Would America beat Iran?

Question

The question begs answers!

Remember:

The US can't beat a tiny, Iraqi rebel uprise, do you think the US can beat a large-scale military force with 52,000 Mujahid Suicide Bombers signed up?

The Iranians are ready to smoke a few marines and they won't be playing any games like Saddam in 1991.

Do you think the weak, worn-out, old US Army can beat a mighty, young Iran?

EXTRA FOR THE AMERICANS:

I only created this thread to see how much the Americans would scream like monkeys over how strong they are!

F*cking sick Animals!

And the Iraqi death toll is 9 to 1, not because you can kill insurgents but because you kill women and children.

Good DAY!

Answer 1

Yes, but they'd have to really mean it and not care about what the news is reporting.

Answer 2

Define "Beat".

There is no way that Iraq or Iran is going to take over US
territory or run our government. On that level, they haven't
beaten the US.

However, yes, the US has failed to complete their military
objectives in Iraq as they are using techniques remarkably similar
to those used in Vietnam - the absence of victory leaves defeat.

However: NO GUERILLA WARFARE EVER WINS
OUTRIGHT.

They only win by the larger party getting disgusted and leaving.
Did North Vietnam "win" the Vietnamese war? Well, they
have a country that is quickly becoming capitalistic in order
to compete with other countries that want to do business with
the US.

However, they control the government of Vietnam - so, yes,
they won.

From that point of view, I can well imagine Iran doing the
same thing. However, 52000 suicide bombers is no match
for 10 or so hydrogen bombs.

It really is a matter of who is willing to do what kind of damage.

The best that either the Iraqis or the Iranians can hope for
is that the Americans go home.

Interestingly, North Korea is using the same provocative
techniques to try to get American aid. They call us agressors
but really really don't want us to leave the table and ignore
them.

Answer 3

The US can easily go in, topple the government and leave the place in shambles. Probably simply by killing multiple heads of state. The only problem in Iraq is that we are trying to help it become a peaceful democracy. Democracy yes. Peaceful no.

Seriously, if we have a nuclear situation on our hands, if civilians are going to die, it will be Irans. Normally, civilians are kept at a distance when western countries fight. But, in a World War situation, you just have to win. Punches aren't pulled, and whoever decides not to get out of the way may very well die, civilain or not.

Besides we wouldn't be going it alone.

ADDITION: The hubris in asking this question is incredible. The massive wound to Iran would be outrageous. The US military may be a very marginal police force, but they are definetly good at destroying things.

I just hope, that if it come to it, we have the heart to enter on time rather than late. We don't need another WW2 massacre of civilians going on.

If russian was to enter in for Iran, the threat would just be incredible. I'm not sure anyone would survive such a scenario.

Germany still bears the scars of its facism. I don't see how you can be so fanatical to lose sight of reality so much that this seems like a good idea.

Answer 4

The American military would eat Iran for breakfast!
Their only real threat is the Amercian media and fickle public opinion.

I joined the USMC in '79 during the Hostage Crisis specifically to go over there kick a** & take names. The politicians just didn't give us the chance. We wouldn't have all this lingering crap going on today if they did.
The American public is generally weak and lazy and ignorant of how the rest of the world works. But let them get a tase of your kind over here, and they will let the military loose in a fashion that would leave not a man / building standing in your sandy, sorry land.

Answer 5

you should use the web and examine the fatality count number for Iraq, BTW it truly is decrease than your huge style. in case you've faith that Iran is able to defeating the U. S., then you definately have not really considered the themes. First, if it were to be a conflict on the floor then they could withstand because the Taliban have. yet we may likely merely bypass in with overwhelming technologies/military superiority and take out communications, infrastructure, etc. and they could more effective than likely capitulate after going without the comforts of existence extremely rapidly. Or they would not. yet once a society is inextricably tied to ordinary products from bathroom paper to bathe ingredients, there's a level the position the electorate will call for them back. it truly is a complicated difficulty, yet no longer unsolvable.

Answer 6

Yes they would, if it was a full-out war. It's not that we can't "beat" Iraq, it's that we don't want to. Trying to beat a small group of people while not hurting anyone else is very complicated. The US government is only letting the army provide enough force to keep it somewhat under control. If they gave the generals all out green-light, Iraq would be a parking lot in a week.

Answer 7

Let me see, AK-47s against AR-4s. AR-4s would win. The U.S.A has better training, weaponry, and allies. I don't know where you are getting your info from but you need to get some new info. We are beating them, we are just trying to do it with as few casulaties as possible. Plus you are thinking of ground forces. Watch futureweapons, it comes on the science channel, that is what we already have on the battlefield. Suicide bombers are useless when they are vaporized still in their beds. America hasn't gone all out because of wimps crying that we shouldn't be in iraq. Because the press only publishes what the military screws up.

Answer 8

yes...america defeated the Iraqi army. its the insurgency we're having problems with.

america has the top military on the face of this planet.

the USA is on the left, Iran is on the right.

$518,100,000,000 Yearly Military Expenditure $4,300,000,000
18 Minimum Enlistment Age 18
67,742,879 Available Military Manpower 18,319,545
471,500 Active Military Personnel 325,000
220,000 Frontline Personnel 240,000
18,169 Aircraft 954
29,920 Armor 2,380
5,178 Artillery 4,594
35,324 Missile Defense Systems 1,760
2,441 Infantry Support Systems 12,500
1866 Navy Units 65
470 Merchant Marine Units 143
11 Major Ports 2
7,610,000 (bbl per day) Oil Production 3,979,000 (bbl per day)
20,030,000 (bbl per day) Oil Consumption 1,425,000 (bbl per day)
22,450,000,000 Proven Oil Reserves 133,300,000,000
$533,000,000 Arms Exports $NR
$571,000,000 Arms Imports $NR
6,407,637 Km Roadways 178,152 Km
227,736 Km Railways 7,203 Km
41,009 Km Waterways 850 Km
9,631,418 Sq Km Land Area 1,648,000 Sq Km
14,893 Airports 310
149,300,000 Labor Force 23,680,000
$12,410,000,000,000 Purchasing Power $552,800,000,000
$86,940,000,000 Gold Reserves $40,060,000,000

if the USA were to deploy all of its troops from europe and split them in between iraq/afghanistan..oh boy.

Iran would be fighting a two front war...

Answer 9

Yes. The reason the US is having a hard time in Iraq is due to the sectarian violence. They are not fighting a Gov't in Iraq. Selective ground fighting is tough because you don't want to kill civilians, mamas and papas.

The difference between Iran and Iraq.. Iran is a Gov't with a military. The US can simply bomb the living daylights out of them using their superior air power. Or.. drop a nuke get it done quickly -- although very risky because it can pull in other major powers such as Russia or China.

Answer 10

I don' t think that the US is worn out. I think we're trying to be TOO politically correct. If we go to war, we should TRULY go to war. Get the job done and move on. We're trying to be the kinder and gentler US Army. Hmmm... that's not really working. War is not a game. If we make the serious decision to do so, we should go all out to get the job done. That was the only way we were successful in the past.

Answer 11

The more important question is this: "Could we keep Iran from closing off the Strait of Hormuz?"

Probably not. Since the whole point of being involved in the Middle East is oil, it would be stupidly suicidal for us to go to war with Iran.