Iranian Foreign & Resistance Front Strategy & Operations

[Xerxes22]

Once again my predictions come true.

Now Israel is openly leveling Iranian consulates (a war crime).

Would any other major military power tolerate their embassy/consulate being blown up by missiles? Only Iran it seems…

But don’t worry, users on here will tell you that this is a sign of weakness and that Iran has the enemy right where it wants them.

Even Joseph Goebbels would laugh at that level of propaganda

They have been parroting this nonsense for many years. From the time soleimani was killed. One of my favourite brothers in here did the same parroting and continued with it using words such as "Strategy", "Long term success", celebrating some kind of "RARE SPECIES OF VICTORY". This nonsense needs to stop. I love the iranian leadership but I am gunna say they have lacked some serious balls so far. This is weakness beyond belief. There is no strategic positive in this whatsoever. Strategic gain would be to announce Nuclear deterrence and start going on the offensive immediately, whilst the paper tiger west is busy sh*tting against the Russians

 

[Persian Gulf]

Nukes won’t suddenly make everyone afraid to attack you or retaliate. Especially when they know you are afraid of direct conflict to begin with.

Nukes will provide Iran more confidence and room to respond to these attacks conventionally

Wait till they Sink Beshad.

That’s probably next on the list.

We are quite lucky the USA didn't do that yet

What can Iran do to prevent Israel trying to sink the Behshad? And what should Iran's response be if they do? I would like to think the IRI leadership has already deeply prepared for these scenarios but I am not confident

 

[Xerxes22]

Just now

Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman said Iran, while reserving its rights to take countermeasures, will decide on the type of reaction against Israel. Iranian ambassador to Damascus said the response will be “proportionate” and at the “right time and place”.

Its never proportional because the responses never establishes any deterrence whatsoever. Khamenei needs to know better with all honesty. What kind of leadership is this? The military hierarchy must put pressure on the Islamic establishment to retaliate with a really proportionate attack. Im sick of this nonsense.

 

[Immortals]

This is why the target is key has to be different than before and Iran must be confident in its success.

IMO target and level a military base in the Golan, that is probably easiest to hit.

Hamas went into a secretive IDF base on Oct 7th and killed everyone.

HZ has routinely been attacking Israeli military installations.

Houthis have fired BMs at Israeli territory for first time since Saddam did in PG War 1.


So other axis groups already did what you suggested. So Iran doing it isn’t some crazy event especially after all the sabotages, assassinations, and 200+ airstrikes they have conducted on Iran.

At this point you either target the bases where the F-35’s are being kept (the weapon used for the attack) or you go for a high ranking military decapitation strike. Anything less will not deter Israel.

Yes a skirmish might happen because of this and even a prolonged war. But if you think for one second that you bomb an Israeli base and suddenly Israel stops attacking Iran, that is never going to happen. Israel will keep attacking Iran until there is war or conditions change that make such attacks no longer politically tolerable.

 

[Persian Gulf]

At this point you either target the bases where the F-35’s are being kept (the weapon used for the attack) or you go for a high ranking military decapitation strike. Anything less will not deter Israel.

Yes a skirmish might happen because of this and even a prolonged war. But if you think for one second that you bomb an Israeli base and suddenly Israel stops attacking Iran, that is never going to happen. Israel will keep attacking Iran until there is war or conditions change that make such attacks no longer politically tolerable.

the bolded parts appear to be contradictory. the first part suggests that targeting F-35 bases will deter Israel, but the second suggests that bombing an Israeli base will not deter Israel.

 

[Immortals]

Nukes will provide Iran more confidence and room to respond to these attacks conventionally

No, nukes prevent confidence that your opponent won’t evade your territory. Which again Iran isn’t afraid of a war with Israel or US where boots on the ground happen. That is highly unlikely maybe even borderline impossible outside of WW3.

Instead, Iran is worried about a war where US/Israel will use air power to destroy its economic assets, infrastructure, and military capability all without landing a single troop inside Iran.

In that scenario, nukes are useless for Iran. It will still have to respond via conventional means. Iran is the least likely country to use nuclear weapons of all the current nuclear weapons powers.

Nukes were made to prevent your territory from falling to your enemy in an era where boots on the ground was how war was conducted. With the emergence of 5th Gen. Fighters, BMs, Hypersonic CMs, Drones, Stealth Bombers, etc you can do major damage to your opponent without ever escalating to full blown war.

We are quite lucky the USA didn't do that yet

What can Iran do to prevent Israel trying to sink the Behshad? And what should Iran's response be if they do? I would like to think the IRI leadership has already deeply prepared for these scenarios but I am not confident

 

[Persian Gulf]

No, nukes prevent confidence that your opponent won’t evade your territory. Which again Iran isn’t afraid of a war with Israel or US where boots on the ground happen. That is highly unlikely maybe even borderline impossible outside of WW3.

Instead, Iran is worried about a war where US/Israel will use air power to destroy its economic assets, infrastructure, and military capability all without landing a single troop inside Iran.

In that scenario, nukes are useless for Iran. It will still have to respond via conventional means. Iran is the least likely country to use nuclear weapons of all the current nuclear weapons powers.

that is not the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons even by the established nuclear powers such as Russia

any attack that can impact the country's strategic defences or its ability to function can be grounds for a nuclear retaliation

 

[Immortals]

the bolded parts appear to be contradictory. the first part suggests that targeting F-35 bases will deter Israel, but the second suggests that bombing an Israeli base will not deter Israel.

To clarify:

F-35 is a high ticket item directly related to Israeli defense doctrine.

A random Israeli base is just that….a random Israeli base. Hamas has done it and HZ has done it. Last I checked both are still getting attacked.

Israel isn’t afraid of Iran striking its soil —it welcomes it. Because then it can expand its target list to include hundreds of targets across the Middle East that Iran uses (Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Naval assets).

By the way, what some of you don’t know is, during this shadow war, Israel has been attacking Iranian tankers and naval vessels on their journey to Syria. In fact it reached a point where Russia started escorting Iranian ships once they reached the Mediterranean.

 

[Persian Gulf]

To clarify:

F-35 is a high ticket item directly related to Israeli defense doctrine.

A random Israeli base is just that….a random Israeli base. Hamas has done it and HZ has done it. Last I checked both are still getting attacked.

thank you for clarifying. attacking F-35 bases in Israel would certainly lead to war

Israel isn’t afraid of Iran striking its soil —it welcomes it. Because then it can expand its target list to include hundreds of targets across the Middle East that Iran uses (Sudan, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Naval assets).

if this was the case, why hasn't Israel just directly struck Iran and started the war itself?

Does Israel have no targets of value that it has to worry about being targeted in response?

By the way, what some of you don’t know is, during this shadow war, Israel has been attacking Iranian tankers and naval vessels on their journey to Syria. In fact it reached a point where Russia started escorting Iranian ships once they reached the Mediterranean.

we know

they also disabled the last ship that Behshad replaced, I forgot its name

is your point that Israel is capable of doing huge amounts more damage to Iran than vice versa?

 

[jauk]

My worry is not about our military capability. It’s the political will, or, more precisely, the lack of it within our government to act decisively.

I’m not concerned. The IRI has acted coldly, unemotionally, and correctly. No doubt painful for us.

 

[guangdongt]

Will attacking a military target re-establish deterrence? Or will Iran attempt to re-establish that via taking out the same number of Israeli Diplomats ? Iran may do some tactical strike for the pressure at home for now, but will they feel the need to make sure Israel feels it personally? That is the question. Deterrence has been lost. It has been for some while now as none of Irans responses to date have been equivalent.. ie when was the last israeli general that was killed in response etc?

Can you imagine India trying to take out a Pakistani general/admiral etc ?! Can you imagine what Pakistan will do in response? India knows that - that is why they dont attact at that level in

That's because India fundamentally cannot be compared to Israel，India wants to be the hegemon of South Asia but is unwilling to wholeheartedly serve the US led camp. India cannot match Israel's importance to the Western camp

 

[mangekyo]

No, nukes prevent confidence that your opponent won’t evade your territory. Which again Iran isn’t afraid of a war with Israel or US where boots on the ground happen. That is highly unlikely maybe even borderline impossible outside of WW3.

Instead, Iran is worried about a war where US/Israel will use air power to destroy its economic assets, infrastructure, and military capability all without landing a single troop inside Iran.

In that scenario, nukes are useless for Iran. It will still have to respond via conventional means. Iran is the least likely country to use nuclear weapons of all the current nuclear weapons powers.

Nukes were made to prevent your territory from falling to your enemy in an era where boots on the ground was how war was conducted. With the emergence of 5th Gen. Fighters, BMs, Hypersonic CMs, Drones, Stealth Bombers, etc you can do major damage to your opponent without ever escalating to full blown war.

I am starting to belive that pursuing nukes was only for deterrence against regime change. Based on the threat of distributing nuclear weapons widely if the regime is threatened.

 

[Xerxes22]

I strongly disagree with the point that having nuclear deterrence would not change much as @Immortals have put it. Nuclear deterrence will change the approach of IRI itself, let alone its adversaries. It will give it more options and room to maneuver. I am pretty sure the Iranians are aware that in a conventional exchange Israel would be no match with Iran, as most experts agree.

Having nukes would give Iran more space to operate and be absolutely decisive with its Ballistic missiles arsenal as well as mobilization activities across the whole region. Having nuclear deterrence will make the state feel more secure and they will have the room to act boldly. Nukes will change Iranian military itself more than it would effect Israel but that change is all we need.

 

[Immortals]

that is not the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons even by the established nuclear powers such as Russia

Oh yeah what a great example Russia—for my point.

The country that has its energy facilties attacked, it’s land invaded, it’s capital attacked by drones, it’s cities attacked, lost 100,000+ soldiers and 100B+ in economic damages and 400B+ in liquid assets frozen around the world……yet not even a tatical nuke fired against a much weaker country with no nukes to boot let alone one that can ensure MAD.

You know why? Because US/NATO said if you use even a single low yield nuke in Ukraine we will target all Russian assets in Ukraine. Then you will have to decide between WW3 or backing down.

any attack that can impact the country's strategic defences or its ability to function can be grounds for a nuclear retaliation

Oh come on. This establishment has zero spine. Saddam gassed Iranian troops and civilians and Iran didn’t do anything. Taliban beheaded Iranian diplomats and their children and Iran didn’t do anything.

Now suddenly Iran going to become trigger nuke happy? You forget Israel has 100 nukes? You fire one and every major Iranian city will see nuclear retilation strike. You think this establishment has that kind of courage? Let’s be real. You are starting to sound like Pakistan members on here with their fantasy ideas.

Nukes are worthless in a skirmish. Ukraine-Russo war has shown that to be quiet clear. And again Ukraine doesn’t even have nukes. Now imagine the game theory when your opponent (Israel) also has nukes and the delivery vehicle (Jericho 3). Its a lose-lose scenario.

Even Israel said during the Arab wars when they feared they would be overrun there was internal debate if they should use nuclear weapons to save Jerusalem from falling into Arab hands. They couldn’t agree even in those dark hours.

That’s what nukes are for—to prevent a Berlin 1945 when enemy is at the gates and all hope is lost.

Even Saddam (2003) or Assad didn’t use their massive chemical arsenals to save themselves when their backs were against the wall.

The threshold to use nuclear weapons is extremely extremely high.

 

[Xerxes22]

Oh yeah what a great example Russia—for my point.

The country that has its energy facilties attacked, it’s land invaded, it’s capital attacked by drones, it’s cities attacked, lost 100,000+ soldiers and 100B+ in economic damages and 400B+ in liquid assets frozen around the world……yet not even a tatical nuke fired against a much weaker country with no nukes to boot let alone one that can ensure MAD.

You know why? Because US/NATO said if you use even a single low yield nuke in Ukraine we will target all Russian assets in Ukraine. Then you will have to decide between WW3 or backing down.



Oh come on. This establishment has zero spine. Saddam gassed Iranian troops and civilians and Iran didn’t do anything. Taliban beheaded Iranian diplomats and their children and Iran didn’t do anything.

Now suddenly Iran going to become trigger nuke happy? You forget Israel has 100 nukes? You fire one and every major Iranian city will see nuclear retilation strike. You think this establishment has that kind of courage? Let’s be real. You are starting to sound like Pakistan members on here with their fantasy ideas.

Nukes are worthless in a skirmish. Ukraine-Russo war has shown that to be quiet clear. And again Ukraine doesn’t even have nukes. Now imagine the game theory when your opponent (Israel) also has nukes and the delivery vehicle (Jericho 3). Its a lose-lose scenario.

Even Israel said during the Arab wars when they feared they would be overrun there was internal debate if they should use nuclear weapons to save Jerusalem from falling into Arab hands. They couldn’t agree even in those dark hours.

That’s what nukes are for—to prevent a Berlin 1945 when enemy is at the gates and all hope is lost.

Even Saddam (2003) or Assad didn’t use their massive chemical arsenals to save themselves when their backs were against the wall.

The threshold to use nuclear weapons is extremely extremely high.

Congratulations , you now represent the opposite spectrum of madness as salar haq. Your points make no sense at all .