• Iran declares it can sink US carrier with 'ease' in Persian gulf.
    370 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;34289449]You are aware that Iran is nothing like Afghanistan, correct? And an even further shot away from Vietnam. We've covered what a conflict with Iran would be like, go back and read GunFox's posts.[/QUOTE] I'm not gonna get in an argument over it but I see everyone saying "Hurr we're American, we'll flatten you all", I honestly think a war with Iran would go a lot worse than planned. Not only would the war itself cause casualties but you can bet attempted terrorist attacks on US soil will rise tenfold and even if one out of 20 attempts slips through and is sucessfull then it'll cause havoc.
"OMG ACT OF WAR DECLARE WAR OMGOMG U BADDIES, FLIPPING MIDDLEEAST BADDIES" Have you even stopped to think that getting your carriers near their countries and standing by is not actually a "I'm your friend" statement?
What if... during their war games, they were laying mines and getting their subs into position? I mean it would look completely legitimate. "No we aren't preparing for war, in Iran we just like to play marco polo with mines and submarines."
[QUOTE=Swebonny;34289490]Has a B-2 or F-22 ever been shot down before? Is there any system that can bring them down or detect them? US is quite OP, nerf pleae.[/QUOTE] They can be detected with radar. S-400 could probably kill it and so could fighter jets.
Iran why are you so stupid, you are about to get roflstomped...
[QUOTE=deltasquid;34276352]Jesus, Iran. Even if you could, that's not how you win a war. Blowing a US carrier out of the water will just cause everyone to attack them in retaliation and they can't fight our combined strength. Hell, even if the US has to fight them solo, their navy alone could bitchslap Iran's, every day, all day.[/QUOTE] Irans Evil evil plan: Oh no, they destroyed one of our whole fleet of carriers. Lets surrender. :downs:
[QUOTE=JohnnyOnFlame;34289890]"OMG ACT OF WAR DECLARE WAR OMGOMG U BADDIES, FLIPPING MIDDLEEAST BADDIES" Have you even stopped to think that getting your carriers near their countries and standing by is not actually a "I'm your friend" statement?[/QUOTE] I'm inclined to agree with this. The US loitering around where ever it wishes is not approved of by many, I suppose. If you find it hard to understand why Iran and any other countries that may act like this, act like they do, then ask yourself this: How would you (US) feel if Russia or China deployed naval battlegroups to the territorial waters of the USA at their own leisure? [QUOTE]Hey Bro, wanna play battleships?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;34289007]Wait, seriously? Also, that doesn't change:[/QUOTE] All of this came from one side. If memory serves I believe the shit he was complaining about was generally stuff that was done to mimic the actions of other US hardware. Like revealing the locations of red units was a result of UAV's and shutting down air defense systems was because they were advancing the scenario to one where they had destroy the air defense system. It was all a very odd wargame. So much was actual movement, and large swaths existed solely on paper/computer screens. The idea ultimately though was that letting him do whatever he wanted didn't prove to accurately reflect reality. So instead they decided to test a bunch of different scenarios. It is sorta like running an experiment in that you need to run a bunch of individual tests to test each variable rather than a few that test a bunch of variables at once. If you test a bunch of variables at once, then you have no means of determining which variable was the important one in that selection. [editline]19th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=doonbugie2;34291632]They can be detected with radar. S-400 could probably kill it and so could fighter jets.[/QUOTE] Australian F-15's inside[I] cannon[/I] range couldn't convince their systems to lock onto the F-22. Very few S-400 units even exist though. They are still new tech for Russia.
You don't need a massive quantity if you spread them out. Australian F-15's must suck, citation needed.
Like I said earlier, Iran [I]might[/I] have ICBMs/superweapons and [I]might[/I] wipe out the US armed forces. It isn't impossible. [editline]19th January 2012[/editline] and Iran has pretty advanced AA.
The most Iran could have would be MRBMs or potentially IRBM's.
[QUOTE=Mr.T;34293566]Like I said earlier, Iran [I]might[/I] have ICBMs/superweapons and [I]might[/I] wipe out the US armed forces. It isn't impossible. [editline]19th January 2012[/editline] and Iran has pretty advanced AA.[/QUOTE]Actually, it pretty much is entirely impossible. There is no evidence that Iran has some super weapon (IE: Nuclear Weaponry). It would also be both figurative and literal suicide to bomb their own people.
[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;34293642]Actually, it pretty much is entirely impossible. There is no evidence that Iran has some super weapon (IE: Nuclear Weaponry). It would also be both figurative and literal suicide to bomb their own people.[/QUOTE] Iran is a massive country, a nuke would not be suicide if they launched onto their own terf. They could pass it off as a nuclear test.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;34293460]You don't need a massive quantity if you spread them out. Australian F-15's must suck, citation needed.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/f22-raptor-procurement-events-updated-02908/[/url] “I can’t see the [expletive deleted] thing,” said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, exchange F-15 pilot in the 65th Aggressor Squadron. “It won’t let me put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it visually through the canopy. [Flying against the F-22] annoys the hell out of me.” "Russian radar and missile systems like the SA-20 and S-400 are extending their ranges to hundreds of kilometers, and their missile performance makes it extremely dangerous for non-stealth aircraft to challenge that perimeter. That response range will even make them dangerous to stealthy aircraft, as their VHF radars improve and widen the detection distance for even reduced radar profiles. Fortunately, their positions are more fixed than an aerial opponent’s. All-aspect stealth helps shorten the F-22’s detection range from any angle, which can create gaps in enemy radar coverage, and is especially useful when the Raptor is trying to leave the danger zone. A hyperspectral suite of embedded sensors helps the aircraft map and exploit coverage gaps in real time, as sensor fusion displays the known safe and danger zones. Supercruise reduces detection times further, and shortens any time inadvertently spent in a danger zone. The hope is that these measures will allow the Raptor to get close enough to launch its own weapons first. An AN/APG-77 radar with future software upgrades may even be able to provide final-stage jamming of enemy radars."
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;34293682]Iran is a massive country, a nuke would not be suicide if they launched onto their own terf. They could pass it off as a nuclear test.[/QUOTE] Are you familiar with the term "fallout"? The damage regarding a nuclear detonation falls far beyond ground zero and the initial detonation zone.
[QUOTE=ewitwins;34293829]Are you familiar with the term "fallout"? The damage regarding a nuclear detonation falls far beyond ground zero and the initial detonation zone.[/QUOTE] Not if they detonate when the wind is blowing away from Iran
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;34293864]Not if they detonate when the wind is blowing away from Iran[/QUOTE] It wouldn't end well if it blew into another country.
[QUOTE=GunFox;34293887]It wouldn't end well if it blew into another country.[/QUOTE] Welcome to nuclear war?
[QUOTE=GunFox;34287376]Yeah the part they like to leave out is that he fired more anti ship missiles than were in existence in the US arsenal. He complained a bunch when they said "no, you have limited resources. Here are the constraints" and gave him hardware amounts that matched reality.[/QUOTE] Source?
[quote]and Iran has pretty advanced AA.[/quote] Nope, Russia backed out of the deal of the newer S-300s
[QUOTE=Contag;34294717]Nope, Russia backed out of the deal of the newer S-300s[/QUOTE] Implying Iran cannot make their own?
[QUOTE=ewitwins;34288188]This, basically. They may like to stomp around a lot, wave their flags and test their missiles, but in the end they aren't suicidal.[/QUOTE] And they're only doing those things because if the US had experienced a tenth of the warmongering shit and attacks that Iran has, they would be at war. [editline]20th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=doonbugie2;34294746]Implying Iran cannot make their own?[/QUOTE] What the fuck? No of course they can't make comparable systems when China can't, and the US barely can with their Patriot SAMs
They claim to have reverse engineered S-300's from Belarus.
Ha.
[QUOTE=sam.clarke;34289322]I could honestly see Iran being another Vietnam for America. Seriously underestimating the enemy who'll slowly chip away at the force with guerilla warfare and eventually force them out. Awaiting incoming US shitstorm.[/QUOTE] You realize that Vietnam had jungles right you know, an environment that is damn good for guerrilla warfare
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;34295117]You realize that Vietnam had jungles right you know, an environment that is damn good for guerrilla warfare[/QUOTE] Iran has jungles too. [editline]19th January 2012[/editline] Hint: Its not completely a desert.. it snows in Tehran.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;34295270]Iran has jungles too. [editline]19th January 2012[/editline] Hint: Its not completely a desert.. it snows in Tehran.[/QUOTE] Huh, wow, you're right, they do. I actually didn't know that. Those are some pretty jungles.
[QUOTE=DeEz;34276366]I get the feeling that war is inevitable.[/QUOTE] It is always a matter of time Also, replied to a post on first page just because I could.
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;34295270]Iran has jungles too. [editline]19th January 2012[/editline] Hint: Its not completely a desert.. it snows in Tehran.[/QUOTE] Well it's also not exactly a country with huge amounts of jungle either [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/XHYI0.jpg[/IMG] (got this from Wikipedia)
Yeah but its still a massive amount of area, and Mountains region has alot forested areas too.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.