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

[Ali_Baba]

Air power does not become irrelevant just because Iran prioritizes missiles. Modern warfare is layered, not single domain. Even countries that invest heavily in ballistic and cruise missiles still require air superiority, ISR, electronic warfare, and defensive counter air capabilities. Missiles can deter and strike, but they cannot provide persistent airspace control, dynamic targeting, close air support, or real time battle management.

The claim that air forces “factor zero” is not supported by recent conflicts. In Ukraine for example, both sides rely heavily on air defense and airpower because neither side has achieved air superiority. In the Middle East, Israel’s dominance is built on integrated airpower, not missiles . Even Russia, despite hypersonic systems like Kinzhal, continues to invest heavily in tactical aviation because missiles cannot replace sustained air operations.

As for hypersonic and advanced stand off weapons “piercing layered ADs,” interception rates are mixed and heavily disputed in every conflict. No modern air defense system guarantees 100 percent interception, but that does not make air forces obsolete. The US, China, Russia, and even smaller powers continue to modernize fighter fleets alongside missile forces for a reason: missiles provide strategic deterrence, air forces provide operational flexibility and battlefield control.

If anything, relying only on missiles creates strategic rigidity. A balanced force structurre, including airpower, air defense, and missiles, is what serious military planers pursue. There is no modern example of a major power abandoning air capability in favor of missiles alone.

1000% agree with this assessment. Relying on only 1 domain is militarily flawed. Iran needs an effective air force, and IADS to protect the missile bases and their entrances so that the missiles can then be used for offensive operations.

We saw how freely Israel was able to progressively take down the entrances to these bases, and thereby reducing firing rates of missiles near the end of the 12 day war.

Had Iran had a proper air force, the rate at which Israel would have been able to reduce the firing capability of Iran itself would have been reduced too, thereby providing more offensive power for longer, and for damage on Israel. Iran may well have been able to go after the air refuelling tankers over Iraq, pushing back the logistics chain and force Israel to have to devote more aircraft to protect the air-refuellers, which would have reduced how many aircraft could be used for offensive actions. The fact that the Israeli aircraft flew to attack Iran with no air-air missiles because they had no threat to face, shows the folly of Iran's approach.

Any modern country needs an effective IADS, an effective air force, and then an effective offensive capability. The offensive capability itself needs active protection so that it can be utilised for it's required military outcomes.

Having an IADS and air force, are also complimentary and balanced. The fact that Iran has started to procure Su-35s shows that they have finally realised the error of their ways in relying solely on missiles as a defence policy, and we can assume that Iran will rebuild its air force over the years.

Iran cannot win against NATO/Israel with Ballistic missiles alone, OR with ballistic missiles + IADS + Fighters. It can however raise the deterrence level so high, that the cost of executing a war itself and the associated fallout and are not worth the effort relative to the outcome they want. That is the point of deterrence, to raise it such that it is not a viable option even with possibility of victory.

 

[HAIDER]

Will Trump, Vance, Hegseth, Rubio, Ratcliffe accept that they openly lied in 2025 when they claimed destroying "entire nuclear program" of IRI with half a tonne HEU and thousands of centrifuges included ? they are now U-turn claiming that Iran is 1 week away from having fission devices which means WGU has been enriched and deviced, they are also demanding the same HEU to be shipped off to 3rd country. More funny is the IRI stance last year that nodded to Trump about the claims and is now resisting handing over HEU. Are these two fooling public as a tag team?

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

same old song ...

 

[Meengla]

Pakistan itself is not threat to them but as part of trilateral cooperation between SA, Turkiye suddenly becomes grave one due his nuclear capabilities

I was gone for many hours since last evening (NYC time) and spent time watching smart people like Trita Parsi and Max Blumenthal on Judge Napilatano; combined, they two are the best resource on understading USA-Iran-Israel geopolitics. Some take away:
1) There is indeed a nascent formation of two distinct alliances with Turkey-KSA-Egypt on one side vs Israel-UAE on the other side; though Pakistan wasn't mentioned by those two, other sources mention Pakistan because Pakistan is definitely on KSA's side.
2) Both analysts said J.D.Vance is not fully behind this escalation against Iran but he is basically being shut out by Israel-firsters like the White House Chief of Staff who, incidentally, was Netanyahu's campaign person for his 2020 elections!!
3) Even if round of escalation defuses, there will be another one, for as long as the two people sit in the offices offices (Netan and Trump).
4) Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey see Israel as bigger threat now than they saw Iran once and hence #1.

#2: I have said it many times here: This is Trump's personal war, driven for Netanyahu, and not America's war! If today Trump has a heart attack and Vance takes over then we will likely see a de-escalation. So much so for 'democracy'!!

 

[BHAN85]

War is coming in next 2 days ....

... since 2008

Interesting year 2008, it reveals what is really behind USA intentions towards Iran war.

2008 financial crisis year.

From USA point of view: Iran war is about world economy things, and it's not about security things.

The decline of USA as world empire, in favor of China, it makes something good for USA interests to just create mayhem in all Eurasia economies.

In fact, USA tariffs is another face of same coin. And something like Trump tariffs it could be foreseen in the beginning of 2010 decade when Iran war plans became serious.

USA is not interested in Eurasia order anymore. And they become a rogue empire, with all kind of lies to hide real intentions (lies like the concerns about Iran nuclear program)

 

[Meengla]

damn u guys have that curse too .

You have it too? I thought it had started with us first?

Outside of the South Asian languages, Persian is the most dominant part of Urdu language. Recently saw a video where youngens from several Islamic countries were comparing shared words; I think the countries were: Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Uzbekistan, Pakistan and 1-2 more and the Pakistani guy and the Iranianian lady had more words shared with each other than with others.

 

[Hassan Al-Somal]

1000% agree with this assessment. Relying on only 1 domain is militarily flawed. Iran needs an effective air force, and IADS to protect the missile bases and their entrances so that the missiles can then be used for offensive operations.

But how can Iran have this air force if no one - especially Russia and China - is willing to sell their latest fighter jets to Iran? Russia under Putin cares more about Israel than Iran and drags its feet to sell its latest fighter jets and ADS to Iran. You virtually have a guy (Putin) who has stated in the past that he will help the effort to "rebuild the Solomon Temple" in Jerusalem. Do you seriously expect that man to come to Iran's aid against Israel?

China from foreign policy perspective is good at supporting Iran, but it is most likely the sanctions, imposed on Iran by the West, are what keeps Chinese firms from committing significant arms purchases with Iran.

Another thing that worries the Chinese is the Iranian system where one of the factions (the Reformist camp) in the political establishment is viewed as pro-Western. It is kind of a difficult to fully back a country who is 4 or 5 years down the road could be supporting your adversary. Nevertheless, China buys 90% of Iranian oil, keeps the Iranian economy afloat, and is beating the sanctions by bypassing the US dollar and the SWIFT system when buying Iranian oil.

Bottom line, it is not easy for Iran to acquire this air force that people keep emphasizing. First, the crippling sanctions handicap Iran from committing significant resources to buying expensive fighter jets. Second, they used to have solid indigenous fighter jet development program, but this program has been under the Iranian air force, and most of the funding has been going to IRGC-led asymmetric programs such as missiles, drones, and air defense. And as the 12-day war has shown, the IRGC has done well with that limited funding.

We saw how freely Israel was able to progressively take down the entrances to these bases, and thereby reducing firing rates of missiles near the end of the 12 day war.

Had Iran had a proper air force, the rate at which Israel would have been able to reduce the firing capability of Iran itself would have been reduced too, thereby providing more offensive power for longer, and for damage on Israel. Iran may well have been able to go after the air refuelling tankers over Iraq, pushing back the logistics chain and force Israel to have to devote more aircraft to protect the air-refuellers, which would have reduced how many aircraft could be used for offensive actions. The fact that the Israeli aircraft flew to attack Iran with no air-air missiles because they had no threat to face, shows the folly of Iran's approach.

Any modern country needs an effective IADS, an effective air force, and then an effective offensive capability. The offensive capability itself needs active protection so that it can be utilised for it's required military outcomes.

Having an IADS and air force, are also complimentary and balanced. The fact that Iran has started to procure Su-35s shows that they have finally realised the error of their ways in relying solely on missiles as a defence policy, and we can assume that Iran will rebuild its air force over the years.

 

[Meengla]

So, Iran can turn this into a nightmare by not stopping at 14 days,

Max Blumenthal is a very credible analyst and I pay attention to every word he says, just like I pay attention to Trita Parsi.
Per Max, Trump would like to wrap up very quickly (I think he used, 'Sugar High' from the Venezuela success grabbing Maduro) and for that, per Max, tactical nukes to subdue Iran could be used to wrap up in first two days of the conflict.
I don't rule that out at all. Not at all.

 

[Tehrani021]

Max Blumenthal is a very credible analyst and I pay attention to every word he says, just like I pay attention to Trita Parsi.
Per Max, Trump would like to wrap up very quickly (I think he used, 'Sugar High' from the Venezuela success grabbing Maduro) and for that, per Max, tactical nukes to subdue Iran could be used to wrap up in first two days of the conflict.
I don't rule that out at all. Not at all.

If US uses tactical nukes on Iran then Iran would have the moral justification and obligation to develop nukes. You really have no idea of Iranian resolve in the face WMDs, because that would be a massive assumption on your part if you think Iran would stop fighting if US used tactical nukes in two days. US would have to wipe Iran off the map for a nuke strategy to work which is a can of worms that even Trump wouldn't open.

 

[ShapurII]

Outside of the South Asian languages, Persian is the most dominant part of Urdu language. Recently saw a video where youngens from several Islamic countries were comparing shared words; I think the countries were: Iran, Turkey, Egypt, Uzbekistan, Pakistan and 1-2 more and the Pakistani guy and the Iranianian lady had more words shared with each other than with others.

Many Pakistanis here fail to understand that a powerful, prosperous, secular Iran is in fact pretty good for Pakistan as well. Most Pakistanis are focusing on Iran's current threats against Israel, but first of all, these threats have never been materialized in action, and secondly, it has enabled Israel to normalize its relations with Arabs and Turks while a secular Iran would most likely impact Arab-Israel relations negatively.

First of all, there is no doubt that Pakistanis are closer to Iranians than Turkish or Saudi people. An average Pakistani would fit right in in many provinces of Iran and Urdu and Pashto are both Iranic languages.

Secondly, a secular Iran means that Pakistan, by extension, would get rid of religious superstitions through cultural exchange. Iranian music used to be quite famous in neighboring countries during the time of the Shah. Our cinema after the Islamic Republic also produced some really good movies like The Children of Heaven, The Color of Paradise, etc. If Iran becomes secular, surely it will have an impact on our neighboring countries as well, particularly other Iranic people.

Thirdly, a prosperous Iran means that Pakistanis can come to Iran to work with good salaries. Unlike the Emirates or Arab countries where Arab citizens and Europeans are offered the most prestigious jobs with the highest salaries, while people from Southern Asia are usually offered low salaries only to survive, there has never been such discrimination in Iran even during the time of the Shah or the Islamic Republic.

Fourthly, Iran can guarantee Pakistan's energy needs. If the Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline had been launched in 2015, not only Pakistan would've had access to cheap energy a decade ago, but India would've been reliant on Pakistan for energy, effectively reducing India-Pakistan tensions due to energy reliance.

So, it's not just black and white. A secular Iran is definitely a positive development for our neighbors that share similar culture with us.

 

[ShapurII]

If US uses tactical nukes on Iran then Iran would have the moral justification and obligation to develop nukes. You really have no idea of Iranian resolve in the face WMDs, because that would be a massive assumption on your part if you think Iran would stop fighting if US used tactical nukes in two days. US would have to wipe Iran off the map for a nuke strategy to work which is a can of worms that even Trump wouldn't open.

If the US uses tactical nukes on Iran, you won't be given a chance to develop nukes to retaliate.

Japan was nuked twice with weapons that were considered strategic at the time. Look at Japan now. Did they ever even think of retaliation against the US? No.

 

[the saint]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Any truth into it?

 

[Meengla]

If US uses tactical nukes on Iran then Iran would have the moral justification and obligation to develop nukes. You really have no idea of Iranian resolve in the face WMDs, because that would be a massive assumption on your part if you think Iran would stop fighting if US used tactical nukes in two days. US would have to wipe Iran off the map for a nuke strategy to work which is a can of worms that even Trump wouldn't open.

It is not my assumption or even Max's; he is saying that Trump would like to wrap up in two days by using tactical nukes.
BTW, the impact of nukes--the psychological impact, that is--is not be underestimated; they would not be just nukes destroying some military targets but as 'warning' to escalate such strikes further; study Hiroshima and Nagasaki for that. And who is going to stop Trump from doing so?? It is a jungle out there!

Many Pakistanis here fail to understand that a powerful, prosperous, secular Iran is in fact pretty good for Pakistan as well. Most Pakistanis are focusing on Iran's current threats against Israel, but first of all, these threats have never been materialized in action, and secondly, it has enabled Israel to normalize its relations with Arabs and Turks while a secular Iran would most likely impact Arab-Israel relations negatively.

I don't think Pakistanis care who rules Iran as long as it is not too much in India or Israel's orbit. There were good relations between Pakistan and Iran under Shah and even since 1979, relations have not been too bad and Pakistan's border posture on Iran tells that.

 

[Ali_Baba]

Max Blumenthal is a very credible analyst and I pay attention to every word he says, just like I pay attention to Trita Parsi.
Per Max, Trump would like to wrap up very quickly (I think he used, 'Sugar High' from the Venezuela success grabbing Maduro) and for that, per Max, tactical nukes to subdue Iran could be used to wrap up in first two days of the conflict.
I don't rule that out at all. Not at all.

Donald Trump is most certainly stupid enough to order a tactical nuclear strike on some of the heavily defended missile bases, but the problem for the USA is that if he does, then that gives the green light to Russia to start using them in Ukraine.

 

[Meengla]

Donald Trump is most certainly stupid enough to order a tactical nuclear strike on some of the heavily defended missile bases, but the problem for the USA is that if he does, then that gives the green light to Russia to start using them in Ukraine.

Right but do the Americans care for the Ukrainian dead?? No.

 

[Meengla]

Here is the Max video I keep referring to above.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies