Your all very stupid... Terrorists ahahahahaha, I need a minute to finish laughing... What are you all scared of? A country that's half way across the world and has never threatened a soul? A sanctioned country that can't even buy COMMERCIAL AIRCRAFT PARTS to keep its citizens safe? You're all watching too much Fox news my friends. A country that was torn by a war for 8 years that WE FUELED (IRAQ and IRAN war)? If god forbid any sort of attack was to happen, most of you couldn't even put gas in your cars... Do you realize that? An attack on the second largest oil reserve IN THE WORLD... I say no and so should you! We have to solve our problems through dialogue and REAL leadership not through oppression and anger. Most of the problems in the mid-east are because of Iran-US relations.

Posted by: SomeDude at October 4, 2008 07:39 PM

Sunburn missiles

The Sunburn missile has never seen use in combat, to my knowledge, which probably explains why its fearsome capabilities are not more widely recognized. Other cruise missiles have been used, of course, on several occasions, and with devastating results. During the Falklands War, French-made Exocet missiles, fired from Argentine fighters, sunk the HMS Sheffield and another ship. And, in 1987, during the Iran-Iraq war, the USS Stark was nearly cut in half by a pair of Exocets while on patrol in the Persian Gulf. On that occasion US Aegis radar picked up the incoming Iraqi fighter (a French-made Mirage), and tracked its approach to within 50 miles. The radar also "saw" the Iraqi plane turn about and return to its base. But radar never detected the pilot launch his weapons. The sea-skimming Exocets came smoking in under radar and were only sighted by human eyes moments before they ripped into the Stark, crippling the ship and killing 37 US sailors.

The 1987 surprise attack on the Stark exemplifies the dangers posed by anti-ship cruise missiles. And the dangers are much more serious in the case of the Sunburn, whose specs leave the sub-sonic Exocet in the dust. Not only is the Sunburn much larger and faster, it has far greater range and a superior guidance system. Those who have witnessed its performance trials invariably come away stunned. According to one report, when the Iranian Defense Minister Ali Shamkhani visited Moscow in October 2001 he requested a test firing of the Sunburn, which the Russians were only too happy to arrange. So impressed was Ali Shamkhani that he placed an order for an undisclosed number of the missiles.

The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or: a 750-pound conventional warhead, within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern that hugs the deck and includes "violent end maneuvers" to elude enemy defenses. The missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system. Should a US Navy Phalanx point defense somehow manage to detect an incoming Sunburn missile, the system has only seconds to calculate a fire solution not enough time to take out the intruding missile. The US Phalanx defense employs a six-barreled gun that fires 3,000 depleted-uranium rounds a minute, but the gun must have precise coordinates to destroy an intruder "just in time."

The Sunburn's combined supersonic speed and payload size produce tremendous kinetic energy on impact, with devastating consequences for ship and crew. A single one of these missiles can sink a large warship, yet costs considerably less than a fighter jet. Although the Navy has been phasing out the older Phalanx defense system, its replacement, known as the Rolling Action Missile (RAM) has never been tested against the weapon it seems destined to one day face in combat. Implications For US Forces in the Gulf

The US Navy's only plausible defense against a robust weapon like the Sunburn missile is to detect the enemy's approach well ahead of time, whether destroyers, subs, or fighter-bombers, and defeat them before they can get in range and launch their deadly cargo. For this purpose US AWACs radar planes assigned to each naval battle group are kept aloft on a rotating schedule. The planes "see" everything within two hundred miles of the fleet, and are complemented with intelligence from orbiting satellites.

But US naval commanders operating in the Persian Gulf face serious challenges that are unique to the littoral, i.e., coastal, environment. A glance at a map shows why: The Gulf is nothing but a large lake, with one narrow outlet, and most of its northern shore, i.e., Iran, consists of mountainous terrain that affords a commanding tactical advantage over ships operating in Gulf waters. The rugged northern shore makes for easy concealment of coastal defenses, such as mobile missile launchers, and also makes their detection problematic. Although it was not widely reported, the US actually lost the battle of the Scuds in the first Gulf War termed "the great Scud hunt" and for similar reasons.

http://www.rense.com/general59/theSunburniransawesome.htm

Posted by: Brock at July 10, 2008 07:49 PM

I just realized that,terrorists are willing to kill their own and some how without bothering them, they will attack foreign countries on a whim!They operate in severe blindness of obscure
conciense etc.Who knows,what kind of signals their
brains are producing? It's:"The mystery man."

Posted by: Paul at February 5, 2008 11:55 AM

In response to Kent's comment about history:

The U.S. ousted the democratically elected government in Iran and replaced it with a dictator, the Shah of Iran, as he was known from that point onward.

The 1979 revolution was in response to policies of the Shah, the dictator that the U.S. and many other NATO members (as you stated) supported. When he was ousted, they re-established a democratic government. But of course, since the new does not "friendly" to the United States (for obvious reasons---the Shah was rather cruel), it is branded a rogue nation for looking after its own citizens. It probably sponsors terrorism, but then I'm sure the terror organizations headquarters inside the United States and England are just for cookie parties. Isn't that right? (I can name a few if you are interested.)

There is growing reason (and correctly so) to dislike American policies. America is a threat to world peace. Never mind that kids from a relatively younger age are indoctrinated how it defends Freedom and all, but at the end of the day, it's just what it is---propaganda.

Why should European nations play into America's national interests, as it so put? They have their own interests to preserve. Europe SHOULD deal with Iran. Unlike the United States, Iranian missile strikes could hit most of the European nations. They have a reason to favor cooperation over confrontation, aside from economic interests.

Next time you want to refer to history, try not to interpret it selectively.

Posted by: IRIS at December 9, 2007 12:02 PM

I don't undestand why all this madness in between the nations, if by any chance U.S.A goes into IRAN it will be for valuable reasons and don't mistaken my friends it will not be easy, deffinitely a lot of blood will be lost and the iranians will have wished this never happened, the iranians are been fooled by their dictator and he will be responsible for all their deaths. It is sad to loose these many lives. The U.S.A has too many strategies to fight and will not let this war be another IRAK!

Posted by: Jesus (NAVY) at November 26, 2007 10:12 PM

I don't undestand why all this madness in between the nations, if by any chance U.S.A goes into IRAN it will be for valuable reasons and don't mistaken my friends it will not be easy, deffinitely a lot of blood will be lost and the iranians will have wished this never happened, the iranians are been fooled by their dictator and he will be responsible for all their deaths. It is sad to loose these many lives. The U.S.A has too many strategies to fight and will not let this war be another IRAK!

Posted by: Jesus (NAVY) at November 26, 2007 10:11 PM

those F-14's have no spare parts, they are not in shape for combat at all. the Iranian air defense system will be dismantled, command and control cut off, not to mention the cyber war our geeks are capable of waging. in the air, on the water, it will be a slaughter. they want a ground war, coz thats the ONLY way they will be able to inflict casualties. i think Pakistan is a much bigger problem. the T-ban is not far from seizing power, with the help of the rogue, traitors of the ISI, they will have nuclear weapons. make contingencies for that. even thier population is hostile. nuke p-stan, the world will be a better place.

Posted by: RHYNO327 at July 21, 2007 12:09 PM

Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.

Sir Winston Churchill

I think the current "situation" in Iraq is yet another example proving Chruchill's words. Vietnam would be another.

Beware the predictions of "quick and easy victory".

Add to the mess the unknown and unpredicatable blowback that may occur long after the armed conflict is won.

Even if the planned attack on Iran goes off as planned - then what? What will disgruntled Iranians and their sympathizers get up to for revenge in the next several decades?

Given that development of a nuclear weapon is years away, the best approach now is the diplomatic one.

Posted by: Sceptic at June 13, 2007 10:16 AM

dear mehrbad people like u encourage usa to attack muslim countries i think u didnt see what happened in iraq after the operation freedom all the freedom is gone to the dogs women and children die because of foolishness by people like u its our government right or wrong and we will resist to the core as 8 years iran iraq war has told us and also if americans dont value the life of there soldiers or freedom of there people how can they provide us freedom.After reading ur comment i remember an iraq who gave my father sweets on his removal and my father said "i would eat ur sweets after a few months when order would be restored in iraq"and my father was right he didnt show up again he lost his family in a aerial bombardment of al qaeda the problem is either u mehrbad will be the first to exit iran or apply for american asylum and the rest will do the hard job kicking american ass after they leave u will return saying i love iran its a shame u call urself an iranian u bastard and ur family will be the first martyrs in gaining freedom bro good luck with ur freedom fighting alongside americans.

and sorry i forgot to mention after war insurgensy will be those few hard core fanatics after 5 or 10 years it will be stay the course and then at the end retreat since WW2 america won no war because after that there was no just war it were all imperialistic wars.

Posted by: ALI ASGHAR at May 31, 2007 04:50 AM

I think Iran is gonna take a part of the battle in to Iraq. As usually the might of US will bring them initial military success but then ...?? what next steps US gonna do when an uprise ll be in southern Iraq led by Muktada Al Sadr?? Today Iran-Syria had an military pact. what are its implications?? Iranian Military infrastructures will be crippled but their paramilitary and IRGC those will be transform in to unconventional force equipped with quite credible homemade weapons need to be thought of. Does Iran has got Sunburn Missile with Nukes. I dont think Russians will be that stupid. But US might lose some of their key surface combatant in Navy. Any unplanned break out by US force may cause huge loss of US soldiers. They need to clear all IRGC/Iranina ground force position by successive air strikes. And US to Remember, Iran is a country of 100 millions and its not a flat country as Iraq. Lets wait for another CNN breaking News---

Posted by: H M Sohel at March 12, 2007 11:09 AM

It's obvious there's not a lot of military experience here, however there’s no lack of armchair General’s. Having spent over 20 years in the Navy I think I can be safe in saying that first: What clown would post his strategy on the web in first place?
Second: I would sincerely doubt there would be any land invasion. The problem is not with the Iranian people, for the love of god they have enough problems with their current regime
They don’t need any more. The problems a typical Iranian gets from his government besides threatening a war with a major supperpower which of course he will have to fight on a daily basis are starvation, going to prison for listening to the wrong radio broadcast or reading the wrong newspaper, book, taking a picture at the wrong place or time, Speaking out against the current government or watching the wrong movie. Gee kinda like old school communism with a fanatical religious twist.
Someone said it would take a few days for the US Navy to take out the Iranian Navy.
This assumes that the Iranians actually get to leave port to use the reverse engineered Russian and Chinese weapons that they currently tout. The biggest problem will come from the go fast boats. Now you thinking “oh no another USS Cole well that ain’t gonna happen the US Navy ain’t playing that game again.
Iran could mine the straits of Hormuz, but that would put a burden on not only the US
but the Middle East as well. Oil doesn’t flow out; no money comes in OPEC gets a case of irritable bowel syndrome. Another question is this? If what the Iranian president says about theses factories is that they are “for peaceful electrical power” then why not let the IAEC inspect it, share a little safety information and then go about their business.
It’s amazing that over a thousand years ago the middle east was “bar none” the cradle of civilization. Learning, agriculture, law, engineering, exploration, science, and culture. It all started in the Middle East.
Thanks to religious zealotry their people are reduced to hiding in mud huts while
the “religious leaders” who preach fundamental worship live in gilded mosques and watch CNN and Al Jazeera from satellite on big screen televisions. Talk about hypocrisy.

Posted by: Curt at March 10, 2007 04:35 PM

I don't think the tomcats will be a big threat to the US. those planes have been cut from maintenance from years. so i really doubt if they are still operational. the threat is russian migs and sukhoys. the russians are hard at work developping missiles (anti-air, anti-tank...) and the proof is the heavy chopper losses in iraq in the last month and the huge israeli tank loss in lebanon. The iranians won't paint their bases and navy with a target mark and wait for the US to strike, they will surely use tactics employed by hezballah in lebanon.
and in all cases the US navy shouldnt be present in the gulf sea, if they attack iran, I've read about a sunburst anti ship missile which can carry a tactical nuke warhead. which could eradicate most of the US fleet in a few hours. the US needs new strategies, its enemy is well aware of its common ways to attack, and the iranians could be well prepared to counter the attack. just my thoughts.

Posted by: Ralph K at March 10, 2007 04:53 AM

first strike Yamamoto made many assumptions . never underestimate the surprises nor the outcome of battle. Hanoi victory park ( loaded to the teeth w anti aircraft batteries - flak + cross fire ) and local tactical dets protecting Hanoi and Haipong Harbor. Falklands ( Chinese silkworm missile slams into aluminium hull of allies - sinks ship ) . Persian Gulf coastline loaded with sunburn missiles ( what else is Iran going to buy with the loot they collect from their American oil customers ? ) the USS COLE was ah sittin duck for a very crude bozo low tech attack . Iran - they ve got th hoot and what ah hoot it is ! they will have all manner of craft to deliver the hoot. it looks like a slim torpedo bomb like the one dropped from the Nakajima bomber planes. not complainin about Mitsubishi - the Japanese allowed my Momma to leave out on the last dependants ship out of Manila Bay ... and they didn't take my Momma prisoner at Shanghai . back to Iran - before blasting the nuclear sites into the stone age for Iran's puppets ; who are endangering the citizens of Iran for violating UN Resolution 1737 - lets see if we can butter up the folks hostile to Fat America and Little Israel . sometimes ; when you can satify your opponent ; the opponent will have met their needs and calm down and not be so aggressive . give em love and kindness and see if we can domesticate the Iranian leadership into becoming our friends . nobody dies ; especially the people who did not call a war on themselves . battle involves risk and assumptions . bad luck and hestitation at the trigger can get you dead quick . it would be wonderful - if we could just drop some sweet sleep state spray down on our contestants and then swiftly secure the facilities in a calm demeanor . maybe ; Iran will stop the uranium enrichment and meet with a decent bargain to purchase non weapons grade uranium rods under UN sales supervision . Sensai said ; " the best fight is the one that never happened . " he also advised ; " do not fight a mad man . a mad man is insane . " so ; with all this scare and threatening going down ; the lilliputians need to access their swelled hubris . Russia and Iran have historic ties . ties that go back to the days of the Crimean War . China sprinted across the Yulu River after the North Korean Army were utterly defeated . MacArthur had his attack dog leash put in a strangle hold by Harry S. Truman . we need to know how far we are going to go and to where picking off the Iranian uranium centrafugal work shops . when my boss told me to take the card board box and clean out my desk - i did because i knew how the cards were going to fall -no matter how much i resisted . every nations sovereignty should be respect and tolerated ; if possible . President Amadinejan should let buy gones be by gones and just quit making the uranium rods and buy them through UN control . many weapons of mass destruction are just as effective and cheaper than nuclear grapefruit sized softballs . i once killed a spider because it scared me . i once killed a snake because my x wife ordered me to do it . i remember the dead snake with its broken head looking up at me like ( why did you do it ? ). soul to soul . i remember all the cancer patients i worked with . i remember a child burned and blistering screaming with surprise and terror . man can be very cruel . the common man does not want war . more wars are started over religion than anything else . ( global warming - the earth is having hotter temperatures because there are more sun explosions . there is more heat being irradiated from the sun . Mars has become more dry . oil resources are one thing - water resources are also a serious human need . billions of people on earth do not have enough water nor clean drinking water . there will be a billion and a half more people on earth in the near future . something has got to give . what is the harm in going along with UN resolution 1737 and avoiding scaring your opponents ? do not fight America . go with the flow . Erris is 40 million light years away - its an earth like planet the size of Jupiter . humanity should budget for the Space Programs . we all might have to become astronauts and escape The Planet of The Apes . expenses of war take from the space colonization programs . Russian surface to air missiles and radar will be on stand by . they will have satellite surveillance . sub surface warfare will be a challenge too . its going to be ah certifiably insane bumpy ride . after the first strike ; maybe ; we all can breathe a sigh of relief . failure is not an option .

Posted by: fatherbenniesiegel at March 10, 2007 04:41 AM

Hey we need to let Jimmy Carter the peanut man lead the charge into Iran, he was so sucessful getting the Hostages out way back when.
We can thank him for all this Iranian mess. I would love to watch him wipe his ass with his Noble Peace Prize......
Everyone listen up, dig up a Book "THE CRASH OF 79", came out in the early 80's or before....
Don't remember the name of the guy who wrote it but he sure knew the Future....read this and also John Hagee's book, "Countdown to Jeruselem"....

Posted by: P51 Jock at March 10, 2007 01:42 AM

These people in the middle east have been fighting since the begining of time, they will continue to fight with themselves and each other regardless of what the United States does. If you believe other than that you are completly ignorant. those people hate us, they have been raised to hate us from the time they were born, and they would do anything to see us gone. You would be to insane to believe that there is anything we can do to stop these people from fighting, and carrying on the only thing they have ever been tought to irradicate: US!!!

Posted by: Big Al at March 9, 2007 09:39 PM

It's very clear that Iran shall be defeated. If the US don't bomb Iran, Israel will. Don't listen to the peace-lovers, they are in fact dictatorship-supporters.

Posted by: Leroidavid at March 9, 2007 08:20 PM

I dont think we should go to Iran, the most probable event of war is that it will lead to other wars. So whats the point, i say pull out now before something bigger happens..

Posted by: Devon at March 9, 2007 08:08 PM

Nothing like telling the Iranians our battle plan in advance. I can't believe you people. The media is what loses wars, not the troops.

Posted by: Tom at March 9, 2007 06:50 PM

"Iran tried to stopped Hussein in 1980, but the US helped Hussein not to be defeated. You stupid people. The US gave F-14s, and Phoenix missiles to Iran. How stupid can you get if they are your enemy. You call the Iranians religious fanatics, you are too stupid to see you, the USA, are the religious fanatics. Stupid Americans, Stupid US citizens, bunch of braying Jackasses."

You obviously know nothing about history, just like every other person who voices the same mindless anti-American nonsense that you just did.

When the US gave Iran f-14s and other weapons it was before the Islamic Fundamentalists had taken over that country. Iran had a secular leader that not just the US, but ALL OF NATO supported with aid, military, political and economic aid. Yet of course, most Europeans, Canadians, Australians and other countries who misguidedly lash out against the US for this are completely unaware of their own country's involvement with Iran... Nevermind the fact that many European countries STILL provide military cooperation with Iran.

Get your facts straight, because from what you've shown, its obviously that you've already made up your mind and have no desire to be confused by the facts. Not as long as you can salvage your precious, irrational anti-American bias.

Posted by: Kent at March 9, 2007 05:49 PM

Bomb them with burger kings mcdonalds and things for they want to kill us all and say it daily and sings.Death to Israel and America they cry while we sit at home idley by.To holler about Iraq like they dont understand what it will soon be like in their own land.They whine about the goverment and think they are safe.From the worlds identities of killing and hate.Placing the blame upon their own they allow their enemies to get closer to home somehow.They forget their grandfolks educated wise, of times that were desperate and America despised.To what they have learned was not handed down , to relive again the sorrows sound.I can forsee the dangers ahead that arise in our land,when our enemies plot to erase us with their despicable hand.Iran is the head of the terrorist regime they've killed Americans and others it seems ,to allow them to castrate and continue on,would be our gravest mistake so crazy Iranian leaders be gone !Dont you just love an easy read ?The anti war wackers always let the threat beat them up and antagonize them so naturally they cry like a silly dove.But we who keep them safe and warm have to go out and keep them that way,they just dont understand.

Posted by: Tach 4 at March 9, 2007 05:48 PM

Dan,

I've flown with and against Iranian pilots. They are good. Very, very good.

Zoomie

Posted by: Jamie at March 9, 2007 03:34 PM

Iran tried to stopped Hussein in 1980, but the US helped Hussein not to be defeated. You stupid people. The US gave F-14s, and Phoenix missiles to Iran. How stupid can you get if they are your enemy. You call the Iranians religious fanatics, you are too stupid to see you, the USA, are the religious fanatics. Stupid Americans, Stupid US citizens, bunch of braying Jackasses. What eventually happens to jackasses that destroy the farmer's crops, and field? If the Jackass won’t learn, they are executed. Go ahead and invade Iran you bunch of Jackasses, if that is what you want, you stupid people. Some stupid people will write back and say those F-14s were when we forced a Dictatorship on Iran, and some other even stupider people will say that was old USA white men who did that to Iran, so you admit your fathers killed the prophets, just like Jesus said the same thing long ago about the Jews. Stupid is what stupid does. Israel was destroyed for doing stupid things 2000 years ago, and your fate is sealed if you ever attack Iran. You bunch of Jackasses, when will you learn? Russia, or China will defend Iran, so bend over and kiss you know what "Goodbye."

Posted by: Dan Ross at March 9, 2007 02:12 PM

What needs to be realized is that the religious terrorist we are now fighting in Iraq, Afghanistan & maybe soon in Iran will not be defeated. They may not win but they don't surrender. They've taken a 100 year view or longer when condisidering their struggle, not the four year election cycle of the the United States. We are merely the current enemy in their never ending "jihad" . If we stay 10 more minute or 10 more years it will make no difference in the outcome... except the number of Americans that will be killed. The idea that we can protect America here by fight terrorist over there is specious. There are terrorist here right now. They aren't going anyplace. We could use those 150,000 fighting men & women to fight terror right now, here at home. Help Iraq to help it self? Sure. Help Afganistan with $$$. We will. It's a no brainer. Continuing to bleed in a civil war that is not ours & we cannot win is just stupid.

Posted by: John at March 9, 2007 12:13 PM

absolutely insane! no wonder people hate americans!!!

Posted by: k.h. at March 9, 2007 03:42 AM

Hyperthetically Speaking;

No matter who wins in the Air & Sea Campaigns, it comes down to the ground war in Iraq, Afganistan, & then Iran.

The ground war is taking away the ground forces that could be protecting the continental United States & it's Allies from terrorism. Iraq, Afganistan, Pakistan, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, & North Korea are considered the big threats.

I think by attacking Iran; sooner or later Russia & China will be involved! Russia & China have trade relations with Iran. China has trade relations with the U.S. Russia does not have trade relations with the U.S. Perhaps if we did have trade relations with Russia, it would be easier to negotiate with them in the "Middle East Crisis!" To include Iran & Syria!

Thinking ahead of time, we need all the major powers of the world to have three main missions working together to: stop any nuclear threat; neutralize all threats related to terrorism; & contain terrorism from spreading throughout the world!

Discussions with "All" the major powers agreeing to these goals would help secure the whole world! This needs to be discussed & a plan worked out prior to any agreed attack to Iran; in my opinion!

Terrorism is already spreading to nations in Africa to cause havic there & it is focusing on Great Britian; who is one of our greatest Allies.
Terrorism will not stop there!

It will try to spread to all of our Allies (inside their own country) until it either succeeds or is permanently stopped. It will not stop unless we kill or capture them. No terrorist will surrender because they know if they do they would be killed by their own kind for thinking such a thing.

We aught to be concentrating on terrorism & trying to contain the spread of terorism; instead of discussing attacking Iran. This is & will continue to be the United State's, Great Britain's, Austrralia's, Canada's, Isreal's, India's & the rest of the World's biggest threat!

All of these ground wars are providing a way for terrorism to spread. They take enormous amounts of man-power & if ground wars continue to rise outside of their country, the people of that country are more at risk from terrorism or terrorist attacks! That is reality!

Posted by: Rock Trousdale at March 9, 2007 12:23 AM

Why is anyone concerned too much about the Iranian F-14's. Two things are important: in an Air to Air fight the better pilot wins - aircraft is secondary. Our Pilots will make quick work of them even if, and this is unlikely they have any F-14's flyable. And as I understand it we sold the F-14 to them but not the Pheonix Missle system. And we have F-18's which are more then a match for the 14 when you utilize the AWAC's to increase their visibility.
Anyhow it is nice to have a plan, and we must have one but I doubt we will need it. Unless we don't prepare for it, fortune favors the prepared.

Posted by: Dan at March 8, 2007 09:19 PM

Many people think that President Bush is pushing for war against Iran's nuclear sites. Let's face it, it's the rest of the Arab world (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordon, UAE, for example) who are pressuring the United States to attack Iran's nuclear sites.

These Arab countries don't want Iran to develop nuclear weapons because if they do their nations will be at risk of nuclear attack from Iran!

Also, Iran wants a war with the United States because of the unstable thoecratic government and economy which is suffering from high inflation and coruption.

I agree with the article, the majority of the strikes from the Unitied States will be conducted by the U.S. Naval aviation assets and U.S Air Force B-2s, B-1s, F-15Es, and B-52s striking first. Don't be surprised as part of the battle plans there will be a Marine Corps amphibious assult on Iran's coast line to secure a beach head.

Iran's navy and air force will be destroyed within a few days. Thier nuclear sites will be more of a challenge for percesion weapons to destroy without releasing radation into the atmosphere.

When you see F/A-22 Raptors deploy to the Middle East, then, and only then, will you see a strike against Iran!

The F/A-22s will be responsible to knock-out the Iranning F-14s on the first day of battle to make sure and establish total air dominance in the region for the protection of B-2 strike operations!

My question will be how will the (corrupt) United Nations, Russia, and China react when the United States strikes Iran?

When, not if, Iran develops nuclear weapons it will be a matter of time before the theocratic rulers use one to start World War III. Iran is a clear and present danger to the entire region of the Middle East!

However, the real threat is not against Israel (as Iran voes to destroy Israel) but Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan, UAE, China, Russia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India.

World War III is what Iran wants! Don't give it to them! A majority of the population in Iran was born after 1979 who wants politcal change with a democratic government. Lets pursue this course first before striking Iran. The United States should pressure Iran politically and economically that will force a change within the government before they have the ability to produce nuclear weapons. However, it might be too late?

Posted by: Ian M. Guajardo at March 8, 2007 09:03 PM

Pete says: "This is never going to happen. Face it, it would be the end of our military's ability to be combat effective. So neo-con nut jobs keep smoking your pipe and dreamin of wars you will never have to fight in or sacrifice anything for. We see what the profiteering, special interest, war in Iraq has turned into. What makes them think Iran would be any different? Besides I don't think the Iranians are gonna be such an easy bunch to roll over the way the Iraqis under Saddam were".

Pete, you are a poor misguided soul. The anti-war left based rhetoric that you are spewing is exactly what fuels our enemy into believing that they can win a war against us. People like you, it seems, actually root against the U.S. when it comes to our foreign affairs.

Do all of us a favor and leave our country for France, Germany, Iran or some other country who does not share our views and policies. Stop drinking the Kool-aid and by the way, most of us troops, both dead and alive, actually support our role and mission in the middle-east.

Posted by: Manny at March 8, 2007 08:51 PM

This is never going to happen. Face it, it would be the end of our military's ability to be combat effective. So neo-con nut jobs keep smoking your pipe and dreamin of wars you will never have to fight in or sacrifice anything for. We see what the profiteering, special interest, war in Iraq has turned into. What makes them think Iran would be any different? Besides I don't think the Iranians are gonna be such an easy bunch to roll over the way the Iraqis under Saddam were.

Posted by: Pete at March 7, 2007 03:24 PM

Check out that picture, that's actually a HAWK hanging under the wing. Good on 'em for jury rigging a SAM for air to air use, but it's no Phoenix. Not even a Sparrow, but I'm no expert.

We're going to crush these clowns in a conventional fight. It's the unconventional fight that worries me.

S/F

Posted by: Snowflake at March 7, 2007 02:38 PM

Have we forgotten Chernobyl? That was an accident, but we are going to destroy a nuclear plant on purpose - Isn't there a threat of an atomic reaction and fall out?

Besides

Check this out:
http://www.lucasgray.com/video/peacetrain.html

Why do we want to turn this place into Iraq? How will it benifit to create children who will grow up to be terrorists, this is absurd. All common sense has fallen asleep.

Ofcourse these aren't the real plans, you wouldn't post the real plans online.

Posted by: Roger The Okcitykid at March 7, 2007 01:32 PM

Seems more logical to me for the United States to attack from Iraq and Afghanistan then it is for them to solely attack using naval power. I think it would be all of the above, and maybe if the SHTF some nukes dropped from SPACE. This article is pure propaganda since how we would attack Iran would obviously be classified.

Posted by: jtw at March 7, 2007 09:05 AM

Pedestrian

You do know that Iran and Azerbaijan have a mutual non-agression pact that specifically precludes either country providing bases/airspace/land corridors for use by a third-party military. Perhaps not.

The US military is actually located on the wrong side of Afghanistan to be of much practical use against Iran. They're also in the midst of an intractable counter-insurgency mission. Interestingly, the Karzai government has good relations with Iran, and, whilst he may only be the Mayor of Kabul, I doubt that he's got much of an appetite for a war on his Western border to complement the current clusterfuck.

The US military in Iraq is, likewise, conducting a counter-insurgency campaign, and is not configured to do anything of much practical benefit against Iran; the posture, I suspect would be defensive - with the USAF desperately trying to stop the missiles raining down on their city-size bases and keeping the supply lines from Kuwait open.

The more pertinent question is whether the Iranians have prepared the ground/have the capacity/will to collapse the US militarily in Iraq. I'd rate the chances as 50-50 if they've been thorough in their planning. At any rate, the current Iraqi government wants to pursue an entente cordiale with Teheran, so perhaps it would be best to actually get serious about the diplomacy.

Posted by: dan at March 6, 2007 11:45 AM

Wait a minute...I thought the US said they "don't have a plan to attack Iran"!??!
*gasp*

Posted by: DS at March 6, 2007 11:29 AM

If rail guns on ships were availible today, it sounds to be one of the options other than expensive missiles, but only for targets within the reach of rail guns. While Navy might launch missiles and aircrafts from aircraft carriers, and Air Force sending some bombers, I wonder how the ground force in Afghan and Iraq (and from Azerbijan if possible) can contribute, especially GMLRS and ATACMS. I guess ground force advancing into Iran is very unlikely (even with rare chance to hold areas such as Kurdish, and Arab concentrated regions), but guess GMLRS and ATACMS may play a limited role to strike targets within the range from the border. Are there any ATACMS in Iraq at this time?

Posted by: pedestrian at March 6, 2007 09:55 AM

This is complete madness -

"Far from setting back Iran's nuclear programme, a military attack might create the political conditions in which Iran could accelerate its nuclear weapons programme."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6418213.stm

Having finally got to the point where we can just about admit that attacking Iraq might have been a mistake, let's not go repeating it.

Posted by: Wembley at March 6, 2007 08:31 AM

Thanks for your post, Mehrdad. Here's hoping for peace. Perhaps you and your peers can start to change Iranian society for the better from within over time.

Posted by: Ward at March 6, 2007 07:25 AM

This is how the Iraqi campaign began in 1989 when the scuds went up under Gen Schwartzkoffs command. It went in stages from desert sheild to desert storm. Desert storm stuck as the main name of the war even though many operations were carried out sucessfully during the 18 years of war there. I think we need to target possible rocket munitions pants and guns and bullets plants as well as hydroulic presses and drill presses for ifp support parts. If we are going to do it , do it. Go in hard. Hit the beaches too. No messing around. Set the message straight, we do not allow allies to interfere in our domination of Iraq , impartial or fully participating in resupplying the insurgency effort with food, weapons, and intellignece.

Posted by: Max Anderson at March 6, 2007 02:03 AM

I'm from Tehran.I know Iran can't stand up against United States but i also think they have prepared themselves most with land forces and the number of troops they have.
United States can't have enough troops on the ground to face iranians while it's busy in Iraq and Afghanistan.and thats the reason why iranian mullahs think United States would not attack Iran.
I dream to see the day that mullahs power is destroyed by US attack.and they have to live like their brothers in afghanisatan and ...(osama bin ladan and terrorists.)
there is no way for iranian to stand against US and i also know and guess many young iranian troops wich almost all have just basic traning do not go to war and fight against US.many like me even love United States.you may have to know that going to military is forceable for all iranians(2 years in military).they could not own anything and even marry if they don't go to 2 years military term.
US needs to destroy mullahs facilities as quick as he can,else it comes to furture problems.

Posted by: mehrdad at March 6, 2007 01:32 AM

Even with the supposed haul of spare parts Iran was to have landed last year, maintaining even 12 of the 79 thirty year old F-14A's would likely be beyond the capabilities of IRIAF. The Phoenix missiles would also require like maintenance. They've likely reconfigured all the jets that do fly (if any) to launch Russian made weapons. Even if they had a small flyable squadron, they'd need pilots to fly them. Really good ones - which are in short supply in Iran. The air to air threat from Iran is a manageable one. The bigger air threat comes from newly acquired Russian SAMs.

Posted by: RTLM at March 5, 2007 10:12 PM

Thanks ward!
I'm so afraid of drones.... Real terror-drones they are. Menacing.... scary...

Posted by: Foreign.Boy at March 5, 2007 08:04 PM