- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Erickson gives a reality check on Iran War
Posted on 3/14/26 at 8:32 am to monsterballads
Posted on 3/14/26 at 8:32 am to monsterballads
A full scale ground troop war is likely where we’re headed. This really is only the beginning.
This post was edited on 3/14/26 at 8:33 am
0
Posted on 3/14/26 at 8:42 am to prplhze2000
Iran is different from any of the other operations mentioned. The difference is the majority of the Iranian people want regime change. The gamble is, are they willing to fight to throw off their oppressors.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 8:43 am to prplhze2000
two weeks to flatten the curve.
All bullshite
All bullshite
Posted on 3/14/26 at 8:46 am to RollTide1987
quote:
Both of those operations involved ground invasions. Roughly 34 infantry and armored divisions took part in the invasion during Operation Desert Storm, seven of which were American.
The right way to do this will require a targeted and specific boots on the ground operation but not Iraq war or desert storm level. I’m not talking about only SOF guys either. It will require conventional infantry and lots of air defense and logistic units in harms way and taking significant casualties.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 8:47 am to prplhze2000
I'm not the biggest Erick Erickson fan.
But he grew up in Saudi Arabia.
I am definitely interested in his perspective.
His takes are interesting if nothing else.
But he grew up in Saudi Arabia.
I am definitely interested in his perspective.
His takes are interesting if nothing else.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 8:48 am to geoag58
quote:
The gamble is, are they willing to fight to throw off their oppressors.
50,000 murdered Iranians would likely say they are willing.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:09 am to RollTide1987
We are not carpet bombing civilians, nor fire bombing women and children.
If the population wants change, they will have to rise up. 30,000 of the brave have set that back, but time will tell. Altering their quality of life may be enough. Seeing a chance to rid themselves of religious zealots may be enough. Weapons will be intergral to any action on their part.
If the population wants change, they will have to rise up. 30,000 of the brave have set that back, but time will tell. Altering their quality of life may be enough. Seeing a chance to rid themselves of religious zealots may be enough. Weapons will be intergral to any action on their part.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:09 am to Good Times
quote:If airpower alone won wars you’d be able to list examples off the top of your head. The fact that you can't name any kind of answers the question.
Wouldn’t that depend on what you take out, and the prospect of the population getting involved? Especially it it’s painful in everyday life.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:18 am to northshorebamaman
Genghis Kahn ruled because his horsemen and archers were so much better, that many villages just surrendered as he approached.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:20 am to RollTide1987
quote:
We flattened Germany by carpet bombing all of their major cities. The entire country was in ruins by the spring of 1945, and yet many within Germany believed in the final victory almost to the bitter end
Commentors keep missing the salient difference between Japan and Germany on one hand and Iran on the other. The population of Iran is not an ally of the regime. The Germans and Japanese were.
So yes, we needed massive boots on the ground in Germany, but we beat Japan with air power, didn’t we? We are not using nukes this time, but we are using precision bombing that is becoming very effective at targeting our true enemies. Kill enough of them and they WILL start abandoning ship.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:23 am to Penrod
quote:No. We put the nail in the coffin with airpower. Google "WW2 Pacific campaign."
we beat Japan with air power, didn’t we?
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:24 am to prplhze2000
I'm pretty sure that Eric's campaign experience came from getting coffee for Lee Atwater. All that dude knows about oil and natural gas was his daddy being a construction foreman for Conoco in Dubai I've talked with him personally, clueless as Greta Thunberg
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:25 am to northshorebamaman
quote:
No. We put the nail in the coffin with airpower. Google "WW2 Pacific campaign."
I wasn’t speaking about the entire Pacific campaign. I meant that we did not need boots on the ground to make Japan capitulate. Enough air power, plus the threat of more, did it. If it’s bad enough they will quit.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:30 am to Penrod
quote:Uh... yeah we did.
I wasn’t speaking about the entire Pacific campaign. I meant that we did not need boots on the ground to make Japan capitulate.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:30 am to Penrod
quote:
I meant that we did not need boots on the ground to make Japan capitulate.
Would they have capitulated with an intact army & navy?
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:32 am to Good Times
quote:
We are not carpet bombing civilians, nor fire bombing women and children.
Just one girls school so far
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:40 am to Flats
quote:
Would they have capitulated with an intact army & navy?
After we dropped two A bombs? I don’t know, but I’m guessing Yes.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:40 am to tide06
Amazing that some think an invasion on the order of Iraq will be needed.
The Iranian people are not our enemy for the most part. They are on our side. It would make no sense to send in the infantry and take ground like we did in Iraq.
We don't need or want to take ground city by city to eventually take the country while having muslim sniping at us all along the way.
All we need to do is keep killing any resistance, via air or guerilla warfare. The IRGC sets up check points.... would you rather be the IRGC or the freedom fighter that pokes a weapon out of a 4th story window to pick one of them off before disappearing into the night?
This is the difference. This is why Iran will be nothing like Iraq. In Iraq we fought like Russia is doing in Ukraine. In Iran we are the insurgent. We are the ones that will be sniping from windows. And by we I mean special ops and mostly Iranians. NOT a single mechanized battalion.
And guess what? This coup will have the unheard of benefit of US and Israeli air power, missile power and intelligence.
The Land part will take slightly longer than the air campaign but not much longer.
We have destroyed the regional attack capability. Now we are moving along to killing the foot soldiers. Who will have no money, no resources, no physical backing for anyone. They are between a rock and a hard place. The ground invasion will likely be less dangerous for US soldiers than the air campaign.
The Iranian people are not our enemy for the most part. They are on our side. It would make no sense to send in the infantry and take ground like we did in Iraq.
We don't need or want to take ground city by city to eventually take the country while having muslim sniping at us all along the way.
All we need to do is keep killing any resistance, via air or guerilla warfare. The IRGC sets up check points.... would you rather be the IRGC or the freedom fighter that pokes a weapon out of a 4th story window to pick one of them off before disappearing into the night?
This is the difference. This is why Iran will be nothing like Iraq. In Iraq we fought like Russia is doing in Ukraine. In Iran we are the insurgent. We are the ones that will be sniping from windows. And by we I mean special ops and mostly Iranians. NOT a single mechanized battalion.
And guess what? This coup will have the unheard of benefit of US and Israeli air power, missile power and intelligence.
The Land part will take slightly longer than the air campaign but not much longer.
We have destroyed the regional attack capability. Now we are moving along to killing the foot soldiers. Who will have no money, no resources, no physical backing for anyone. They are between a rock and a hard place. The ground invasion will likely be less dangerous for US soldiers than the air campaign.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:41 am to Penrod
And I'll save you the effort of looking it up. The strongest example of airpower alone 'winning' a war was the Bosnian conflict. And even then we only forced a withdrawal, not capitulation.
Posted on 3/14/26 at 9:42 am to Penrod
quote:
After we dropped two A bombs? I don’t know, but I’m guessing Yes.
I don't know either but it's a non-trivial complication to your claim.
Page 2 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News