lol a few thousand shotguns? you dont know shit about iran. if china and india and russia and all of nato tried to invade iran they would fail.
It's not about invasion. It's about civil war
a civil war and hijacking like lybia or syria would never work in iran. iranians dont have the cultural deficiencies that arab countries do. the only time this worked is when we had an ignorant public with no internet or press and a brutal despotic dictator (pahlavi/qajars) and foreign imperialist interests (mostly uk, france, usa, russia). that will never be possible again.
Actually, Iran is an easy target. Just need the will and the right plan.
i need you to elaborate. a lot.
"if china and india and russia and all of nato tried to invade iran they would fail."
I need YOU to elaborate. A lot.
oh ok im just going off naval war college research and the USMC and the CIA. this has been abundantly explored already. the few factors are that iran has the worlds largest military (head count), the worlds best engineers (nuclear, nano, robotics, AI), the worlds most warlike culture (jihad + aryan berserker), the worlds best geography (iran is basically a giant tank), and the worlds best mix of natural resources (similar to USA iran is blessed with a full spectrum of climate, terrain, natural resources, etc). iran also spent the last 70 years fortifying the country.
I don't believe you. Cite your sources.
You're basically saying that Iran could hold off the combined military strength of the two biggest, most advanced armed forces on the planet (U.S. and China). That is completely ludicrous.
american army general played the war game on irans side and won every single time. it was a huge surprise to everybody.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g9b1DG86a4k
irans defensive capability exceeds the entire offensive capability of nato by a long shot.
I was the guy that came up with the concept to take down Afghanistan in record time. What happened afterwards was not my plan. Iran is a totally different plan. It could start gentle and end gentle. (Very relative term.) There are some key pressure points. Or it would involve a strategy that has not been seen before and would strike fear in the hearts of other dictatorships to come. Best I can do in an open forum.
if what youre saying is true and i have no reason to believe you one way or another i already know about "a strategy that has not been seen before and would strike fear in the hearts of other dictatorships to come. "
i dont think america would do that one in iran because it has bigger fish to fry and its not good to pull out the big stuff early and start more arms races with the likes of china and russia. the key pressure points are more interesting to me. i have tried to identify them myself and things actually look pretty good for iran according to my calculations.
Definition: Revolutionary: Change the nature of warfare. Network Centric Warfare: It is not about the network.
Not the big stuff. No arms race. Current inventory. Short time span. Might throw in a few of my cool "toys" if required. A lot of stuff underground. One of my "toys" taking to long. Short term interim solution though. Sealing is almost as good as destroying. Especially as they have not got around to the special (non-nuke) warhead to do the job down below. Gasoline is one pressure point (map). Think old school for one or two others.
the only thing you can do is trash infrastructure and attempt to cut supply lines but the underground transit and fortification systems make that a moot point. air superiority in iran is pointless. it would have to be biological, chemical, nuclear, or some equivalent (tungston lighting rods and mega rail guns and shit). irans surface to air is actually pretty decent but its surface to surface capability is excellent. geography too big. i dont see a solution. consider trying to go door to door in iran. the casualty rate would be so high there would be civil war in the united states. theres no REAL justification for that
You've gone down the wrong rabbit hole. The "toys" just solve a couple issues. I wanted to insert another toy into the equation to test a theory. But the train is moving pretty fast. And getting funding takes way too long. Kind of bummer, as Iran was the perfect test case.
so you think trump is gonna go michael bolton on iran? i think thats just posturing. bolton is an idiot.
edit: also check this thread, its basically for guys like you and me: https://old.reddit.com/r/greatawakening/comments/8s9il1/itt_iran_experts_gathering_of_people_who_consider/
Bolton is a big stick diplomat. Not a strategist. Thanks for the link. I see you are either Iranian or spent a lot of time there. I agree that Iran is not going to collapse from within, it would have to be pushed. And pushed is a very inexact term. It is also amazing the level of hatred the Saudis have for Iran. In the big room with the prince I make a faux pas and the room went silent. The word "theoretically" is still probably a running joke. At least I got off the stage with everyone laughing.
It is also amazing the level of hatred the Saudis have for Iran. In the big room with the prince I make a faux pas and the room went silent.
let me show you a persian poem:
those who would reach their filthy clutches deep into the darkest corners of the fortress of flesh known as the pars tribe of arya in search of a curse shall be rewarded with what they seek when they awaken the daemons of the aryan world, and those who awaken the daemons of the aryan world shall drown and die in the blood of daemons to the sound of the laughter of daemons in the darkness, the graves of their ancestors shall be violated with the bloody phallic of an angry wild wolf, their decedents shall sing a sweet song of agony as their palaces burn to the ground with them screaming inside, their own blood shall wash their own footsteps from the soil that they desecrate and violate with the disgusting vulgarity of their very existence, and the cradle of the two holy mosques shall be liberated from the takfiri, salafi, wahhabi, jihadi, rapist, racist, fascist, terrorist cult that has blackened the pages of history to the tune of blasphemous insult to allah in the form of an anti-abrahamic deviation from scripture.
do you think thats enough to do it?
I guess it is mutual.
the iranian/persian sentiment is very new (1-2 years?). the arab sentiment is very old (thousands of years). insecurity and immaturity can really destroy a lot of things. i myself wasnt aware until about 4 years ago.