So if Iranian special forces, say, were to double tap Blair in the head ...

[Old Greg]

Thanks for answering, good points well made.

Couldn't figure that one out on your own? Perhaps we need a Cretins' sub-forum where basic questions can be posed in a safe environment without fear of ridicule.

[russell]

Couldn't figure that one out on your own? Perhaps we need a Cretins' sub-forum where basic questions can be posed in a safe environment without fear of ridicule.

I was glad he expressed his opinion, he made good points but does that mean I am wrong? Nope. Also you seemed to be displaying sign 1.

[Moscow Mule]

I don't think they would want to. Iran is a different kettle of fish than Iraq or Afghanistan, they have a very large army and produce their own arms including aircraft and tanks. The ensuing carnage would be politically unpalatable in both countries, and it would be exceedingly expensive and logistically difficult to wage war on the required scale, we would be talking about a Vietnam sized operation, at least 5x the size of the deployment in Afghanistan.

You under estimate the power of cruise missiles. Air superiority over Iran could be achieved quite quickly (less than a month I'd say). It would preferably be done with organic air, air a couple of carrier groups in the Gulf would be extremely vulnerable, so you'd have to get a couple of the locals on-side too.

An invading / occupying force would be bogged down as you say, but if you wanted to bomb them back to the stone age, it could easily be achieved.

Of course, that's all bollocks as invading a country for a single assassination is a totally disproportionate response. What would likely happen is a few diplomats would be expelled, and a few spies knocked off quietly.

[amcdonald]

Most likely Imadinnerjacket would be disppeared both pleasing the yanks and the Iranian mad mullahs

[GreenLabel]

Signs you are arguing with a moron...

Sign 3: You are Incognito. (This is 100%)

So you admit that Incognito is arguing with a moron?

[russell]

So you admit that Incognito is arguing with a moron?

If you don't get the joke, perhaps I need to add another few signs.

[doodab]

You under estimate the power of cruise missiles. Air superiority over Iran could be achieved quite quickly (less than a month I'd say). It would preferably be done with organic air, air a couple of carrier groups in the Gulf would be extremely vulnerable, so you'd have to get a couple of the locals on-side too.

An invading / occupying force would be bogged down as you say, but if you wanted to bomb them back to the stone age, it could easily be achieved.

Of course, that's all bollocks as invading a country for a single assassination is a totally disproportionate response. What would likely happen is a few diplomats would be expelled, and a few spies knocked off quietly.

I am sure air superiority could be achieved but I don't think it would be a formality. We are talking about a country that produces it's own warplanes, helicopters, missiles, radar systems etc. A lot of it is reverse engineered, but they aren't completely reliant on outdated foreign weapons like Iraq was. They have fairly modern air defence systems, including ones that are designed to target cruise missiles.

They also have cruise missiles of their own, as well as submarines, and some fairly high tech anti-ship missiles, so a carrier group in the gulf would be at considerably more risk than during comparable operations against Iraq. If you launched an operation from e.g. Turkey you would likely see tanks and several hundred thousand troops roll over the border, so you would get a large scale ground war whether you wanted it or not. I can't see any of their other neighbors e.g. the Saudis being keen to host the USAF as the Iranians are capable of hitting targets across the whole region and even southern Europe with ballistic missiles.

But as you say, it's all bollocks because no one is going to start a war.