PERSIAN SCARE: New war games in the Straight of Hormuz - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Sottalytober;34086689]Canada could easily win against Iran. Let them come instead of going to them. Can't come from the north or south, only two seas which could easily be defended. Australia's an island but half of its really shitty desert. Anyway, I think Irans trying to test their boundaries. It's a dog without a leash seeing how far it can go into the highway before it gets hit[/QUOTE] Have you ever been to australia? Most of it's fucking impenetrable bushland, if anyone tried to invade with any large force they'd be totally fucked.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;34086552]we fucked [img]http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/oo87/Snauhi/Iranian%20exercises/navy2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I've always wanted one of those.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;34086552]we fucked [img]http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/oo87/Snauhi/Iranian%20exercises/navy2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] Isn't this one of those Super battleships that can sink a entire aircraft carrier fleet?

WTF again?

[QUOTE=DiCiSpitfire;34094009]Isn't this one of those Super battleships that can sink a entire aircraft carrier fleet?[/QUOTE] Well credit to them, they do pack a fair amount of firepower [img]http://i364.photobucket.com/albums/oo87/Snauhi/Iranian%20exercises/navy15.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=ewitwins;34086793]Aren't the Iranians still flying the F-15's we sold to the Shaah?[/QUOTE] Not F-15's, F-14's. Which would be kind of scary against carrier jets the US would be sending up, good thing the US pilots get more flight hours.

[QUOTE=WubWubWompWomp;34093238]Hahaha lolwat. Australia (being a coalition force) has up to date artillery, aircraft, and all other military tech. I'm not sure about Iran's but let's just say they do too. If both countries could mobilize artillery and aircraft they'd pretty much be at a stalemate, which means infantry comes into play. The Australian infantry, not to mention the SASR and the commandos, is on me of the best trained armies in the world, and best equipped. The SASR and the commandos both are some of the best counter-terrorism/unconventional warfare units in the world (kimda subjective, but whatever). I think a conflict between Iran and Australia would be long drawn out and shitty for everyone, but no one would get kicked to the curb. This doesn't even take into account that the USA, China (because of trade relations (not sure about China's relationship with Iran, though)) which means, if anyone, Iran would get annihilated.[/QUOTE] You lack a sufficient navy to launch an amphibious assault. Without the USN, your entire military is restricted to defense. I say that not as an insult, as it makes way more sense to let your war mongering cousins in the states pay for the stupidly expensive naval vessels, but simply as a statement of fact. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Royal_Australian_Navy_ships[/url] You have a number of frigates and amphibious landing vessels. Both of which allow you to bring some equipment across the ocean and land it without the aid of a port, which is way more than most nations can claim, but you don't have any carriers. Without carriers you can't defend the fleet or launch the necessary air strikes ahead of the operation. Basically the boats would show up and eventually would be overwhelmed by Iranian aircraft. Even assuming you could hold out, as your frigates are well equipped to defend against aircraft and missiles, you wouldn't have the equipment to establish and defend a beachhead. Neither one of you could actually do anything to the other using conventional military forces. The USN is one of a very small number of navies that can actually carry out aggressive actions overseas. [editline]7th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=RAG Frag;34095152]Not F-15's, F-14's. Which would be kind of scary against carrier jets the US would be sending up, good thing the US pilots get more flight hours.[/QUOTE] F-14A's. These are not the F-14D's that actually had all the upgrades which would make them scary. The A variants had engine problems and sport ridiculously old avionics (1970's) at this point. A nasty opponent, but my money would remain on the USN super hornets.

As the falklands war confirmed, your fleet needs constant air cover. Imagine if Britain waltzed into that without a single aircraft? We would have surely lost in no time.

[QUOTE=GunFox;34095821]You lack a sufficient navy to launch an amphibious assault. Without the USN, your entire military is restricted to defense. I say that not as an insult, as it makes way more sense to let your war mongering cousins in the states pay for the stupidly expensive naval vessels, but simply as a statement of fact. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_Royal_Australian_Navy_ships[/url] You have a number of frigates and amphibious landing vessels. Both of which allow you to bring some equipment across the ocean and land it without the aid of a port, which is way more than most nations can claim, but you don't have any carriers. Without carriers you can't defend the fleet or launch the necessary air strikes ahead of the operation. Basically the boats would show up and eventually would be overwhelmed by Iranian aircraft. Even assuming you could hold out, as your frigates are well equipped to defend against aircraft and missiles, you wouldn't have the equipment to establish and defend a beachhead. Neither one of you could actually do anything to the other using conventional military forces. The USN is one of a very small number of navies that can actually carry out aggressive actions overseas.[/QUOTE] You could probably send the SASR and commandos in through Afghanistan to harass the Iranians we're two years off having ~100 F-35s so one would hope they'd maintain air superiority pretty bloody quickly you'd probably see Australia decimate iranian infrastructure over the medium term, considering the relative economic might backing the ADF we already spend roughly 3x more than the Iranians do, which corresponds to the difference in GDP of course this is just a bit of wanking, because Australia is a regional naval power and otherwise a large complementary asset to American operations

I think gunfox is right in saying many nations like Australia, while advanced lack the power projection.

I'm pretty sure that's actually the case for every state except for the US

Yes.

thank you United States for protecting Western interests and footing the bill

[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/timeline/f47e7399ef8d4cadff5cda575d0a05e6.png[/IMG] :V Too bad we're dumb and fight wars in the middle east for no discernible reason. [editline]7th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Contag;34096416]thank you United States for protecting Western interests and footing the bill[/QUOTE] welcome mate

[QUOTE=Contag;34096416]thank you United States for protecting Western interests and footing the bill[/QUOTE] Not if Ron Paul gets elected :P

[QUOTE=DanTehMan;34096469]Not if Ron Paul gets elected :P[/QUOTE] I'm not too concerned about that. I don't think he has factored in the possible consequences of laying off tens of thousands of the world's best trained killers

[QUOTE=Contag;34096416]thank you United States for protecting Western interests and footing the bill[/QUOTE] wait, sorry but budge in but.. you're pro-western interests?

[QUOTE=belgiumtoast;34096575]wait, sorry but budge in but.. you're pro-western interests?[/QUOTE] Well, I live in the West, and while I think we have a lot of problems, and we do lots of terrible stuff, we're not the only ones. And we're a lot less bad than everywhere else.

[QUOTE=Contag;34096619]Well, I live in the West, and while I think we have a lot of problems, and we do lots of terrible stuff, we're not the only ones. And we're a lot less bad than everywhere else.[/QUOTE] Hahaha

when I say pro-western interests, I'm ignoring all the shitbag dictators because I genuinely believe we'd be able to reap benefits from democratic and free states anyhow [editline]8th January 2012[/editline] If the west wasn't so powerful I wouldn't be able to criticize it so much because I'd probably be starving or working for pennies

[QUOTE=Contag;34096643]when I say pro-western interests, I'm ignoring all the shitbag dictators because I genuinely believe we'd be able to reap benefits from democratic and free states anyhow [editline]8th January 2012[/editline] If the west wasn't so powerful I wouldn't be able to criticize it so much because I'd probably be starving or working for pennies[/QUOTE] Democracy really isn't at the core of pro-west interests. Todays pro-west priority is to secure oil no matter the cost. [editline]7th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=dbk21894;34096439][IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/timeline/f47e7399ef8d4cadff5cda575d0a05e6.png[/IMG] :V Too bad we're dumb and fight wars in the middle east for no discernible reason. [editline]7th January 2012[/editline] welcome mate[/QUOTE] Enjoy the debt :)

[QUOTE=belgiumtoast;34096669]Democracy really isn't at the core of pro-west interests. Todays pro-west priority is to secure oil no matter the cost. [editline]7th January 2012[/editline] Enjoy the debt :)[/QUOTE] That is a small fraction of our 15 Trillion dollar GDP. We can afford ~700 Billion dollars of spending on our military, its the increased spending that the wars cause that we can't afford.

[QUOTE=dbk21894;34096936]That is a small fraction of our 15 Trillion dollar GDP. We can afford ~700 Billion dollars of spending on our military, its the increased spending that the wars cause that we can't afford.[/QUOTE] The point of a over funded military is to fight a war, kind of a oxymoronic statement?

[QUOTE=Medevilae;34097059]The US doesn't even buy oil from Iran. They've refused to trade with us since 07, plus we've imposed sanctions recently in light of their nuclear program.[/QUOTE] That's all pretty irrelevant and doesn't change the fact its about oil and other resources.

[QUOTE=ripple3000;34086788]No shit but that isn't what you said.[/QUOTE] "Even though it was a typo, what it came out as is something I can use to my advantage therefore you meant it lol!!!" Your presence in this thread is a piss-off and you argue like a child about pointless shit that you started with childish words to begin with. [QUOTE=ripple3000;34086610] But.. Canadian military > Australian military any day.[/QUOTE] Augh STOP.

What's funny is that the picture in the OP is of F-14 jets that we sold to the Iranians to begin with. We're the reason they're in this position.

[QUOTE=Contag;34096369]I'm pretty sure that's actually the case for every state except for the US[/QUOTE] Yes but France is the only one with a carrier excluding the USN (Britain disbanded theirs). [QUOTE=Contag;34096416]thank you United States for protecting Western interests and footing the bill[/QUOTE] Damn right. It's sad that people, like the Europeans for example, have taken this for granted.

The only nations in the world that could establish a beach head in a foreign nation that is a fairly strong power, would be the US, France and UK (the UK is at a disadvantage because they converted there last aircraft carrier to a helicopter carrier but would stand a good chance with there new type 45 destroyer's), hopefully this should change in the future when they finally finish building the 2 new 63,000 ton super carriers and get the F-35's to go with them.

[QUOTE=james0724;34105156]The only nations in the world that could establish a beach head in a foreign nation that is a fairly strong power, would be the US, France and UK (the UK is at a disadvantage because they converted there last aircraft carrier to a helicopter carrier but would stand a good chance with there new type 45 destroyer's), hopefully this should change in the future when they finally finish building the 2 new 63,000 ton super carriers and get the F-35's to go with them.[/QUOTE] Are you kidding? China would use its' citizens to build warships and fire babies out of cannons. We're fucked.