Iran Shows Off Its Mlitary Might

[GetEmGamecocks]

This stuff scares me!

Iran shows off its military might
By Pam O'Toole
BBC News, Tehran

Iran has been displaying its military power at a ceremony to mark the country's annual army day.

Speaking at the parade, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran was the most powerful nation in the world.

The country's strength was such that no major power would dare to challenge its security, he said.

Official media claimed the ceremony included the largest ever show of aerial strength, with a fly past by almost 200 aircraft.

There was also a huge military parade, with missiles displayed on trucks.

Confidence

Top officials have made much of Iran's achievements in being able to maintain and manufacture sophisticated military aircraft or other equipment despite US sanctions against it.

President Ahmadinejad expressed his confidence in the strength of the country's armed forces.

He said Iran was now so powerful that "none of the current world powers are capable of, and have the courage to, threaten the Iranian nation and its interests and security".

The president stressed that Iran's armed forces were purely defensive, but warned that they would respond strongly to any act of aggression.

The parade comes amid continuing tension between Iran and the West over Tehran's controversial nuclear programme.

It also follows a recent war of words between Iran and Israel, in which an Iranian deputy army commander said that if Israel attacked Iran, it would be eliminated from the global arena.

[Cjssax]

nuke em!!!!!!!!!

[D^3]

Smoke and mirrors. Iraq had some pretty fancy parades too, back in the day.

Don't get me wrong, Iran is no slouch... but there's a reason Ahmadinejad is boasting about his mighty military. He's worried Iran might get invaded next. He also knows thats a war he would lose. All this is just a strategic play to make the world believe it is not worth it to attack them.

[geechee]

This stuff scares me!

You live in the most powerful nation ever known to mankind. If you are scared, its because you are allowing them to scare you. They show that stuff off so that the world can see that they have it, which means in actuality they are scared of us. You don't see this country ever showing off all those weapons in a parade. We don't need to because everyone in the world is quite aware of the fact that we have them and in great numbers. Iran would never attack us with a first strike.

[GetEmGamecocks]

I'm not actually scared of Iran. I'm scared that they are going to piss off the US government too much, or Israel, since we are buddy-buddy. And when that happens, the world suffers. It's hard to put into words actually, what I think.

[WarEagle73]

Scared of Iran? The best Iran could do in their near decade long war against the Iraqi army was a stalemate. This is the same Iraqi army that we went through (to quote G. Patton) "like $hit through a goose". Their air force consists of aircraft that would be swatted from the sky like flies by our own air assets, they're armored forces are equipped with tanks that have as much a chance of surviving more than a few seconds against our armor as I do of scoring with Sara Evans. And their navy* is as about as impressive as the collection of toy boats my son has in his little toy box in his bathroom. A conventional war between us and Iran would resemble that between Germany & Poland in 1939.


* Iran at one time had what was considered by the regional standards of the time a somewhat potentially threatening navy until Ronald Reagan ordered it completely wiped out following the Marine Barracks bombing in Beirut. Now they have what resembles a glorified BASS fishing tournament.

[crawfish]

Iran's only defense is intimidation and terrior tactics. WE73 is right. An actual defense they do not have. Their little fellow that is their "leader" would be just like Sadum hid out in a hole if attacked by the USA.

[zartan]

the Turks could kick their ass up and down the street. i only care about Iran if they get the bomb.

[D^3]

Smoke and mirrors. Iraq had some pretty fancy parades too, back in the day.

Don't get me wrong, Iran is no slouch... but there's a reason Ahmadinejad is boasting about his mighty military. He's worried Iran might get invaded next. He also knows thats a war he would lose. All this is just a strategic play to make the world believe it is not worth it to attack them.

Need I quote myself?

[gatorunvrsty]

Conventionally, they're absolutely non-threatening to any but the smallest nations. But, recent assessments have warned that our prolonged deployment in Iraq has made us extremely vulnerable, and ill-equipped to respond to any threat should a real need arise. In other words, if we absolutely had to deploy elsewhere for a real threat (not the Iraq kind), it'd be impossible. Of course, as many have pointed out, the mere knowledge of our nuclear capabilities will keep everyone at bay... nobody in their right mind would attack the U.S..

Here's what's scary: That a$$hole isn't in his right mind. And, at some point they will be a nuclear nation; and their "government" is made up of just the kind of lunatics that might want to see what one of their new toys will do. Frankly, I'm surprised Pakistan hasn't already given one a whirl; but, obviously, the nation they have a problem with (India) is also nuclear, so the threat of retaliation has likely kept that from happening. North Korea would be a good bet to be the first (or second, depending on how you look at it) to throw some fallout around... of course, they'd be obliterated by their neighbors, too.

[geechee]

Iran's only defense is intimidation and terrior tactics. WE73 is right. An actual defense they do not have. Their little fellow that is their "leader" would be just like Sadum hid out in a hole if attacked by the USA.

It would be a huge mistake to confuse Iran with Iraq or to think that Iran would react to an attack on their country the way the Iraqi people did.

[D^3]

Conventionally, they're absolutely non-threatening to any but the smallest nations. But, recent assessments have warned that our prolonged deployment in Iraq has made us extremely vulnerable, and ill-equipped to respond to any threat should a real need arise. In other words, if we absolutely had to deploy elsewhere for a real threat (not the Iraq kind), it'd be impossible.
.


Actually, if Iran were to arise as a threat, we would be at an advantage; we already have established bases of operation and have a very strong presence in the area. There would be no time wasted deploying forces; they are already there.

As far as North Korea... I think they are extremely overrated as a potential threat. Collective security being what it is, there isn't a single country they can attack without drawing responses from every major member of the UN. That includes the US, Britain, Russia, France, etc. The UN may not agree with our mission in Iraq, but any aggression on North Korea's part would certainly be met with formidable opposition from the Security Council. That was originally the Security Council's main function; to prevent any rogue states from threatening international security (i.e. Germany WWII). I think you'll find that if NK was to test the waters, they'd find them very unhospitable, and for once you'd see a unified response from the Security Council.

[crawfish]

It would be a huge mistake to confuse Iran with Iraq or to think that Iran would react to an attack on their country the way the Iraqi people did.

I understand exactly who Iran is. But again, what are they going to use other than terriorist attacks against us? As WE73 stated, their defense weaponary is still years behind. Until they get "the big one", they will be like Iraq. Would they give a better fight than Iraq? Yeah, probably so, but the out come would eventually be the same. A nuke in their crazy hands would change everything though. IMO I think we should have nuturalized Iran a long time ago.

[D^3]

It would be a huge mistake to confuse Iran with Iraq or to think that Iran would react to an attack on their country the way the Iraqi people did.

True, but keep in mind that Iraq was strong enough militarily to keep Iran at bay... and vice versa. They offset each other. So while Iraq's quick defeat may not be a mirrror image of what would happen to Iran, it is an indicator of how their military might stacks up against the likes of the United States. There's really no standing in our way.

[D^3]

IMO I think we should have nuturalized Iran a long time ago.


Well, we didn't before because Iraq and Iran took care of each other. They rivaled each other militarily, but each one kept the other in check.

We took care of that balance. :glare:


But there is also at this time no justification for "neutralizing" them as you suggest. Preventative wars are a dangerous thing. You'll never have the support of the international community and as such, if you ever need assistance, you're up the creek without a paddle. Another is that you will likely be condemned for the invasion by states who do not believe you had enough justification for impinging on the sovereignty of another nation. You can never justify the operation to the international community. If there was significant cause to believe that Iran was an imminent threat to international security (and by significant cause I mean a hell of a lot more than we had with Iraq) then you might have a case. But "neutralizing" them out of fear that they MIGHT eventually be a problem is the last thing you want to do.

[AUviaDC101]

the very minute Iran wants to PROVE itself. About 12 SMART missles will find their way to President whatever's doorstep...

...