01 March 2012

The Iranian “Threat”

An estimated 45-50% of Iran’s small, obsolete air force is grounded by lack of spare parts or repairs. Iran’s pilots, who last saw action during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War, have critically little flying time. Iran’s air force lacks modern radars, communications or electronic warfare equipment.
The mainstay of Iran’s air force remains about 60 ancient US-built F-14 naval fighters, F-4 Phantom strike aircraft dating from the Vietnam era, and some old US F-5 trainers. Iran also has a grab bag of some 25 Soviet/Russian Mig-29’s, a similar number of capable SU-24 strike aircraft, and some 20 Chinese outdated F-7 fighters. The US -supplied aircraft all suffer from metal fatigue and are more of a danger to their hapless pilots than an enemy.
Iran’s bathtub navy has a few small frigates and three modern Russian Kilo-class submarines that are effective in shallow coastal waters. Iran’s sizeable numbers of Chinese anti-ship missiles on shore, at sea and carried by aircraft might score a few lucky hits on the mighty US Navy or oil tankers, as could its ample supply of magnetic mines.
But any US assault of Iran, would open by surprise attacks from waves of cruise missiles and stealth aircraft against Iranian air bases, ports and communications hubs. Most of Iran’s air force and navy would be destroyed. Iran’s obsolete air defenses would be put out of action by missile and cyber-warfare attacks.
Iran’s primary method of counter-attacking would consist of commando raids against US bases in the Gulf, Afghanistan, Pakistan and, possibly, on Saudi oil installations. But no such attacks would prove decisive or alter the course of the conflict. Iran would be pounded until its attackers decided to cease fire.

Now, can we dispense with nonsense on stilts that the Republican chickenhawks keep peddling, in regards to grave military threat we face from Iran, and focus instead on things that actually matter, like the economy?


  1. Republicans want us to "do something" about Iran.

    Democrats want us to "to something" about Syria.

    "Something" doesn't have to be invading, bombing campaigns or ship to ship fighting.

    I would be in favor of cutting them out of the international banking system, but we don't control all those other 188 countries. They should be shut out because they are the number one counterfieter of US $100 dollar notes in the world. Any American money that they trade is likely to be fake and all the national banks know it. national banks of small countries in Africa and Asia don't care because fake US money is still better than their own.

  2. "They should be shut out because they are the number one counterfieter of US $100 dollar notes in the world."

    As a proponent of opening the free market to include currencies, I'm going to have to disagree. Really, it's the federal reserve (I guess technically it sould be the treasury) that's the number one counterfeiter of one hundred dollar bills.

    To be honest, I don't really know what else the US can unilaterally do about Iran, other than declare war.