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

Kyussis said:
They don't want a deal. They want to give the impression that they were willing to negotiate but Iran would not be reasonable leaving the U.S no choice but to have to attack militarily. This is all laid out in the Brookings institute paper, "which path to Persia" published in 2009.
Click to expand...
I don't think they want to attack. Trump recently spoke about maximum pressure not military action.

I don't know why we continue to send Araghchi for negotiations when the US has made its position public and very clear.

 
Persian Gulf said:
I am perplexed by Rubio and Witkoff's push for zero enrichment. It is a non-starter that will close the window of opportunity that currently exists with few prospects of reopening it.

Even if this is a negotiating strategy and the real red line is different, then that should be handled at the negotiating table rather than in public. Negotiating in public is not conducive to success.

Iran has never agreed to completely end enrichment, even temporarily. They know that restarting the enrichment will be extremely costly politically, even if the agreement is broken by the US. This would amount to them giving up their main leverage in return for a promise of a reward down the road.

Not only are they starting with zero trust in the US, they also saw what happened to Hamas. Netanyahu broke the ceasefire agreement after Phase I and faced no consequences from the US for sabotaging Phase II and III. The release of the American hostages was reportedly made in return for promises by the US to press Netanyahu for a ceasefire afterward, but that does not seem to be happening. Instead, Netanyahu is launching a major ground offensive into Gaza.

So the idea that the Iranians would give up their main leverage in the hope that there will be reciprocity down the road assumes a degree of Iranian trust and confidence in the US that frankly has not existed for the past 45 years. Promises of primary sanctions relief do not sufficiently change that picture.

Bottom line - the zero enrichment goal was Bolton and Pompeo's objective precisely because they knew it would lead to war. That remains true today.

Source: Trita Parsi
Click to expand...
The truth is that Iran's true leverage is our current stockpile of uranium, which should be increased and accumulated as much as possible until we reach an agreement.

The Trump administration should pick one:
1. Get the current stockpile of HEU out of Iran
2. Enforce zero enrichment policy for a period of time

I personally think that keeping our current stockpile of HEU inside Iran is far, far more important than the issue of uranium enrichment.
If the US agrees to the stockpile remaining inside Iranian territory, I think a temporary stop in uranium enrichment (3 years) is a pretty good compensation in return for that.
 
ShapurII said:
The truth is that Iran's true leverage is our current stockpile of uranium, which should be increased and accumulated as much as possible until we reach an agreement.

The Trump administration should pick one:
1. Get the current stockpile of HEU out of Iran
2. Enforce zero enrichment policy for a period of time

I personally think that keeping our current stockpile of HEU inside Iran is far, far more important than the issue of uranium enrichment.
If the US agrees to the stockpile remaining inside Iranian territory, I think a temporary stop in uranium enrichment (3 years) is a pretty good compensation in return for that.
Click to expand...
the US will not accept that either

our leverage:

- moving HEU across multiple undeclared sites to make it impossible to destroy. we have to do this BEFORE military strikes. ideally we do it now
- leaving NPT (if snapback is imposed)

not much else
 
Persian Gulf said:
the US will not accept that either

our leverage:

- moving HEU across multiple undeclared sites to make it impossible to destroy. we have to do this BEFORE military strikes. ideally we do it now
- leaving NPT (if snapback is imposed)

not much else
Click to expand...
We can't move even a gram of our enriched uranium without the IAEA noticing that. We should first kick out all IAEA inspectors and turn off all the cameras before we do that. And that is no different from officially leaving the NPT.

We are in a tough situation. And we are in this situation because the regime has chosen not to build nukes.
 
ShapurII said:
We can't move even a gram of our enriched uranium without the IAEA noticing that. We should first kick out all IAEA inspectors and turn off all the cameras before we do that. And that is no different from officially leaving the NPT.

We are in a tough situation. And we are in this situation because the regime has chosen not to build nukes.
Click to expand...
they can notice it, but they can't stop it. and the camera only work inside the facilities.

Shamkhani (I think) mentioned we will move our uranium to dozens of sites if we need to. we can do this overtly (we have to).
 
Iranian FM Araghchi: No matter how much they repeat it, we’ll still continue enrichment.

Responding to the White House press statement calling Iranian enrichment a red line, Iran's FM says, “No matter how much they repeat it, our positions won't change. Our stance is clear: we will continue enrichment."
 
Persian Gulf said:
When Israel goes to war, it doesn't go slowly or to set redlines, it goes all out to overwhelm and DEFEAT the enemy before it has a chance to organise itself

Iran must prepare to sustain multiple unexpected blows simultaneously

missile cities must be decentralised with contingency measures for loss of contact with leadership and unexpected forms of sabotage

EO seeker enables < 10m accuracy but makes missile easier to intercept in late stages

--> use old stockpile of 1000+ Shahab-3 / Ghadr / Rezvan aimed at counter value targets (cities) to deplete ABM interceptor stockpile. no point aiming at empty air fields as Israel will opt to preserve interceptors to protect cities. force them to use their interceptors or sustain huge losses. these missiles have large warheads (500kg+) and high impact velocity and can do serious damage at the right sites even with low CEP.

--> once ABM inventory has been sufficiently degraded, fire 200-300 KS/HQ missiles with EO seekers per day to do real damage and devastate their military industry (IAI, Elbit, MoD, Mossad, IDF HQ, etc), and air bases (100 accurate hits can do SERIOUS damage to even a large air base like Nevatim). can use missiles with penetrator warhead (we saw a model of this recently) and EO seeker to try to take out the hardened F-35 shelters.

--> follow up with strikes against electricity and desalination plants (these are heavily concentrated and large sites and there are not many of them - even with <500m CEP, Sejjil and Emad can be effective against these large targets)

the goal must be to overwhelm Israel with non-stop and well-executed sequential missile barrages to keep them in disarray. ideally all of this would happen in < 7 days before they can bring in reinforcements or get organised.

at the same time, 60% HEU stockpile must be immediately distributed across a number of secret underground sites and weaponised immediately to prevent Israel from resorting to nuclear strikes
Click to expand...

All that is non-existential my brother. Let me correct you here gentle!

An Israeli-Iranian war is not realistic on paper at all outside of tit for tat irrelevant strikes outside of that it is basically hoax.

Also all these strikes for tit and tat does is very very minor limited damaged on both sides to the degree it is almost irrelevant.

It´s not only Israel that goes hard in wars it´s basically everyone that fights a war also an Israeli-Iranian war is not conventionally equal battlefield as there is scale in conventional conflicts. Conventioinal war in the modern era is super tough and most people don´t realize until they are actully caught up in one.

Example Israel has been fighting Gaza a city with little bit under 2 million people that would be equal to like fighting only Tabriz in Iran forget Shiraz, Karaj, Isfahan, Mashdad or Tehren.

In such a conventional engagement would be a one-way ticket they don´t have the manpower to threaten Iran conventionally. You can´t just go head first into a Nation with over 85 million population for a tiny country like Israel.

Currently they have mobilized their last reserve back-ups, took these from the northern theatre and brought them all into Gaza if this wave is beaten down back they have not much to shoot with as Gaza is a tough nut to crack they are stubborn hence the Aid blockade because they can´t seem to move Hamas conventionally and it has become a meatgrinder I was reading an article saying that over 70.000+ IDF are injured and not fit to combat just from the Gaza war and as for the losses they took in KIA it´s around 50.000 and they are experiencing recruitment crisis.

Israel will never fight conventionally an opponent outside of their weightclass and not to forget Israel will never fight Iran they will sit it out. If Iran was to go to war it would most likely be the US or regional nations of it´s same measurement size.

If the US wants an Invasion on Iran they would first start gathering willing alliance and then move into Iran from Iraq but that is the only way. Because without a corridor is there no war.

There is a certain calculations when it comes to conventional conflict and most of the modern once tend to drag out and turn into meatgrinders and opponents have to outlast each other and they all follow the same pattern.

Example: The Syrian war (The Rebels vs SAA, Russia and other miliitias) Lasted for 10 years of none-stop action if we exclude the 4 year ceasefire.

The Russo-Ukrainian war - going into the 4th year soon and many more years to come

The American-Afghan war - Lasted for 20 years and one of the longest wars in human history.

Yemen Civil war - Lasted for 7 years none-stop action and could have gone on for another decade.

Myannmar war - Entering it´s 5th year and this one has atleast another 2 decades left to go

Hamas-Israel war - Entering it´s 2nd year and I predict it will go all the way to 2026 reaching 3 years in total right before the Israeli election

Israel is a tiny land in truth and won´t be a chellenge overrunning it in the future either by anyone who would be the adventurer who wants it.

Tho overrunning Europe conventionally would be a very hard nut to crack if anyone was to attempt and it would even be very very tough for a very very large alliance to do it that includes China, Russia and everyone else because they have industrial base, won´t run out of manpower and can reproduce war material within the war and could take probably 2-3 decades of war to beat them
 
Last edited:
Ali_Baba said:
And only 1 runway was put out of operation, that is the design advantage of such a design for an airbase. ie multi-runway.
Click to expand...
no , ballistic missiles with conventional warheads are useless against military targets
 
Persian Gulf said:
they can notice it, but they can't stop it. and the camera only work inside the facilities.

Shamkhani (I think) mentioned we will move our uranium to dozens of sites if we need to. we can do this overtly (we have to).
Click to expand...
Do not underestimate the intelligence community in the US. The moment they notice that is happening, they will activate all tools at their disposal (satellites, spies within the system, all latent espionage capabilities they have prepared for this day such as Stuxnet and God knows what other hardware and software backdoors they have).

Shamkhani said we would do that in case that they attack us. If you look at the threats of IR officials, it's always about how we will react if they attack us.
The moment we start to move our HEU, the chance of pre-emptive war will be 99.9%. And the regime seems to be avoiding that at all costs, which is a good decision but we should've never reached this point in the first place.

The regime had over 30 years since early 1990s to build a nuke, and they got really close to it, but Khamenei chose to stop our nuclear and ICBM programs and now we are at this point where we badly need deterrence and some real cards for negotiations but the time is running out and we're pinned down. The worst part is that all of this could be easily predicted. They should've used the Biden administration as an opportunity to build and test nukes.
I really wish I was wrong about Khamenei and he was some sort of genius who could play the West, but the truth seems to be completely different. We need a Mirza Reza Kermani to take care of Khamenei and people like Zarif and Rohani. The damage they have done to the country takes a really long time to be fixed.

We can produce copper-gas lasers in Iran. We have had access to laser isotope separation in Iran since the time of the Shah. We have previously done this at Lashkar Abad with success. If the system Khamenei has left us with wasn't so full of spies and treasonous cunts, we must've been able to run a successful covert program for decades.
 
Iran should go nuclear like North Korea and all none sense will stop with going nuclear
  • North Korea went Nuclear and no issue in 2006
There is no substitute for Nuclear Deterrence

Before North Korea detonated a Bomb in testing every one tried to scare North Korea with destruction and chaos

But it is almost 20 years now and North Korea has held the Nuclear Bomb and no one has dared to light up a fire cracker near North Korea

Have you seen anyone try to start a war with North Korea ? Nope
 
Last edited:
Well Nuclear Tech is way forward for Iran

if we look at Ukraine ,the reason why they lost half of country is they gave up nuke in 90's , who came to their rescue in war , no one

They actually had Nuclear weapon but it was exchanged for some trivial asset

Just build it get it over it , and stock pile it
  • 10
  • 25
  • 50

If anyone threatens again , stock pile another 100

There will be lasting peace

North Korea has had it since 2006 not one plane or missile flew into North Korea and never will because they also have 25-50 Submarines
  • Did anyone bomb North Korea - No
  • Did anyone send missile into North Korea - No
  • Did anyone attack foreign minister of Nation - No
  • Did anyone attack oil tanker for iran or kidnap tanker - NO

Look forward to announcement of Iran announcing nuclear Nation
It would be welcomed news in region

Facts on Iran
Since Iraq-Iran war (80's) , Iran has mostly been inactive in direct war
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 1 more.
    • Total: 67 (members: 6, guests: 61)

    Pakistan Defence Latest

    Country Watch Latest

    Latest Posts

    Share this page

    Back
    Top