Iranian Foreign & Resistance Front Strategy & Operations

[ShapurII]

Iranian state always supported allied groups in different areas on cooperation within the official system with other political groups... if they are not the ruling factors, then they are influential opposition, with ambitions to take place in the government...

Giving various benefits to allied groups, and various punishments, on long-term projections, to unfriendly ones...

Iran will probably redefines the actual axis of resistance concept, but strategy will keep working, because there is no other way to get strong Iranian powerhouse in global terms...

Let's make it very simple. It's been estimated by the US, and one of our parliament members that Iran has spent 20-40 billion dollars in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen since the Arab spring.

Let's assume 30 billion dollars. You are a sanctioned country, cash poor and you live in an extremely unstable region. The unit cost of F-35 is $110M. The unit cost of Sukhoi-57 is $80M. Let's use $100M.

Here's the question:
300 fifth-generation jet fighters at the hands of your own pilots vs. Iran's proxy groups who happen to be Arabs. Which one can ensure Iran's regional influence and national security better?

Discuss.

 

[vmro]

you make some interesting points

but I don't think this is an imperial strategy. it is based on local autonomy and support without control or conditions

Only few things are important for Iran and for everything with the internal state matters is independently controlled by those groups... I mean, even if Iran doesn't intend, they will come to ask for support...

Iranian Plateau as heartland of Iran itself is union of diversity, so model is rooted in Iranian landscape in its nature... But is goddammit hard to project foreign influence on Iranian Plateau, while Iran is easily able to spread own touch, also because of the neighboring landscape...

If Iran is not strong, active and competitive, probably new occupation is near to be...So imperial terminology is not something negative, but must have policy for any serious big nations...I was surprised that on the Middle East term Persian Empire is in derogatory connotation perceived...for me it is not something negative, that why I am using it frequently....

 

[vmro]

Let's make it very simple. It's been estimated by the US, and one of our parliament members that Iran has spent 20-40 billion dollars in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen since the Arab spring.

Let's assume 30 billion dollars. You are a sanctioned country, cash poor and you live in an extremely unstable region. The unit cost of F-35 is $110M. The unit cost of Sukhoi-57 is $80M. Let's use $100M.

Here's the question:
300 fifth-generation jet fighters at the hands of your own pilots vs. Iran's proxy groups who happen to be Arabs. Which one can ensure Iran's regional influence and national security better?

Discuss.

Answer is very simple, Iran couldn't get any potent modern weapons after revolution, while the regime of the Shah followed the path to the semi-colonial status and foriegn ownership over resources.... The reality on the field is dictating steps... Sadam declared bloody panArabian battle with Persian enemy...Of course you will try to get some Arabs to own side...Nothing wrong here...If Iranian opinion is changed and need redefinition, that's also nothing wrong...Nuclear weapons could replace all of the allied groups, but Iran will risk strategic edge...things are never so simple in long-term decisions...

 

[ShapurII]

Answer is very simple, Iran couldn't get any potent modern weapons after revolution, while the regime of the Shah followed the path to the semi-colonial status and foriegn ownership over resources.... The reality on the field is dictating steps... Sadam declared bloody panArabian battle with Persian enemy...Of course you will try to get some Arabs to own side...Nothing wrong here...If Iranian opinion is changed and need redefinition, that's also nothing wrong...Nuclear weapons could replace all of the allied groups, but Iran will risk strategic edge...things are never so simple in long-term decisions...

One could argue, and probably reasonably so, that if we hadn't chosen Israel to be our arch enemy and hadn't tried to encircle it by forming proxy groups around her, if we hadn't taken American diplomats hostage and kept them for 444 days, we would've been able to receive potent modern weapons like Turkey and Saudi Arabia. And Saddam would've never dared to attack if the hostage crisis hadn't happened.

If we had developed actual nuclear capability, we wouldn't have needed any of these groups. In fact, what has forced the US to negotiate with us right now is our highly enriched uranium. Not Hezbollah, Houthies of Yemen or Shiite militias in Iraq. It's hard to see what these proxy groups have achieved for us that nuclear weapons or modern weapons couldn't have achieved in a much more economic way.

 

[vmro]

One could argue, and probably reasonably so, that if we hadn't chosen Israel to be our arch enemy and hadn't tried to encircle it by forming proxy groups around her, if we hadn't taken American diplomats hostage and kept them for 444 days, we would've been able to receive potent modern weapons like Turkey and Saudi Arabia. And Saddam would've never dared to attack if the hostage crisis hadn't happened.

If we had developed actual nuclear capability, we wouldn't have needed any of these groups. In fact, what has forced the US to negotiate with us right now is our highly enriched uranium. Not Hezbollah, Houthies of Yemen or Shiite militias in Iraq. It's hard to see what these proxy groups have achieved for us that nuclear weapons or modern weapons couldn't have achieved in a much more economic way.

Point of the revolution was clear rejection of the western influence and partnership... They never truly valued Iran, and didn't intend to get it... As same as they never valued Russia, despite Russian desire for cooperation...

Winston Churchill had same agenda for Iran as he had for African colonies...After Hari Truman, Iran never had positive administrations...

While Turkey is their portal to the Muslim world, Iran was only golden opportunity for resources... For love two sides are equally important....

 

[Tijani]

I see where you're speaking from but your advice entities severe risk and unless said actors are willing and able to win the ensuing civil war due such an approach then they must wait until the feasibility of the approach has a higher rate success. Ansarallah was able.

@vmro Had a similar exchange of views with @BigMela2onin

 

[ShapurII]

Point of the revolution was clear rejection of the western influence and partnership... They never truly valued Iran, and didn't intend to get it... As same as they never valued Russia, despite Russian desire for cooperation...

Winston Churchill had same agenda for Iran as he had for African colonies...After Hari Truman, Iran never had positive administrations...

While Turkey is their portal to the Muslim world, Iran was only golden opportunity for resources... For love two sides are equally important....

And Russia and China have truly valued Iran, right?

And no, the point of the revolution was never to turn against the US.
It just happened that some radicals who had socialist/marxist ideas mixed with some Islamic elements thought that the US was responsible for all the misery in the world.
Your average Iranian didn't give a flying duck about that. They just wanted the situation to get better.

It is ridiculous to compare Iran under the Shah to an African colony. That's just stupid. Iran was the world's 13th largest economy by GDP in 1979. Even went up to the 11th place in 1980 before the war with Iraq. Way more prosperous than it is now. Way stronger and influential than both Turkey and Saudi Arabia by all means. Turkey and Saudi Arabia could only ever dream of getting where Iran was in 1979. In today's geopolitical terms, Iran was similar to Poland for the West.

 

[tsunset]

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

MQ-9 is very close to be the most shot down drone in the history after Bayraktar

 

[vmro]

And Russia and China have truly valued Iran, right?

And no, the point of the revolution was never to turn against the US.
It just happened that some radicals who had socialist/marxist ideas mixed with some Islamic elements thought that the US was responsible for all the misery in the world.
Your average Iranian didn't give a flying duck about that. They just wanted the situation to get better.

It is ridiculous to compare Iran under the Shah to an African colony. That's just stupid. Iran was the world's 13th largest economy by GDP in 1979. Even went up to the 11th place in 1980 before the war with Iraq. Way more prosperous than it is now. Way stronger and influential than both Turkey and Saudi Arabia by all means. Turkey and Saudi Arabia could only ever dream of getting where Iran was in 1979. In today's geopolitical terms, Iran was similar to Poland for the West.

I just offered some different opinions, that are legit to be discussed... BTW, you are approaching the points with common sense, so don't get me wrong, forum is place to share and shape opinions... cheers...

 

[ShapurII]

I just offered some different opinions, that are legit to be discussed... BTW, you are approaching the points with common sense, so don't get me wrong, forum is place to share and shape opinions... cheers...

No, I am absolutely fine with what you posted. I'm sorry if I came across as rude. It was only one part that I objected to. The rest of your post was very well written and it is very reasonable.

 

[PakAl]

Hamas is responsible for that mistake. They can't declare all out war on Israel without telling anyone and expect Hezbollah to sacrifice Lebanon and IRI to sacrifice Iran in support of their total war on Hamas' timing

From Hamas point of view it wasn't a mistake, Israel killed 100s of innocents Palestinians before Oct 7th and when Hamas had the chance they took revenge. Hamas also knew Saudia UAE were planning on betraying the Palestinians so they did what they had to do. Look at PLO, they stopped fighting against Israel but still Israel has annexed WestBank with settlements surrounding WestBank, Israel also arrests who ever it wants.
The fact is Palestinians know Israel wants to kick them out and everything else is just an excuse, they bully harass kill Palestinians and when someone retaliates Israel starts it's genocide.

 

[Persian Gulf]

From Hamas point of view it wasn't a mistake, Israel killed 100s of innocents Palestinians before Oct 7th and when Hamas had the chance they took revenge. Hamas also knew Saudia UAE were planning on betraying the Palestinians so they did what they had to do. Look at PLO, they stopped fighting against Israel but still Israel has annexed WestBank with settlements surrounding WestBank, Israel also arrests who ever it wants.
The fact is Palestinians know Israel wants to kick them out and everything else is just an excuse, they bully harass kill Palestinians and when someone retaliates Israel starts it's genocide.

I'm not saying their attack was a mistake. I'm saying if they wanted others to join their war, not telling us in advance was a mistake.

 

[PakAl]

Don't conflate issues.

(1) I can understand why Hamas did not give Hezbollah or Iran advance notice of its attack as it wanted total secrecy and the more people it shares the plans with, the more chance of it leaking.

(2) That doesn't change the fact that Hamas cannot expect Iran and Hezbollah to join its all-out war with Israel without notice.

Hamas is not really part of Iranian axis of resistance, but yes they have good political relations due to both being anti Israel. Hizbollah kept on targetting Israel due to pure love for their Palestinians brothers and Hizbollah proved with blood of martyrs. I don't believe Hamas expected Iran to support them, they just simply didn't have any choice as Israel kept on killing their people and kidnapping them.

 

[PakAl]

I'm not saying their attack was a mistake. I'm saying if they wanted others to join their war, not telling us in advance was a mistake.

I dont think they wanted Iran or Hizbollah to join or even expect this. Hamas is independent Palestinian resistance movement, deep down i think they knew Arab GCC will betray them so they just had to target Israel. From a military point of view it looks like a big mistake but when your resisting a Genocidal state, you will harm them whenever you can since they keep killing your people. A long time ago I watched a video on Israeli tactics, they encouraged their farmer tractors to cross in to Syrian territory, Syrian troops kept patience, then fired warning shots and suddenly Israel starts to bomb their positions. Point is Israel bullys, harasses everyone in order to see a reaction and then uses that against them in order to humiliate its opponents.

 

[R2D3]

Iran can keep and expand its axis of resistance to Sudan, Somalia and Libya and also develop nuclear capability.