Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

This situation arose because Iran's leadership panicked and agreed to a ceasefire in just 12 days last June.
At that time, most direct attacks were carried out by the IDF, and attacks on oil infrastructure were also restrained.
Therefore, Iran was fully capable of enduring a prolonged conflict, and it presented an excellent opportunity to learn how to fight against Western air forces.
Yemen, having faced years of bombing by the Saudi military—far weaker than the USAF—has transformed into a nation far more resilient than Iran, enabling it to repel US attacks.
Iran, however, cowardly missed its only chance to build immunity by agreeing to a ceasefire. It now faces the worst-case scenario: relentless destruction of its homeland by massive US airstrikes.
This may sound cruel to the Iranian people, but if Iran has any chance of defending itself, it must absolutely refuse to agree to a ceasefire this time.
No matter the blows it suffers, it must never agree to a ceasefire at any halfway point.
Iraq, which surrendered in the Gulf War, subsequently saw 500,000 to 1 million people killed over the following decade or more, its territory fragmented and dismantled, and its oil fields seized.
If Iran does not wish to suffer the same fate, its leaders must make the ruthless decision to accept sacrifice. That is the reality of the international community: a lawless jungle.
If they lack that resolve, they should have surrendered unconditionally to the United States ten years ago.
 
If Iran plans a counter attack instead of a preemptive strike to Usa build up which(counterattack) by the way is a wiser choice(because trump would declare war if Iran attacks first like ww2 Japan and more usa assets will be at risk to be taken out making them more vulnurable as well in a counter attack scenario) there should be several things that needs to be done to absorb the initial potential usa-israel attack with minimal damage for a more effective-deterrant Iranian counter attack. It provides a false sense of security to install more ads radars and ballistic missiles but they are installed at static positions that can be detected by spy satellites and targeted thereafter easily by saturation attacks. Ballistic missile tels detected at the shores would be initial usa-israel targets for example.

- There should be many false targets to reduce the effect of initial attack for a more effective counter attack. wooden copies(recent technology is inflatable balloons that emulate the infrared signature as well but wooden models are better for imitating sharp edges and against visual detection by spy satellites or sar equipped planes) of missile launcher tels towed around rapidly. As well as replicas of radars and ads. False rf emitter decoys can be used with mock ups of ads.
If they stay at the same place they will be filtered out as decoys so these decoys should be carried around rapidly as well. Silo mock ups can be static but can be on many places they are wooden launch doors only.

-Ads are both visible to spy satellites and elint. So they should be moved around very frequently as well. They are not detected real time and attacked from longer ranges immediately but they still need to move to different places very rapidly just like Ukraine does against Ruaf saturation attacks.

Negotiations can be going positively but it shouldnt provide a false sense of security even after a deal is set with usa. israel can still attack anytime. Also last june usa also joined the attack after israel. So alert condition should continue with varying degrees even after the negotiations end.
 
Last edited:
**Wall Street Journal report:** Trump was briefed on a series of military courses of action in Iran — all of them designed to inflict maximum damage on the regime and its regional proxies in the Middle East.

The options include a proposal for an operation that would result in the elimination of numerous political and military leaders with the aim of toppling the regime, or a limited military operation option that would focus on targets related to the nuclear program and the ballistic missile program.

The military force the United States is currently concentrating is the largest it has deployed in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Ian did not do a single thing to protect itself since 12 day war. No new air defences, no new jets. Just ballistic missiles.
 
Is Iran stronger than it was in June war last year? In that war most of its military leadership was killed, many mil infrastructure was destroyed, Iran was launching only handful of missiles in the later part of the battle, and remember that was mostly Israel on the offensive, but this time its US+Israel, which raises the threat exponentially.
 
OldTwilight said:
a none nuclear power can not conduct preemptive attack to a nuclear power ...
Click to expand...

A nuclear war will end the world as we know it... not only for the direct and initial victims but the rest of the world as well. It will end the sadistic parasitic project in the middle east for good. Crash global economy and trade for good and for a long-term.
 
What the US has consistently feared is that provoking Iran might lead to a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz or nuclear armament.
Iran abandonment of that option has eliminated the deterrent.
The US can now bomb Iran at will.
Consider this: if Iran were to openly withdraw from the NPT or blockade the Strait of Hormuz, the US options would be limited.
The tactic of launching a surprise attack to reduce Tehran to rubble and then unilaterally declare victory becomes meaningless.
The US would be forced to persuade Iran to rejoin the NPT or physically secure the Strait of Hormuz's safety, undertaking an operation a hundred times more difficult.
Khamenei is a rare fool.
No nuclear weapons, no Strait of Hormuz blockade.
This effectively grants Trump a license to bomb Iran whenever he pleases and declare victory whenever he chooses.
 
vizier said:
If Iran plans a counter attack instead of a preemptive strike to Usa build up which(counterattack) by the way is a wiser choice(because trump would declare war if Iran attacks first like ww2 Japan and more usa assets will be at risk to be taken out making them more vulnurable as well in a counter attack scenario) there should be several things that needs to be done to absorb the initial potential usa-israel attack with minimal damage for a more effective-deterrant Iranian counter attack. It provides a false sense of security to install more ads radars and ballistic missiles but they are installed at static positions that can be detected by spy satellites and targeted thereafter easily by saturation attacks. Ballistic missile tels detected at the shores would be initial usa-israel targets for example.

- There should be many false targets to reduce the effect of initial attack for a more effective counter attack. wooden copies(recent technology is inflatable balloons that emulate the infrared signature as well but wooden models are better for imitating sharp edges and against visual detection by spy satellites or sar equipped planes) of missile launcher tels towed around rapidly. As well as replicas of radars and ads. False rf emitter decoys can be used with mock ups of ads.
If they stay at the same place they will be filtered out as decoys so these decoys should be carried around rapidly as well. Silo mock ups can be static but can be on many places they are wooden launch doors only.

-Ads are both visible to spy satellites and elint. So they should be moved around very frequently as well. They are not detected real time and attacked from longer ranges immediately but they still need to move to different places very rapidly just like Ukraine does against Ruaf saturation attacks.

Negotiations can be going positively but it shouldnt provide a false sense of security even after a deal is set with usa. israel can still attack anytime. Also last june usa also joined the attack after israel. So alert condition should continue with varying degrees even after the negotiations end.
Click to expand...

A preemptive strike from Iran would be foolish... however, preparing and getting themselves enough time for when and where would be wise!

However at this point anything Iran does would be considered defensive in nature and conduct. Since it is US going to the other side of the world to threaten, kill and maim Iranians as declared enemies. The "negotiations" themselves cannot be taken seriously when it was US along with zion who sabotaged the first bout with a known and proven liar... who aimed to decapitate the state in its first go... openly incited violence and take over of government buildings and most importantly walked away from JCPOA while killing Solemani!
In the whole history of US-Iran ties ... it has been Iran on the receiving end... having regimes changed ... getting royalty installed and having one sitting idly as a bench warmer just in case....

In fact the things are clear... zion wants to balkanize Iran... even if baby king may be in play at the beginning...
 
shapurzolaktaf said:
Recent reports regarding the use of Tomahawk cruise missiles, specifically during a December 2025 strike in Nigeria, have indicated an "alarming" failure-to-explode rate, with estimates ranging from 25% to 33%.
Click to expand...
if we had competent air defences able to intercept > 50% of basic subsonic cruise missiles like the Tomahawk that would be quite useful, but it seems we do not
 
To date, Iran has hesitated to be decisive, it has spent far too much time trying to calibrate it's responses and it has "threatened" actions, that it did not follow up on and that reduced Iran's deterrence posture and perceptions of Iran's responses. In short, Iran has become 'manageable', and that is a problem for Iran now.

If war is imposed on Iran, it needs to be sure that it does not fall into the trap of this issue, and becomes more decisive, faster in its decision making and actions, more proactive and firm in its response and it follows through on what it says it will do.

I hope it does not come to this, but right now it is difficult to see otherwise.
 
Last edited:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.




Some thoughts on the current situation with Iran:1. Deployment prior to this week was, as I pointed out at the time, consistent with a show of force to underline a negotiating position rather than a serious operation. Although that has begun to change, US aerial forces in the Middle East remain inferior in strength to the Israeli Air Force that quickly ran out of steam in combat last year. Any air campaign would not be a step-change from that of the Twelve Days' War.2. The departure of huge numbers of tankers to the Middle East, without concomitant massive fighter deployments, indicates that the USAF intends to base its strike aircraft out of the easy range of Iranian short-range missiles on the other side of the Middle East or even farther afield in Cyprus, Diego Garcia, etc. This will dramatically curtail sortie generation compared to aircraft flying out of Al Udied in Qatar and other bases on the Gulf - established for exactly this confrontation but now perfectly useless given the number of short-range missiles the Iranians have pointed at them.3. USN forces in the region have a realistic total throw-weight of 300 to 400 badly out of date Tomahawk missiles, which is grossly inadequate for a sustained strike campaign against Iran. Recall that the USN fired almost eighty in a single strike against Syrian WMD targets a decade ago and most were shot down. The USN task force realistically has two or three missile salvos against defended point targets before its magazines run dry.4. Iranian offensive and defensive capabilities are formidable and have been overtly bolstered by the Chinese in recent weeks. Any attacks on Iranian soil will need to be - as in the Twelve Days' War - conducted from a limited pool of standoff munitions. The Israelis, who are expected to join any strikes, certainly have not replenished their own stockpiles. This dramatically curtails the combat endurance of the coalition forces.5. The Chinese and Russians are feeding intelligence to Iran. This likely allowed them to stymie a US bomber strike last month prior to latest force buildup. The Iranians can be expected to have an excellent picture of US and Israeli moves at the tactical level.6. In the aftermath of the Twelve Days' War and the insurrection in Iran last month, Mossad's attack network is likely a spent force and cannot be expected to contribute meaningfully to the war effort.7. Iran retains significant proxy capability across the region. Iranian proxies in Iraq and Yemen are practically untouched. Hezbollah in Lebanon sat out the Twelve Days' War but can be expected to join in a regional Götterdämmerung. 8. No significant US ground forces have deployed, and the Iranians killed or arrested all of their compradors two weeks ago. Ergo, there is no route to actual regime change in Iran. There's no Delcy Rodriguez and Vladimir Padrino interested in a coup d'etat by proxy and able to elaborately set conditions for it to happen.9. US facilities in the Gulf and the VERY vulnerable US embassy in Iraq (and the somewhat less vulnerable US embassy in Beirut) remain un-evacuated at this time. Evacuation of those facilities is a short-notice indicator of war - as we saw last month when bombers were likely airborne before being called off. 10. The TACO trade is real. Trump talks a big game until the markets start to believe him, whereupon he reliably beats a hasty retreat and pivots to a new distraction from the Epstein Files. The moral hazard here is that Trump has done this so many times that by this point global markets don't actually take him seriously and so they're reacting late and weak to what are objectively very concerning developments. With that said oil prices are - finally - starting to rise.US deployments to the Middle East thus far are to give Trump a credible military option if he decides to use force against Iran - prior deployments were non-credible and the Iranians would have taken them as such - but talk that war is necessarily imminent or that this force is actually adequate to the absolutely colossal task at hand (Iran is a country of 90 million and a geographic fortress) is irresponsible. As ever, use strict informational hygiene and consider source bias and attempts to box in US decision-making through planted reporting from controlled outlets and journalists. Netanyahu desperately wants a war (fought by the US on his behalf, of course) but Trump probably wants a deal - and it's noteworthy that Iranian reports suggest one may be developing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 9 more.
    • Total: 226 (members: 29, guests: 197)

    Pakistan Defence Latest

    Country Watch Latest

    Latest Posts

    Share this page

    Back
    Top