How many troops would America need to successfully invade and occupy Iran?

Question

How many soldiers and marines would America need to successfully invade and occupy Iran?

Answer 1

when will you Americans stop thinking you own the world and can go crashing in anywhere you like stealing other people's land and oil?
for goodness' sake, you can't even afford the war you're already in, in Iraq - your economy's on the brink of collapse. Keep your noses out of other countries and concentrate on making life a bit better for your own people instead of killing other people.

Answer 2

What are talking about you mean do another preemptive strike and break the 2nd Constitution again. Don't we have enough bodies coming in caskets and some maimed so terrible. I'll tell you something he don't want to strike Iran they have I believe a Atomic Bomb,I don't that is true or not but they have a lot weapons that Iraq didn't have. You strike them Syria & Arabia will come in with them and no telling how many more countries that hate Bush, and you AIN'T seen nothing, YET. Don't even think that I want to live, don't you?..

Answer 3

Ratios used in the Balkans peacekeeping force put 20 peacekeepers in place for every 1000 civilians. Iraq would have required 450k by that standard. So for Iran, you can begin by tripling that number. So 1,350,000 troops. Just a bit staggering I'd say. America would undoubtedly need a draft.

Answer 4

4

Answer 5

In Texas they used to sent one Texas Ranger into a town to reestablish order among hooligans. Wish something like that could be true for the Iran issue. Hopefully the problem (i.e., Islamic Rule, Dictatorship, Nuclear Threats, etc.) can be resolved politically and from within their own country. Remember, many residents of this country want to live in a free society... not under Islamic Law.

Answer 6

invading is the easy part. We could never occupy iran. It woudlnt matter how many troops we had. The people of Iran would never submit to an occupying force. They would be blowing themselves up left and right like popcorn.

Answer 7

I read that in Iraq, a force of about 475,000 would have been needed to properly occupy and pacify the nation. We went in with far less, of course, so we'll never know if the higher level of troops would have worked out. However, if we take that number and multiply it for the larger Iranian population and land area - 2.5, based on the Wikipedia population figures (28M vs. 70M) - then about 1.2M troops.

Answer 8

Well, we sent 250,000 into Iraq and it hasn't been enough to successfully occupy that country and Iran has 3 times as many people as Iran and they aren't looking to throw off a viscious dictator.

Answer 9

probably double the amount they needed in Iraq, because Iran has link to nations with nuclear powers like Pakistan. So Iran is not going to be an as easy target as Iraq was. Also, even if US invades Iran, Pakistan and Aghanistan are not going to be US headquarters, because they will help thier muslim brothers, because muslim brotherhood is very stong among Islam.

Answer 10

It's hard to say. We see right now in Iraq almost 140.000 soldiers there and everything is out control. Iran is bigger than Iraq so, I hope we are not running in this country too. I'm thinking on our soldiers. Normally the politicians they start all the wars, they need to go there and fight along without our soldiers.

Answer 11

All of our fulltime troops if only conventional weapons were used. Iran will not rollover as easily as Iraq did. Even if Iran did lose, Syria, Libya, and other countries would be drawn in. Maybe even China. It would be suicidal to attack Iran.