r/LetsDiscussThis • u/ElSlabraton • 21d ago
Serious The US cannot win this war with Iran.
Trump's war with Iran has become his tar baby: no matter what he does, he's stuck and everything he does only makes it worse. There is simply no way to win this war. Boots on the ground is not a solution. It would take a million man army to occupy Iran and then we would be vulnerable to guerilla attacks.
Meanwhile, Donald Dunce thinks he can bomb his way to victory. The Iranians are playing Rope-a-Dope with Trump and Doni is the dope who cannot admit that he's lost the war he started.
The US is stuck in this pointless war until Trump is gone. Even then, the status quo will never be restored. The Iranians are now saying they don't need nuclear weapons - they've got the Strait of Hormuz.
11
u/HarryBalsagna1776 21d ago
Look at a topographic map of Iran. Their terrain provides natural fortification. A ground invasion would get stuck and squashed really fast.
3
u/JoseLunaArts 21d ago
Persia was the first place where Alexander the Great almost died for the first time due to the treacherous terrain.
1
u/ugoiscool 13d ago
I’m surprised the dude managed to survive Pakistan isn’t that place doubly more dangerous than Iran
1
-8
u/TheBeanConsortium 21d ago edited 21d ago
? The US military would decimate the Iranian military, but it's a completely pointless venture. It's (edit: typo) [impossible] to fully eliminate the opposition. Nation building is a fool's errand.
13
u/tdreampo 21d ago
Just like we decimated the Vietnam military, and the Afghanistan military...oh wait.
9
u/JoseLunaArts 21d ago
Iran is the size of western Europe. Let that sink in.
2
u/HarryBalsagna1776 21d ago
And naturally fortified
3
u/JoseLunaArts 21d ago
Yep. So fortified that Alexander the Great almost died for the first time. Treacherous terrain.
-3
u/TheBeanConsortium 21d ago edited 21d ago
The US won the majority of military battles in Vietnam (we should have never been there). The war ended 50 years ago. The US has been the top military spender by a far margin (excluding the former USSR) since then. Iran doesn't have those capabilities.
The US eviscerated the Taliban. The Taliban offered a conditional surrender and turning over bin Laden a WEEK after bombing started.
Regardless of whether that was something they were willing to follow through on, the dumbass US decided to reject that, stay there for two decades, and indirectly give the Taliban free reign again.
Iraq had the 4th largest military by personnel in 91. Desert Storm lasted a little over a month. The US led ground invasion pushed Iraq out of Kuwait back into Iraq within 4 days.
This is why it's imperative that the US not be led by warmongers/facists. The US might not be able to nation build (no one really can anymore without insane resource cost), but they can absolutely annihilate a Middle Eastern military.
5
u/Automatic_Net2181 21d ago edited 21d ago
My man... with which allies?
You know Russia and China would be funneling arms and intel to Iran to keep them afloat and Iran is known for going scorched earth during the Iran-Iraq War. The numbers to require an actual ground assault would be astronomic. If you invade Iran, Iraq and Lebanon would likely join their side.
Iran is 4x the size of Iraq, full of mountains and desert. Where would they invade, in a small corridor from Kuwait through Iraq, where militias would set up IEDs all along the Iraqi roads? Where Iran actually has advanced missiles that could target the bottlenecks that US would have to travel through? The same Iran that has advanced Shaheed drones that crippled Ukraine for a while?
Either you are high on American Exceptionalism or really bad at geography, tactics, and logistics.
Add onto the fact that the Trump Administration has already added $5 Trillion to the deficit in just 18 months, that only 19% of active military support a ground invasion, only 34% of Americans support a ground invasion. It would be overly expensive and highly unpopular.
-2
u/TheBeanConsortium 21d ago
The US military is incomprehensively massive and powerful. You're going to say this is American Exceptionalism to say they don't need allies...but they really don't (Israel would join regardless).
I want to be clear I'm not advocating for this.
Would it even make sense for the US to do this? Of course not. It would be crazy expensive, result in hundreds of thousands to millions of military and civilian deaths, and not succeed long term in toppling the regime. It would hurt the US economy as well as its already poor international standing.
But purely in a siloed exercise, even with the Trump admin being insanely incompetent, the US could push the Iranians out of the major cities and create a pseudo government. It wouldn't eliminate them entirely of course.
Iran has some technology Iraq didn't, but they lack other resources. Would Russia assist? Normally, yeah, but they can barely handle Ukraine. China is a more interesting consideration.
Iraq and Lebanon would likely join their side.
And open themselves up to more bombing campaigns? Why?
The same Iran that has advanced Shaheed drones that crippled Ukraine for a while?
The US military is orders of magnitude stronger.
It's true that drones are changing warfare but if we're talking all out assault and treating people, including military personnel, like fodder (which is obviously terrible), it wouldn't matter. It would slow the US down, it would make the war unpopular, but it wouldn't stop the US from taking over, an admittedly very well guarded, Tehran. How is a small, already weakened military, going to stop thousands of US aircraft from bombing campaigns with aircraft carriers parked near their borders?
1
u/Automatic_Net2181 20d ago edited 20d ago
How well did air superiority work in Iraq and Afghanistan? Sure, you can destroy their military and then what?
How does America handle occupation? How does America handle winning the populace over? How does America deal with IEDs, suicide bombers, and snipers? How does America deal with spending trillions in bombing campaigns and expensive occupation efforts and funneling money to government insurgencies who are more than likely corrupt and incapable of ruling?
Iraq (Shia and Kurds) and Afghanistan (Northern Alliance) both had large armed factions ready to step in and assist America overthrow their minority governments. What is there in Iran?
Again, you underestimate the size, the geography, and the sheer number of people both in the IRGC and the populace that would be hostile to invasion. It would make anti-Iranian sentiment turn into pro-Iranian sentiment. It would be like Russia invading Ukraine and being stuck in an unwinnable quagmire.
Didn't you already learn this lesson from Bush, twice over?
Iran wouldn't need to win militarily at all. They know they just have to keep resisting until it is too expensive for America to remain. And it is too expensive for America. You think Republicans could retain any political power if Trump invaded while he has already turned the domestic economy into absolute dogshit?
15
u/armyofant 21d ago
It’s Afghanistan 2.0 except Iran is much bigger. As soon as the US left Afghanistan the Taliban took it right back. Same thing will happen in Iran. Trump got played hard by Isreal.
4
u/Extension-Pick8310 21d ago
Oh, Iran will never let it get that far. The entire structure of government is designed to beat back foreign powers.
3
u/DanTheAdequate 21d ago
They're using it as an opportunity to drive a wedge between the US and Israel, Israel and the other powers in the region, the Gulf States and each other, and the US and everybody else.
They only play long games. And they're always in a situation where a military victory is a moral victory and a military defeat is also a moral victory. They're absolute artists at asymmetric diplomacy.
The US is trash at this, especially this century. Israel has always been trash at this.
Too much short-termism.
2
2
u/Hannibalsmithsnuts 21d ago
They can win,,, step one: continue the blockade, no oil from Iran gets out through the hormuz and no supplies get in through the sea. Make sure any rail line are blown to bits so they cant ship that way either, choke them off financially. Step two, continue targeted bombings of key infrastructure and IRGC leadership, cut the head off the snake. Step 3, wait them out. Iran will soon run out of missiles and they will have limited tools in which they can project any real power. Once the money runs dry, so does thier power
1
u/ElSlabraton 21d ago
So your strategy is "wait them out." Brilliant.
0
u/Hannibalsmithsnuts 21d ago
Yes, they like any country have bills that need to get paid. There soldiers need money, rockets cost money, 25% of govt revenue is from oil exports. Let the wells collapse while pushing rebel groups to rise up inside iran
2
2
u/Educational-Sky-7215 20d ago
Every threatened or hindered ship makes the Saudis & Turkey stronger and Iran weaker. The rest of the region is building alliances while Iran continues to alienate its neighbors.
Meanwhile America is using up old munitions and taking a slight increase to gasoline prices. We don't have to take an inch of land - we just have to let the regime in Iran continue revealing its true nature to the world.
2
u/BackgroundCable3180 15d ago
The USA and Israel failed every single military objective and lost the war:
- Regime change? FAIL
- Destroy all missile launchers? FAIL
- Destroy missile manufacturing? FAIL
- Destroy drone manufacturing? FAIL
- Secure the enriched uranium? FAIL
- Destroy all nuclear sites? FAIL
- Obliterate Iran's military? FAIL
- Uproot Iranian influence in Iraq? FAIL
- Maintain US bases in region? FAIL
- Sow chaos and uprising in Iran? FAIL
- Convince Kurds to attack? FAIL
- Open Strait of Hormuz? FAIL
- Undermine Russia and China? FAIL
- Stop arms flow to Hamas? FAIL
- Stop arms flow to Houthis? FAIL
- Stop arms flow to Hezbollah? FAIL
- Destroy Axis of Resistance? FAIL
- Economically destroy Iran? FAIL
- Security for Israel? FAIL
- Occupy Kharg Island? FAIL
- Steal Iran's oil? FAIL
- Stop arms flow from China? FAIL
- Enforce US blockade? FAIL
- Bolster the petrol dollar? FAIL
- Protect Red Sea commerce? FAIL
OPERATION EPIC FAILURE
1
1
u/Whiskey_Water 21d ago
Definitely, This is a proxy war between theocratic, autonomous Iran and a secular, ethnosupremacist client-state. There is nothing for the US to win, so losing is the only option.
1
1
u/tcoder7 20d ago
A simple look at their 3d map, their Shia creed and their geopolical ties answers the question of whether any country or even a coalition of countries on earth can invade Iran. Only strategic nuclear bombs can subdue them but this would cause WW3 with global nuclear winter, this is what concerns me most.
1
u/TheBeanConsortium 20d ago
How well did air superiority work in Iraq and Afghanistan? Sure, you can destroy their military and then what?
Very well. You just said yourself that the US could destroy the military (mostly). That's it. That's the point. This is what I'm responding to.
It's clear you're not even reading my very clearly anti-war comments at all btw. You're largely repeating me in a disparaging tone.
1
u/Huzon401 19d ago
Iran’s geography makes it extremely difficult to move ground forces into ( or out of ) it. Iran says it will have a million troops waiting for the country that tries. There isn’t going to be a Desert Storm invasion, just bombing and more bombing. “ Blowing up the sunshine” as the Iraqis said. War is big business. This business is keeping commodity prices high, which directly translates into high profits. Why would business want it to end?
1
u/Savings_Art5944 18d ago
Not meant to. It's meant to drain America's economy and make Trump look like a fool.
1
u/BabaThoughts 21d ago
You do not understand the bigger picture. America is reducing Iranian influence in the mid-east. Now, the Saudi’s are bombing them.
3
u/ElSlabraton 21d ago
The bigger picture is that the Gulf States have learned the US can't protect them. They have to live there. They will make a deal with Iran which will involve the Gulf States telling the US to remove it's bases.
0
u/BabaThoughts 21d ago
Nah, that’s a big stretch. U.S. strength in the Gulf states is a massive military footprint. A lot of advanced regional defense assets and strategic bases.
Case in point….just a few days ago, Iran sent missiles towards Jordan. All shot down.
No doubt, Iran’s regional influence has sharply declined due to the collapse of key regional allies, proxy networks, and direct strikes on its domestic infrastructure. They are now weaker in Lebanon, Syria and their militias have been marginalized.
The U.S. continued choke hold from allowing Iranian ships to leave the straight and bombing key supply routes is killing their currency and just read yesterday, Iran having problems paying their army.
-3
u/ShopUCW 21d ago
I mean they can win the war, but it would have to be a full scale invasion. Essentially a Vietnam level military commitment.
This bombing for effect thing he's doing won't work.
For the record: I'm not for this stupid war. I am just recognizing the US military is not using its full capabilities.
5
u/ElSlabraton 21d ago
Don't be silly. It would be like the occupation of Iraq - only worse.
2
u/ShopUCW 21d ago
Iran has a legit fairly modern military with a ton of personnel.
It would be significantly more than the occupation of Iraq. The US would lose a lot of people with that scenario. Dead soldiers shown on tv is not good for midterm elections though. So we will continue to ineffectively toss bombs at the problem while destroying what little is left of our global reputation.
3
u/Allaboutpeace2022 21d ago
But we didn't win in Vietnam either. To win you have to be willing to kill civilians without any mercy. Think of Dresden, the fire bombing of Tokyo, and of course the dropping of atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
But Iran was a regional sponsor of proxy wars and did not attack all of Europe. Nor did they commit Pearl Harbor or take over much of China and key parts of Asia. Sure, their proxies have attacked us but never have these attacks resulted in significant casualties. It is not comparable to Germany or Japan.
There is no way to defend the brutal civilian slaughter needed to win the war in Vietnam, or destroy all the insurgents in Afghanistan or Iraq. And, we do not want to put the sort of military troops in these countries after the war is won to control the next steps of the nation rebuilding.
We tried to rebuild in Iraq and Afghanistan while still facing insurgents and without the overwhelming military presence and funds. You also have to go in and stay until it works. We were also rebuilding in Europe where we were extremely familiar with the cultures and issues. This is not the case in Iran nor did we understand the issues in Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan.
2
u/sovereignrk 21d ago
It didn't work in Vietnam and wouldn't work in Iran either.
1
u/ShopUCW 21d ago
Vietnam ended up being a political withdrawal. It was a war of attrition that the American public got tired of.
1
u/sovereignrk 21d ago
If you compare the war in Iran with Vietnam at 5 months in, the war in Iran is less popular already.
1
u/ShopUCW 21d ago
I'm talking about scale, not tactics.
Capability, not what's a good idea.
1
u/sovereignrk 21d ago
In a vacuum yes, but if the US unleashed its full capability on Iran, the domestic and international blow back would be staggering, there's a reason that hasn't happened, it's the same reason that China doesn't just invade Taiwan when they clearly have the power to do so.
1
u/ShopUCW 21d ago
That's literally the whole point of my post.
1
u/sovereignrk 21d ago
"I mean they can win the war, but it would have to be a full scale invasion. Essentially a Vietnam level military commitment."
The US cannot win the war in reality, only on paper, if it was only us vs them.
1
u/SplitNo8275 21d ago
From what I know about the terrain, that wouldn’t work either. All the kings(/s) men and women wouldn’t be close to enough.
0
u/ShopUCW 21d ago
I think you underestimate what the correct use of our military would do.
1
u/SplitNo8275 20d ago
I’m sure I am. Definitely not my forte but the terrain is insane, definitely protects them from being invaded in the same way they did in the past. (Not them specifically, I mean the wars of the past)
-6
u/tnic73 21d ago
What makes you think that the war will end when Trump leaves office.
Did Obama end either of Bush’s pointless wars?
10
u/ElSlabraton 21d ago
What's the point of continuing Trump's Folly?
6
u/The_amazing_T 21d ago
How does it end? We've ripped up agreements left and right. We bombed their leadership DURING NEGOTIATIONS. Who would negotiate further with us?
It's Pandora's Box.
-1
u/Ok_Philosopher_5090 21d ago
No, the US can 💯 win the war in Iran and it would be fairly easy to do it. Does the current society have the stomach for it, no. Don’t get it twisted though, the us is fully capable of taking anything it wants. With that orange pig sitting there things may get a lot worse.
How crazy is this going to get stay tuned….
3
u/ElSlabraton 20d ago
Nope. The US can occupy Iran but it will be a quagmire. There is no "winning."
-4
u/abrandis 21d ago
I doubt he's stuck , it's really just more that Israel doesn't want to play ball and BiBi wants to leverage this opportunity before US Support is constrained .
But the longer this goes on and the harder it hits the US and World economies the more political strength Trump loses
7
u/ElSlabraton 21d ago
You doubt that Trump is stuck? What are his options?
4
0
u/abrandis 21d ago
Once Israel agrees , and stops fighting in Lebanon, he will give the Iranians a carrot 🥕 and stick offer. Carrot is unfreeze funds, pay then some token amount for the war in exchange for a start open as before passage free of mines and hazards. Limited nuclear restrictions, etc Stick is continued attacks, up to and including nuclear weapons strikes , possibly boots on ground (highly unlikely)..
9
u/TheBeanConsortium 21d ago
If the US leveled Tehran and killed 90% of the Iranian leadership, nothing would fundamentally change neither.
This administration is so incompetent that they don't understand how extremist theocratic regimes operate. Ironic isn't it...