Quote:
Originally Posted by TrueBlueAmerican
True.The Iranians would hold their ground at first but a protracted conflict would eventually drain Iran's monetary resources since the US would be pipelineing money into Israel to sustain their effort.
|
Now if the IDF pulls as dumb as the one we pulled in Iraq, that of
trying to occupy Iran then the game chances, and the U.S.'s deep pockets becomes a liability.
Quote:
|
But in a fair fight between Israel and Iran, Israel would lose first since their economy is too tiny to sustain a high intensity conflict for more than 9-12 months.
|
There's never been any such thing as a "fair fight" nor will there.
Quote:
In a US complicit scenario the first 9 months would be a real battle. Then Iran's military would collapse as a conventional military force and would take up Hezbollah style guerilla warfare and tactics.*
If Israel flies over Iraqi airspace that makes the US complicit.
If Israel uses American money that makes the US complicit.
If Israel goes forward with the attack, we MUST stop the above lest we get sucked into the conflict. This is the real problem and this is Israel's trump card. If Israel sends four F-16 squadrons blazing towards Iran over US controlled Iraqi airspace, they know the US would more than likely not engage.
US+Israel Vs. Iran = Israeli voctory
Israel(no nukes) Vs. Iran = 
* The wild card is Russia and China. Im sure they would not sit by and watch Iranian oil fall into the control of Israel and the US, so theres no telling what they may or may not do.
|
Chances are the U.S. would attempt to buy off both Russia and China [possibly with permits to drill for oil off our coasts as well as letting Russia maintain their dubious claim over the Arctic Sea's resources and turning a complete blind eye to any and all abusive labor practices and deteriorating manufacturing standards of communist China].