War Royal Navy thwarts Iranian intercept of British tanker - HMS Montrose prevented a major international incident

Crippled Eagle

Top Floppy Slotter 1977
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Uh, no. The terrain makes an invasion a staggeringly difficult endeavor. Iraq is flat desert connected by highways. Iran is on a natural plateau, with all ground travel done through natural chokepoints.
Their army is well equipped, trained, and experienced. With a national population of 80 million. Nearly three times that of Iraq. And a modern army size of 650 thousand.
The US Would win, but it would be pointlessly bloody and a international embarrassment.
Hopefully we never have to find out.
 
Uh, no. The terrain makes an invasion a staggeringly difficult endeavor. Iraq is flat desert connected by highways. Iran is on a natural plateau, with all ground travel done through natural chokepoints.
Their army is well equipped, trained, and experienced. With a national population of 80 million. Nearly three times that of Iraq. And a modern army size of 650 thousand.
The US Would win, but it would be pointlessly bloody and a international embarrassment.
They have a central government with bases and shit. Invade? We could blow up their defenses with missiles, we know where they are

Trying to occupy would probably be a disaster, but then maybe not since Iran was exacerbating the Iraq situation. Still it's hard to just hold a place and wait for partisans to come to you

I say we bomb out the leadership and military and tell Israel it's theirs now if they can hold it.
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
Build support for a coalition of the willing. Also an invasion of Iran would be a cakewalk. Their army is shit, their navy is shit, and their air force is F-14s with no spare parts and 50 year old missiles, i.e shit.

There is literally nothing the Iranians could do to stop the US from bombing them with impunity.
You're correct. The invasion would be trivial. The occupation would be hell because we suck at occupations now.
 
You're correct. The invasion would be trivial. The occupation would be hell because we suck at occupations now.
Well, we suck at occupations because our model of occupation assumes a somewhat functional society that wants to get back to their normal, nonviolent lives. It completely falls apart when the occupied country has no interest in being anything but a perpetual warzone.

I think a successful occupation of the middle east would have to be pretty fucking awful for the citizens for it to work at all. Heavily restricted freedoms and regular house searches and shit, lots and lots of people arrested for suspicion of involvement in terrorism... And at the same time you'd have to manage the spread of information and disinformation. How you do all that without coming off as a complete tyrant retroactively justifying the anger against you, I have no idea...
 

break these cuffs

You must attack the word bastards
kiwifarms.net
Uh, no. The terrain makes an invasion a staggeringly difficult endeavor. Iraq is flat desert connected by highways. Iran is on a natural plateau, with all ground travel done through natural chokepoints.
Their army is well equipped, trained, and experienced. With a national population of 80 million. Nearly three times that of Iraq. And a modern army size of 650 thousand.
The US Would win, but it would be pointlessly bloody and a international embarrassment.
I hear their Revolutionary Guard is very elite. Much wow. :story:

Where have I heard this shit before? Are you old enough to remember how much the "vaunted Republican Guard" were hyped up before Desert Storm? You realize this is the same military that couldn't beat Iraq in a protracted war in the 80s and is using largely the same equipment as back then as well right? You know they invaded that flat desert connected by highways and couldn't take it right? Armies of the region don't have a history of turning tail and deserting by the tens of thousands either. How many from the ISF fled and deserted in the face of technicals and Wahhabi beards in 2014. This is an army that had billions upon billions of dollars spent on it and was trained by arguably the most experienced and best equipped military in the world. What about in Syria?

Oh shit! They have Pattons, Chieftains, and T-72s. No, please, stop. How many of that 650k are conscripts or reservists? Lets take a look at Syria and see how successful they are. The IAF would get blown the fuck out and then any occupation would be a disaster. Mountains would make the it harder than Iraq and that isn't saying much.
 

Irrelevant

kiwifarms.net
This shit here, this is why Iran's Revolutionary Guard needs to learn to keep it in their pants. It isn't just the US that has an interest in preserving the freedom of navigation. Who the fuck do you think the US took that mantle from in the first place? The UK is no fucking joke when it comes to maritime endeavors.
The British Empire only cared about freedom of navigation for itself. Everyone rejected the concept during WWI and the UK only agreed during WWII for aid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_Charter

Personally I believe freedom of the seas is what made colonial empires redundant and not 60's hippies.

For the same reason I think dividing the world into giant protectionist trade blocs (EU, NAFTA, etc) is a return to the old ways. China ignoring the concept outright is also alarming.

E: I guess you could say the earlier Monroe Doctrine was de facto freedom of the seas for the New World which while a US declaration was originally enforced by the Royal Navy. It kind of proves the point that free trade is more profitable than colonies otherwise the British Empire would have tried to take new colonies in the Americas.
 
Last edited:

mindlessobserver

kiwifarms.net
The issue with Iran is not that the US could beat them. The US absolutely could. The issue is whether the time and expense is worth it. Its a matter of geography. Any sort of invasion would have to be staged in Saudi Arabia and then sealifted across the gulf because there is no way in hell Iraq would allow us to use them as a springboard for any invasion. Tehran itself is hundreds of kilometers from the coast high up on the Persian plateau. Getting there would be a pain even if the Iranians were not defending the approaches and blowing the mountain passes. It would take at LEAST a year to get to Tehran, and that is assuming everything goes great. Which it never does. The outcome would be inevitable, but the question remains if the cost is worth it. What happens when we get to Tehran? Probably the exact same thing Napoleon found out when he got to Moscow.
 
The issue with Iran is not that the US could beat them. The US absolutely could. The issue is whether the time and expense is worth it. Its a matter of geography. Any sort of invasion would have to be staged in Saudi Arabia and then sealifted across the gulf because there is no way in hell Iraq would allow us to use them as a springboard for any invasion. Tehran itself is hundreds of kilometers from the coast high up on the Persian plateau. Getting there would be a pain even if the Iranians were not defending the approaches and blowing the mountain passes. It would take at LEAST a year to get to Tehran, and that is assuming everything goes great. Which it never does. The outcome would be inevitable, but the question remains if the cost is worth it. What happens when we get to Tehran? Probably the exact same thing Napoleon found out when he got to Moscow.
I mean, at a point a disorganized crazy terrorist enemy is better than an organized one, isn't it?
 

Alec Benson Leary

Creator of Asperchu
Christorical Figure
kiwifarms.net
Well, we suck at occupations because our model of occupation assumes a somewhat functional society that wants to get back to their normal, nonviolent lives. It completely falls apart when the occupied country has no interest in being anything but a perpetual warzone.

I think a successful occupation of the middle east would have to be pretty fucking awful for the citizens for it to work at all. Heavily restricted freedoms and regular house searches and shit, lots and lots of people arrested for suspicion of involvement in terrorism... And at the same time you'd have to manage the spread of information and disinformation. How you do all that without coming off as a complete tyrant retroactively justifying the anger against you, I have no idea...
Agreed. There's a reason that nation-building actually worked for Germany and Japan after WWII. Those civilian populations wanted to be rid of their tyrannical dictators.
 

Arctic Fox

Does it have to be so cold?
kiwifarms.net
They have a central government with bases and shit. Invade? We could blow up their defenses with missiles, we know where they are

Trying to occupy would probably be a disaster, but then maybe not since Iran was exacerbating the Iraq situation. Still it's hard to just hold a place and wait for partisans to come to you

I say we bomb out the leadership and military and tell Israel it's theirs now if they can hold it.
Yeah, all we need to do is bomb out the NVA, the North Vietnamese government, and tell the south its theirs now if they can hold it.
That's stupid. Going to war with Iran would be a disaster on par with Vietnam. Population, 80 million. 80 million. Israel can't even occupy Gaza without us pointing missile batteries at every country that has a problem with it. Invading Iran is stupid, pointless, and would result in an unmitigated disaster. We're still fighting terrorists after nearly 20 years. Hundreds of billions of dollars wasted, thousands of casualties and tens of thousands injured just for us. It's never as simple as lobbing a bunch of missiles.
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
Yeah, all we need to do is bomb out the NVA, the North Vietnamese government, and tell the south its theirs now if they can hold it.
That's stupid. Going to war with Iran would be a disaster on par with Vietnam. Population, 80 million. 80 million. Israel can't even occupy Gaza without us pointing missile batteries at every country that has a problem with it. Invading Iran is stupid, pointless, and would result in an unmitigated disaster. We're still fighting terrorists after nearly 20 years. Hundreds of billions of dollars wasted, thousands of casualties and tens of thousands injured just for us. It's never as simple as lobbing a bunch of missiles.
Vietnam was a disaster because of terrible management and sedition at home not because human wave tactics and guerrillas in a jungle are insurmountable obstacles.

The US WON Vietnam once Nixon was in. We just gave up shortly afterwards for political reason and told the South Vietnamese to fuck off, which predictably resulted in a new invasion.
 

Arctic Fox

Does it have to be so cold?
kiwifarms.net
Vietnam was a disaster because of terrible management and sedition at home not because human wave tactics and guerrillas in a jungle are insurmountable obstacles.

The US WON Vietnam once Nixon was in. We just gave up shortly afterwards for political reason and told the South Vietnamese to fuck off, which predictably resulted in a new invasion.
Vietnam was a disaster because it was a pointless war to begin with. We dropped more bombs on the north than both sides did during WWII. Nearly six hundred thousand men assisting the South Vietnamese Army. Tanks, warships, millions of weapons and hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition. We lost dozens of jets and hundreds of helicopters. 66,000 dead and a third of a million wounded. Without a full on rebellion at home, protests wouldn't stop the sheer amount of troops and supplies that were already committed.
If we 'won' when Nixon got in, how come the war went on for seven years after?
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: Your Weird Fetish

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
Vietnam was a disaster because it was a pointless war to begin with. We dropped more bombs on the north than both sides did during WWII. Nearly six hundred thousand men assisting the South Vietnamese Army. Tanks, warships, millions of weapons and hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition. We lost dozens of jets and hundreds of helicopters. 66,000 dead and a third of a million wounded. Without a full on rebellion at home, protests wouldn't stop the sheer amount of troops and supplies that were already committed.
If we 'won' when Nixon got in, how come the war went on for seven years after?
Prolonged refusal to bomb enemy supply lines, people in the DoD leaking bomb targets. Generally poor target picking in the first place due to fear that a hut a km out of the target box might get hit...
 

Arctic Fox

Does it have to be so cold?
kiwifarms.net
Prolonged refusal to bomb enemy supply lines, people in the DoD leaking bomb targets. Generally poor target picking in the first place due to fear that a hut a km out of the target box might get hit...
What part of more bombs dropped than both sides during the second world war did you not understand? And we bombed neighboring countries that had Vietcong supply lines. What is this shit about not bombing supply lines?
 
  • Dumb
Reactions: Your Weird Fetish

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
What part of more bombs dropped than both sides during the second world war did you not understand? And we bombed neighboring countries that had Vietcong supply lines. What is this shit about not bombing supply lines?
Eventually, yeah. That's when we started doing that winning thing. Though the media went batshit over expanding the war to Cambodia.

Bombs dropped isn't that great a metric. Kinda depends on what you're aiming at and what you hit. And actually can I get a source for that? EDIT: Looking it up myself I'm getting wildly different estimates. I mean, estimates that differ from each other by multiple powers of ten. So you're either completely right or horribly wrong depending on the source.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Exterminatus

Arctic Fox

Does it have to be so cold?
kiwifarms.net
Eventually, yeah. That's when we started doing that winning thing. Though the media went batshit over expanding the war to Cambodia.

Bombs dropped isn't that great a metric. Kinda depends on what you're aiming at and what you hit. And actually can I get a source for that? EDIT: Looking it up myself I'm getting wildly different estimates. I mean, estimates that differ from each other by multiple powers of ten. So you're either completely right or horribly wrong depending on the source.
Fair enough. Sources vary and reliability on numbers has never been a strong suit of any country in regards to such things.
Kinda getting off topic anyway. The main thing I was trying to get at with the comparison to the Vietnam War is that Iran would be an equal disaster. It's never a simple as dropping a few bombs and sending the Osprey in. Especially if you take the 2002 US war games into account. A simulated war between the US and 'an unknown Middle Eastern country' IE, Iran.

After the first round went so terribly for the US Navy, (Two fucking carriers being lost.), the games were 'restarted' with rules restricting the team not representing America. Basically a propaganda piece to make a war with Iran look like a cakewalk.
 

Your Weird Fetish

Intersectional fetishist
kiwifarms.net
We lose wargames disastrously all the time. It's marketing to get congress to increase defense spending. EDIT: Reading the talk page of that article it sounds like that wargame was complete garbage on both sides to the point of being a 250 million dollar waste of money. No part of it seemed to resemble a real engagement at any point.

And it really is as simple as just dropping a shitload of bombs...if you're completely amoral about the whole thing. We aren't. Thus the bloody occupations that never really go anywhere.
 
Last edited:
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino