA PROBLEM, IS A WORLWIDE MENACE, USA must work joint with menaced countries to build a coalition (Israel, NATO, Gulf Monarchs, Siria, Turkia) and make them powder, if not just wait few years and read the news about a Nuke detonated on NY, Miami, Paris, Tel-Aviv, Riad, etc.

Last edited by RoAF on Feb 20, 2007 - 05:54 PM; edited 1 time in total

Quote:

to build a coalition (Israel, NATO, Gulf Monarchs, Siria, Turkia)

I hope you're not serious about this. You'll NEVER see Israel alied with any Arab state - even if the aliens attack.

EDIT: "Turkia" is a NATO member

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

VMF-214 wrote:

Iran atack isn;t a problem to be solved with F-22's, the main problem is the uranium enrichment installations, destroy these installation require something like the DeepDigger or Nukes(no case), Just B-2A work, F-22A maybe as Scort, but not in attack role (well a coupe equiped with SLAM just in case some opportunity target is seen).

Some people believe DeepDiggers are close to be "usable", also Israel may have they own version., DeepDigger requies fisrt to clean the zone of AAA (TOR-M1) because it lands with a parachute, Also multiple rounds of "diggers" on the same hole maybe required, not easy work.

Things that are buried still need support from the outside. Killing things around the area doesn't hurt. Killing off access to and from a known location can also help.

RoAF wrote:

Quote:

to build a coalition (Israel, NATO, Gulf Monarchs, Siria, Turkia)

I hope you're not serious about this. You'll NEVER see Israel alied with any Arab state - even if the aliens attack.

I think its more realistic to expect Syria to help Iran then that they attack Iran... This goes for most Arab nations with maybe Turkey as an acception who's really stuck in the middle and probably will remain neutral.

Newbie Joined: Feb 18, 2007 Posts: 8 Status: Offline

elp wrote:

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.

An attack on the Iranian nuke sites would neither be accomplished through F-22's, F-117's, F-16's, F-18's, B-2's, or B-1's. Back in June last year there was a retired USAF General on Fox News who point blank said to the audience that if we (the USA) thought that NK was going to mount a live nuke warhead onto thier missiles that were about to be test fired, that we (the USA) have classified hardware to take out those missile on thier launch pads without sending over a fleet of airframes or cruise missiles. I was a bit shocked that anyone in the loop would come out and spill a couple of beans on classified program(s) and I highly doubt we've got space based lasers (yet).

It would only be a dumb idea to bomb Iran and leave it at that. Now then, if we're going to roll some M-1's through Tehren afterwards, that maybe not so dumb. Considering what's going on in Kurdistan and the unrest of the populace (homogenous populace) of Iran with it's own hardline government, I'd wager that we'd have more success in turning Iran into a pro-democracy country than with Iraq.

Enthusiast Joined: Jun 01, 2004 Posts: 53

Quote:

You'll NEVER see Israel alied with any Arab state - even if the aliens attack.

funny but true......

Quote:

I'd wager that we'd have more success in turning Iran into a pro-democracy country than with Iraq.

If the US will send ground troops in, you'll have a bloodbath several times bigger than in Iraq. You know, people don't like being invaded (whatever the reason).

F-16.net

Forum: F-22A Raptor

Raptors impact on Iran attack