Iran vs UK and USA?

[britishboy]

well title says it all who would win? and I made this cos we was talking about this and another thread but was told to stay on topic so made this so we can talk about it as the topic:D

[Atonement]

Thanks for making a separate thread.

And would you like to give any parameters for this "battle" or is it just, "GO!"?

[britishboy]

np and no rules just 'go' like it would be in real life:p

[TheBigUnit]

Well irans navy dissappears, so does air force

[britishboy]

Well irans navy dissappears, so does air force

what do you mean 'disappears'?

[Harry Smith]

The US would send in the super carriers, I think it's called the 7th Fleet. That would pretty much take out all there ports and any assets at sea.

[TheBigUnit]

what do you mean 'disappears'?

destroy

[Bethany]

Well, considering my family's taxes are going towards the world's top military spender (it spends 39% of the world military spending), the US better win.

[Stronk Serb]

Iranians would probably fight fanatically, it is their land, and being Islamic, it would be fanatical. The US and the UK would strike mostly from the air, like cowards. While Iran would prove much more challenging on the ground. Being a bit extremist, the Iranians might unleash their nuclear arsenal, assuming it is developed enough. Iranians might also fund Al-Qaeda sleeper cells in the US and the UK. Meaning a war on two fronts for the imperialists.

Hell, if the imperialist attack Iran, if I would be old enough, I might volunteer for the Iranians.

[Left Now]

This war will be hated...By both side,also we will give our lives to defend our soil and for our country...Nobody will win this battle at all but US won't have enough time to recover...Also UK if joins the war.
A can guess the number of our country's population after the war now...
If Iran wins:
Now:80 million
AW:45 million
If Iran loses:
AW:10 million
My people won't accept the invasion so they will fight to end!
After all in this era no one wants another war;Neither Iranians nor West,but if there were any transgression,we will defend to death...

Iranians would probably fight fanatically, it is their land, and being Islamic, it would be fanatical. The US and the UK would strike mostly from the air, like cowards. While Iran would prove much more challenging on the ground. Being a bit extremist, the Iranians might unleash their nuclear arsenal, assuming it is developed enough. Iranians might also fund Al-Qaeda sleeper cells in the US and the UK. Meaning a war on two fronts for the imperialists.

Hell, if the imperialist attack Iran, if I would be old enough, I might volunteer for the Iranians.

Iran won't use any nuclear weapon and we do not have any,but a great super weapon we may have and it will draw all the invaders into flames...
Also Iran is against Al-Qaeda...


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[Stronk Serb]

This war will be hated...By both side,also we will give our lives to defend our soil and for our country...Nobody will win this battle at all but US won't have enough time to recover...Also UK if joins the war.
A can guess the number of our country's population after the war now...
If Iran wins:
Now:80 million
AW:45 million
If Iran loses:
AW:10 million
My people won't accept the invasion so they will fight to end!
After all in this era no one wants another war;Neither Iranians nor West,but if there were any transgression,we will defend to death...


I can predict a war of attrition, and many stalemates due to Iranian fanaticism. The imperialists would probably give up, just like in Vietnam. Plus the Iranians know their soil far better then the imperialists.

Iran won't use any nuclear weapon and we do not have any,but a great super weapon we may have and it will draw all the invaders into flames...
Also Iran is against Al-Qaeda...



They have same enemies, maybe a temporary alliance?


-double post merged. -Emerald Dream

[Left Now]

No.Al-Qaeda members are Salaffi Jihadists and they are historical enemies of Shia muslims and other Sunni muslims in Iran and native Iranians.So it is not wise to be allied with your sweared enemy...

[britishboy]

well the west could flatten them but most likely air strikes and they have tiny nukes, no threat we could bomb them all day long and there would be nothing they can do. then send in the SAS, the worlds best special forces to kill the leaders then send in some of the best trained and equipped soliders in the world to mop up the remaining soilders then we will build a peaceful government and we will be allies with them.

[Stronk Serb]

No.Al-Qaeda members are Salaffi Jihadists and they are historical enemies of Shia muslims and other Sunni muslims in Iran and native Iranians.So it is not wise to be allied with your sweared enemy...

You might have a point there. Maybe terrorist groups from Iran muslims would fight instead? Good god, you just proven how uneducated I am when it comes to Islam. Gonna watch some shows about Islamic history hen they come up on the programme.

well the west could flatten them but most likely air strikes and they have tiny nukes, no threat we could bomb them all day long and there would be nothing they can do. then send in the SAS, the worlds best special forces to kill the leaders then send in some of the best trained and equipped soliders in the world to mop up the remaining soilders then we will build a peaceful government and we will be allies with them.

You are saying that the current government is faulty? So why not change it to a puppet state. You would destroy the Iranian people just for a puppet state?


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[Left Now]

Really?Do you really think our people will accept that government?That government in Iran will last only two days,because people will fight against that government until if they die all or that government falls!
Also bombing Iran alldays is like what Saddam did to us during 8 years of war.All the days we had bombings in our country.So it cannot really be useful.

[britishboy]

Really?Do you really think our people will accept that government?That government in Iran will last only two days,because people will fight against that government until if they die all or that government falls!
Also bombing Iran alldays is like what Saddam did to us during 8 years of war.All the days we had bombings in our country.So it cannot really be useful.

I'm sure people will accept it to avoid another war and the extremists who will 'fight to the death's would probably have been killed in the conflict or executed for treason. but the government will not be in the commonwealth we won't be that friendly also we will bring food jobs and money to people.

You are saying that the current government is faulty? So why not change it to a puppet state. You would destroy the Iranian people just for a puppet state?

it will be independent, not in the commonwealth and it will stop future wars.

[Stronk Serb]

it will be independent, not in the commonwealth and it will stop future wars.

Hardly since the people will reject the government and you will have a situation worse then Iraq and Afghanistan combined timed by ten.

[britishboy]

Hardly since the people will reject the government and you will have a situation worse then Iraq and Afghanistan combined timed by ten.

we done this with Afghanistan and what do you know?

[Left Now]

No,it is 0 per cent to have a government like this...

[Harry Smith]

No,it is 0 per cent to have a government like this...

It doesn't matter about your government, if we were fighting for our lives then we would simply launch Trident against you. We could level Tehran in about 5 minutes, and that is just the British Arsenal. You would have ICBM's from America, Tactical weapons hitting your ports and then blockading your sea. Cut off your assets overseas. You can't fight over 500 nuclear warheads

[britishboy]

don't take this too seriously guys were not going to war...

[TheBigUnit]

No nukes please, its the government we re after not the civilians, this war will be a waste of money really, and we'll only attack if and nato memebrs get attacked, and achmedjimidad isn't tht dumb, we should get ready for our possible pointless syria intervention

[Left Now]

Nuke attacks?Do you have a purpose to kill our people?Do you know what will happen to the environment of the area if there is any Nuke attack...
Also at all you are a really war incentive person Harry Smith?...Are you going to kill my people because you are against my country?
Really sorry for your feelings about humanity...Really sorry.Also as hundred times a i've said,there won't be any attack from Iran if Israel or NATO or US itself do not want to threat us about military charges to our lands and our allies.Like yourselves.

[Ace of Spades]

The US spends more on military than the next five countries combined. If this "battle" is to the death or total annihilation of the opposing side and there are no rules, the US would win within a week. Because there would be no rules, nuclear weapons would be authorized and Iran would no longer exist. It would be a crater.
However, given that there would be rules of engagement, Iran would still lose. Iran's military would be crushed under airstrikes and through air superiority alone, not to mention the combined armored and infantry forces of the US and the UK.
This supposed war would be an atrocity. I can only hope that this would never come to pass.

[Left Now]

However i still believe in our military defences will win that battle at all...But with a lot of casualties for both side...
However you still didn't see too much from Iran...Our own people saw more at least.Not all but more...

[RinkyDink]

The US spends more on military than the next five countries combined. If this "battle" is to the death or total annihilation of the opposing side and there are no rules, the US would win within a week. Because there would be no rules, nuclear weapons would be authorized and Iran would no longer exist. It would be a crater.

Sounds impressive but US couldn't just launch a weapon and eliminate Iran without doing a hell of a lot of damage to neighbouring countries and their people - the weapon would also wreck Iran's oil reserves which the US needs.

If you're 13 it's probably fun to think of war as being like a computer game where you can just wipe countires off the map but the real world is a bit different :)

[Left Now]

War is hated at all.I hope it never happens.We had two ruining wars for our country during 100 years ago.WWII,And Iran-Iraq war,both of them made Iranian people suffer a lot.We are tired of war for now...

[Stronk Serb]

However i still believe in our military defences will win that battle at all...But with a lot of casualties for both side...
However you still didn't see too much from Iran...Our own people saw more at least.Not all but more...





Comrade, if the war happens, many will flock just to fight against the imperialists, and Russians might send volunteers, since being surounded by the Americans is against them. I would join also :D
Maybe it would be like the Spanish Civil War. Where people will come to fight against imperialists.

But let us hope it will not happen. The Middle East is unstable enough with Americans bombing it and making puppet states.

[Left Now]

Yes of course.Another war will destroy the hopes of all Middle Eastern people.So it has not to begin at all.

[Ace of Spades]

Sounds impressive but US couldn't just launch a weapon and eliminate Iran without doing a hell of a lot of damage to neighbouring countries and their people - the weapon would also wreck Iran's oil reserves which the US needs.

If you're 13 it's probably fun to think of war as being like a computer game where you can just wipe countires off the map but the real world is a bit different :)

How nice of you to be so condescending. What I said was just pure speculation. I was answering the question. The OP said that there were no rules. I gave two speculations, one involving the pure destructive ability of the US, and the other was based on the actual rules of engagement and the international ban on nuclear weapons. It's nice to know that you took the time to read only half of my post before responding, it really shows your comprehensive ability and spectrum of thought.
I know that there are a multitude of other variables to factor into the equation. My answer was meant to only focus on the military aspect of victory, not the economic or political fallout that the war would cause.
I also love how you seek to disregard my post by targeting my age and therefore make my argument invalid. A pitiful attempt if you ask me, given that I am older than thirteen and that you make yourself appear to be rather simplistic. Have a nice day. :)

[Twilly F. Sniper]

Iran fights dirty.

[Left Now]

Dirty?

[Hunter_Steel]

I don't vouch for either US, UK or Iran. I vouch for Israel and the IDF. Why? Because part of my heritage lies with that country. (Yes, I am one part Jew lol)

The IDF's airforce is the 3rd strongest airforce in the world with Russia and America being the top dogs. The IDF can crush Iran and yes, Israel and Iran will go to war again eventually to see who gets to be the top dog in the Middle East. While I say I do not look forward to it, it would be best if such a war were averted.

Also: The IDF has some of the strongest tanks in the world still used today. They don't need nukes to wipe Iran out, they just need skill. Which they have.

~Hunter

[britishboy]

I don't vouch for either US, UK or Iran. I vouch for Israel and the IDF. Why? Because part of my heritage lies with that country. (Yes, I am one part Jew lol)

The IDF's airforce is the 3rd strongest airforce in the world with Russia and America being the top dogs. The IDF can crush Iran and yes, Israel and Iran will go to war again eventually to see who gets to be the top dog in the Middle East. While I say I do not look forward to it, it would be best if such a war were averted.

Also: The IDF has some of the strongest tanks in the world still used today. They don't need nukes to wipe Iran out, they just need skill. Which they have.

~Hunter

Israel is allies with the us and uk

[Hunter_Steel]

They achieved their victories without US reinforcements, only by using US supplies :P

~Hunter

[Human]

Almost certainly the West would win, with combined forces of two of the most experienced armies in the world.

[RinkyDink]

^^ What would you define as winning?

[LuciferSam]

If we attack Iran, I think it would be like what happened in Vietnam with no real winner. If they actually attack us, that's different, but for now, I think we should just stick to politics.

[Bethany]

I think the outcome of this war would depend a lot on which side instigated it and attacked first.

If the UK and US started it, Iran would probably get a good amount of support from other non-US-allied countries.

[Stronk Serb]

Iran fights dirty.


Like the US doesn't? The '03 attack in Iraq was just over a couple buried toxin shells which do not function properly. You just go swooping with your goddamn air force, firring at will and going on the ground just after the enemy is shattered. There is no more cowardly way to wage war (except Al-Qaeda, bombing civilian targets which does no damage to the US, wtf?), unless you use your nukes.

[britishboy]

Like the US doesn't? The '03 attack in Iraq was just over a couple buried toxin shells which do not function properly. You just go swooping with your goddamn air force, firring at will and going on the ground just after the enemy is shattered. There is no more cowardly way to wage war (except Al-Qaeda, bombing civilian targets which does no damage to the US, wtf?), unless you use your nukes.


typical view of a man from a third world county

[Harry Smith]

Like the US doesn't? The '03 attack in Iraq was just over a couple buried toxin shells which do not function properly. You just go swooping with your goddamn air force, firring at will and going on the ground just after the enemy is shattered. There is no more cowardly way to wage war (except Al-Qaeda, bombing civilian targets which does no damage to the US, wtf?), unless you use your nukes.

Once again use of oxymoron through infinitives, you can't say x was the worse but y was worse.

Anyone the us of an Air force is not a war crime, where as using Chemical weapons is, using civilians as human shields and torturing pilots and placing them on live TV is a war crime. Under Article 51 of the United Nations charter we had every right to go into Iraq. We had a UN resolution to get rid of a Brutal Dictator and return freedom and wealth to the people of Iraq

[Stronk Serb]

typical view of a man from a third world county




That is what any Iraqi or Afghan would say. Serbia is not a third world country.

[TheBassoonist]

I'm just asking, for what treason would we go to war with Iran in the first place?

[Stronk Serb]

Once again use of oxymoron through infinitives, you can't say x was the worse but y was worse.

Anyone the us of an Air force is not a war crime, where as using Chemical weapons is, using civilians as human shields and torturing pilots and placing them on live TV is a war crime. Under Article 51 of the United Nations charter we had every right to go into Iraq. We had a UN resolution to get rid of a Brutal Dictator and return freedom and wealth to the people of Iraq

Still, the US are making puppet states out of Middle East countries which is pretty bad since it increases the instability of the region. Those things might not be war crimes what the Americans do, but they are not right.

[Stronk Serb]

I'm just asking, for what treason would we go to war with Iran in the first place?

Just a simulation kinda.

[britishboy]

that is what any iraqi or afghan would say. Serbia is not a third world country.

looooll your upset cos we bombed you hahaha you ahould be grateful

[britishboy]

Still, the US are making puppet states out of Middle East countries which is pretty bad since it increases the instability of the region. Those things might not be war crimes what the Americans do, but they are not right.

were preventing war like the UK is helping Libya

[Stronk Serb]

looooll your upset cos we bombed you hahaha you ahould be grateful

Nope. Your bombing only did bad.


PS: Wtf is wrong in your head so that you are saying bullshit like that?

[britishboy]

Nope. Your bombing only did bad.

ow you must be one of the people trying to wipe out other races and kill your own civilians? then yeah we did terrible for you:D

[Stronk Serb]

were preventing war like the UK is helping Libya



Actually it makes the region more unstable if it is a puppet state. The people wants a manwho can choose, not a slave who obeys everything his "liberators" say.

[britishboy]

Actually it makes the region more unstable if it is a puppet state. The people wants a manwho can choose, not a slave who obeys everything his "liberators" say.

you need to learn a lot about politics

[Stronk Serb]

you need to learn a lot about politics



Says a guy who believes everything politicians say. If every politician should hang himself doe to lying, more then 95% of the world's politicians would be dead

[britishboy]

Says a guy who believes everything politicians say. If every politician should hang himself doe to lying, more then 95% of the world's politicians would be dead

I agree with you on that haha a 100% of them would be dead more like haha:D n

[britishboy]

this is ment to be about Iran vs USA and UK

[Harry Smith]

Still, the US are making puppet states out of Middle East countries which is pretty bad since it increases the instability of the region. Those things might not be war crimes what the Americans do, but they are not right.

I want to get this back to a real debate and not just you two throwing your toys out of the pram.

The US haven't set up a puppet regime in Iraq, they have had free elections and have cycled through different parliaments. You just wish to dismiss any action by the west as being 'imperialistic'. Iraq is free now, the people have democracy

[Emerald Dream]

this is ment to be about Iran vs USA and UK

Yeah it is, and I am requesting that the name calling and personal insults stop. Otherwise I am closing this topic and we'll talk about it more privately.

[Southside]

Why not just warn the people who are name calling and throwing out personal insults instead of closing the thread? Why punish all because of a few?

Anyway..I think Iran would put up a hell of a fight, US/UK wouldnt completely roll over Iran like some of you guys are saying. Iran has a massive air defense system, so we'd probably suffer multiple US/UK planes being shot down. Let's take the B-2 bomber for example, the B-2 doesnt have any defense systems on board, all they can do is bomb. if a Su-22,MiG, or a ground based air defense system shoots a missile its no way the B-2 can defend itself unless for flares or countermeasures. Iran's air force would probably be wiped out, in a week or so, Iran is a massive country. I dont think a ground invasion would work, we'd get tore up badly if we tried to go in there with tanks and infantry

[britishboy]

Why not just warn the people who are name calling and throwing out personal insults instead of closing the thread? Why punish all because of a few?

Anyway..I think Iran would put up a hell of a fight, US/UK wouldnt completely roll over Iran like some of you guys are saying. Iran has a massive air defense system, so we'd probably suffer multiple US/UK planes being shot down. Let's take the B-2 bomber for example, the B-2 doesnt have any defense systems on board, all they can do is bomb. if a Su-22,MiG, or a ground based air defense system shoots a missile its no way the B-2 can defend itself unless for flares or countermeasures. Iran's air force would probably be wiped out, in a week or so, Iran is a massive country. I dont think a ground invasion would work, we'd get tore up badly if we tried to go in there with tanks and infantry

drone strikes to take out the anti air then we send in the bombers yes drones can be shoot down but they are replaceable when a pilot goes he's gone and I agree about a land invasion we will have to flatten them with bombs before we send in ground troops

[Southside]

drone strikes to take out the anti air then we send in the bombers yes drones can be shoot down but they are replaceable when a pilot goes he's gone and I agree about a land invasion we will have to flatten them with bombs before we send in ground troops

Drones are even more easily to take down! If a MiG or something comes up behind it, that thing is being shot down. Lets go back to the Yugoslav intervention in the 1990's, 40 UAV's were shot down by Yugoslav anti air guns. A ground invasion would fail horribly..Also, why do you guys always have to bring nukes into the equation? I dont think any nation is that daring enough to use nukes, it's too many risk factors of that...

[Someguy42]

Militarily speaking, Iran would probably be demolished. The problem is there'd be a pretty bad social backlash against the UK and US.

[Cygnus]

The side who reads and understands the Art of War will win. It is as simple as that.

[Twilly F. Sniper]

Like the US doesn't? The '03 attack in Iraq was just over a couple buried toxin shells which do not function properly. You just go swooping with your goddamn air force, firring at will and going on the ground just after the enemy is shattered. There is no more cowardly way to wage war (except Al-Qaeda, bombing civilian targets which does no damage to the US, wtf?), unless you use your nukes.

Umm... Mortars? No obvious provocation? Even if they did believe they were the crusaders that doesn't give them the right to launch a mortar on anybody in sight that ISN'T an Iranian soldier.

[britishboy]

Drones are even more easily to take down! If a MiG or something comes up behind it, that thing is being shot down. Lets go back to the Yugoslav intervention in the 1990's, 40 UAV's were shot down by Yugoslav anti air guns. A ground invasion would fail horribly..Also, why do you guys always have to bring nukes into the equation? I dont think any nation is that daring enough to use nukes, it's too many risk factors of that...

they have loads of safety stuff they are perfectly safe.... apart from the enemy haha:D

[Southside]

they have loads of safety stuff they are perfectly safe.... apart from the enemy haha:D Dude..I dont think you understand, if a MiG jet shoots a missile at a drone its over, the drone doesnt have any countermeasures or anything. Though I think Tomahawk missiles would be more effective...That's what NATO did in Libya, they sent in the tomahawk missiles first and then the jets & bombers.

[Sporadica]

Only reason the USA would go to war with Iran is because the Rothschilds don't own the central bank of Iran, nor do they own the central bank of Cuba or North Korea... notice a trend? also after 9/11 the last countries to NOT have a rothschild bank including the aforementioned 3 is Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and sudan.... again notice the trend? those 4 had direct US/UN intervention with these civil wars, wouldn't be surprised if they rigged the whole thing up.

anyone agree or disagree with what I'm saying? please explain why if you bother.

- Thanks

[Stronk Serb]

Only reason the USA would go to war with Iran is because the Rothschilds don't own the central bank of Iran, nor do they own the central bank of Cuba or North Korea... notice a trend? also after 9/11 the last countries to NOT have a rothschild bank including the aforementioned 3 is Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and sudan.... again notice the trend? those 4 had direct US/UN intervention with these civil wars, wouldn't be surprised if they rigged the whole thing up.

anyone agree or disagree with what I'm saying? please explain why if you bother.

- Thanks

I agree that the US aren't doing this for world peace. Can you explain further?

[britishboy]

I think it's unfair to say that the US is not doing it for world peace but the fact that they get tones of oil defiantly helps:D

[likemike]

The US would send in the super carriers, I think it's called the 7th Fleet. That would pretty much take out all there ports and any assets at sea.

I think you mean aircraft carriers, and they aren't called the 7th fleet:yeah:

[Bethany]

Only reason the USA would go to war with Iran is because the Rothschilds don't own the central bank of Iran, nor do they own the central bank of Cuba or North Korea... notice a trend? also after 9/11 the last countries to NOT have a rothschild bank including the aforementioned 3 is Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and sudan.... again notice the trend? those 4 had direct US/UN intervention with these civil wars, wouldn't be surprised if they rigged the whole thing up.

anyone agree or disagree with what I'm saying? please explain why if you bother.

- Thanks

I find the Rothschild conspiracy theory to be a far-too-simple explanation of foreign policy. I have never seen any evidence to support the idea that the Rothschild family is "controlling the strings".

Do you know of any conclusive evidence (correlation between things doesn't equal causation) that supports this theory?

[Harry Smith]

I think you mean aircraft carriers, and they aren't called the 7th fleet:yeah:

I think I mean super carriers the slang term for Nimitz class aircraft carriers and other large aircraft carriers, don't try and act so arrogant

[tovaris]

Iran would lose most of its land to the USA and UK but would newer truly lose the war everyone would fight the foreign invaders for millennia to come until the Angloamericans would finally retreat.

[Stronk Serb]

Iran would lose most of its land to the USA and UK but would newer truly lose the war everyone would fight the foreign invaders for millennia to come until the Angloamericans would finally retreat.



Not for millenia, maybe for a decade maximum, untill the Iranians are extinct, or the imperialists are driven out.

A millenium is like 1000 years, nobody is mad enough to fight for that long.

[tovaris]

Not for millenia, maybe for a decade maximum, untill the Iranians are extinct, or the imperialists are driven out.

A millenium is like 1000 years, nobody is mad enough to fight for that long.

Im sory comrade but i disagre the imperialists vould have to resort to some prety drastic mesures, like extermenation of the people, to stop the locals rebeling and fighting for freedom sooner than in a decade (thow the 1000 year astimate might be a tince bit exagurated)

Smrt kapitalizmu svoboda svetu!

[chrisf55]

Iranians would probably fight fanatically, it is their land, and being Islamic, it would be fanatical. The US and the UK would strike mostly from the air, like cowards. While Iran would prove much more challenging on the ground. Being a bit extremist, the Iranians might unleash their nuclear arsenal, assuming it is developed enough. Iranians might also fund Al-Qaeda sleeper cells in the US and the UK. Meaning a war on two fronts for the imperialists.

Hell, if the imperialist attack Iran, if I would be old enough, I might volunteer for the Iranians.

I wouldn't say attacking from the air is cowardly. It's strategic and resourceful. As for what you think of their army's abilities on the ground, the US and UK still win. The US mainly has many tanks and highly trained soldiers, not to mention the US has nearly three times as many active military soldiers than Iran does. Iran's only advantage would be fighting on their home land.

[Sir Suomi]

Repeat the Gulf War, except multiply the damage and destruction by about 10, and that's what you'd receive. There are no victors in war. There is only one side that is left standing.

[Stronk Serb]

I wouldn't say attacking from the air is cowardly. It's strategic and resourceful. As for what you think of their army's abilities on the ground, the US and UK still win. The US mainly has many tanks and highly trained soldiers, not to mention the US has nearly three times as many active military soldiers than Iran does. Iran's only advantage would be fighting on their home land.



Iranians, being Muslim and fighting on their land, would fight fanatically. The US and the Brits will either have to retreat or to exterminate the Iranians, essentially commit large scale genocide. If they commit genocide, it is certain to get a very bad response from the UN. Probably a bunch of nations will be called up to fight against the US and the Brits.

[britishboy]

Iranians, being Muslim and fighting on their land, would fight fanatically. The US and the Brits will either have to retreat or to exterminate the Iranians, essentially commit large scale genocide. If they commit genocide, it is certain to get a very bad response from the UN. Probably a bunch of nations will be called up to fight against the US and the Brits.

disagree they have an advantage fighting on there own land, but the Brits have the SAS the world's best special forces and the americans and the only world super power, and we have millions of immigrants from places like Iran, Afghanistan, Serbia, Pakistan and they are Muslims and so can't love there country that much, most would flee and any who fight would easily be wiped out.

[britishboy]

Repeat the Gulf War, except multiply the damage and destruction by about 10, and that's what you'd receive. There are no victors in war. There is only one side that is left standing.

the gulf war was 100 odd years ago, now days we could wipe a third world county out with a push of a button, but that's unlikely we would most likely bomb them until they surrendered

[Left Now]

Excuse me!Gulf War was 30 years ago not 100 years ago.However,military will advance in all the countries not just in major powers

[Left Now]

disagree they have an advantage fighting on there own land, but the Brits have the SAS the world's best special forces and the americans and the only world super power, and we have millions of immigrants from places like Iran, Afghanistan, Serbia, Pakistan and they are Muslims and so can't love there country that much, most would flee and any who fight would easily be wiped out.

They are not Shia muslims at all.Fighting with Shia Muslims means suicide.However,in Libya SAS failed so it can fail in Iran too because we have special strategic places which no one just local forces can get there.

Also,Iran is a country which is famous for ambushes and special defending strategies,since over 3000 years ago and one of the best samples is Iran-Iraq war 30 years ago.

And also,Iran is Iran not some new independent countries like Afghanistan or ...

[britishboy]

They are not Shia muslims at all.Fighting with Shia Muslims means suicide.However,in Libya SAS failed so it can fail in Iran too because we have special strategic places which no one just local forces can get there.

Also,Iran is a country which is famous for ambushes and special defending strategies,since over 3000 years ago and one of the best samples is Iran-Iraq war 30 years ago.

And also,Iran is Iran not some new independent countries like Afghanistan or ...

ikr!! haha they went in there to help the rebels and the rebels surrounded the SAS and cos the SAS was there to help they couldn't fight back!! soo funny that was such a fail and in Italy in ww2 they were dug in mountains better than you could ever hope to be and we still beat them!! and we didn't even have nukes or stealth bombers!!

[Left Now]

Dear friend,UK forces couldn't win kurdish local militia of my country in WWII while the main governmental forces in Iran were under Command of UK and USSR,and Iran was invaded.

But Kurdish and Khouzestani people defend against british forces and won in many battles against them,because they were local and know how to fight in their own lands.

[britishboy]

Dear friend,UK forces couldn't win kurdish local militia of my country in WWII while the main governmental forces in Iran were under Command of UK and USSR,and Iran was invaded.

But Kurdish and Khouzestani people defend against british forces and won in many battles against them,because they were local and know how to fight in their own lands.

I don't see why you guys don't like the western world, if you were allies with us your quality of living would be a lot better look at south Korea you would be best in the commonwealth we would stop torture introduce human rights build an economy end corruption and povety. but I don't think the commonwealth would accept new members and more:p then again papua new guinea joined in around 1950 anyway I don't think you guys would like it haha:) and anyway we don't want a war at least not in Britain we got a lot to deal with and don't need another bombing mission especially not an invasion

[Left Now]

We do not want to be allied with West,because we do not want to be like what we were 40 years ago.

[britishboy]

We do not want to be allied with West,because we do not want to be like what we were 40 years ago.

fair enough:) thats the beauty of an independent country you get to decide that's why I feel sorry for puppet nations like Afghanistan

[Stronk Serb]

I don't see why you guys don't like the western world, if you were allies with us your quality of living would be a lot better look at south Korea you would be best in the commonwealth we would stop torture introduce human rights build an economy end corruption and povety. but I don't think the commonwealth would accept new members and more:p then again papua new guinea joined in around 1950 anyway I don't think you guys would like it haha:) and anyway we don't want a war at least not in Britain we got a lot to deal with and don't need another bombing mission especially not an invasion

Lol, in South Korea students are throwing Molotov Cocktails at the police during demonstrations. I do not want to be like that. You might think that Milosevuc's party was communist, it was more facist nationalism. We rose against him and essentially boned ourselves. Still, better this then that idiot on power. Some of us long or the stable days of Socialist Yugoslavia. The state then essentially paid for everything, even for school children's holidays. I do not want to be allied with you westerners since it will incite mass corruption and make bigger problems then today.

[Stronk Serb]

disagree they have an advantage fighting on there own land, but the Brits have the SAS the world's best special forces and the americans and the only world super power, and we have millions of immigrants from places like Iran, Afghanistan, Serbia, Pakistan and they are Muslims and so can't love there country that much, most would flee and any who fight would easily be wiped out.



Serbia is in Europe, and we are Orthodox Christians mostly. I do not know where you got the idea that we are mostly Muslim or near Iran. I am not the case, I am atheist.

[britishboy]

Serbia is in Europe, and we are Orthodox Christians mostly. I do not know where you got the idea that we are mostly Muslim or near Iran. I am not the case, I am atheist.

:0 your communist!! and I know all that what I mean is you guys say you will fight to the death and hate the Western world but most of you immigrate here

[britishboy]

Lol, in South Korea students are throwing Molotov Cocktails at the police during demonstrations. I do not want to be like that. You might think that Milosevuc's party was communist, it was more facist nationalism. We rose against him and essentially boned ourselves. Still, better this then that idiot on power. Some of us long or the stable days of Socialist Yugoslavia. The state then essentially paid for everything, even for school children's holidays. I do not want to be allied with you westerners since it will incite mass corruption and make bigger problems then today.

we have no corruption and YOU CANT TALK ABOUT CORRUPTION YOUR A COMMUNIST YOU GUYS ARE FAMOUS FOR CORRUPTION

[Stronk Serb]

we have no corruption and YOU CANT TALK ABOUT CORRUPTION YOUR A COMMUNIST YOU GUYS ARE FAMOUS FOR CORRUPTION

During Comrade Tito's reign, corrpution was almost non-existent. Please, if communist regimes are so corrupted, tell me why corruption went sky high in the last 2 decades when there were only fascist nationalists ruling the former Yugoslav republics. I did not state that your regimes are corrupt a lot. I stated that if Serbia is to continue on it's way to capitalism, we would have serious corruption problems in the near future.

[britishboy]

During Comrade Tito's reign, corrpution was almost non-existent. Please, if communist regimes are so corrupted, tell me why corruption went sky high in the last 2 decades when there were only fascist nationalists ruling the former Yugoslav republics. I did not state that your regimes are corrupt a lot. I stated that if Serbia is to continue on it's way to capitalism, we would have serious corruption problems in the near future.

agreed but do you really want communism? and you prepared to lose freedom of speech? the right to remain silent? I mean look at China, north Korea, and even Russia, Russia isn't that bad though

[Stronk Serb]

:0 your communist!! and I know all that what I mean is you guys say you will fight to the death and hate the Western world but most of you immigrate here

I personally am communist. But the immigrants are not.

[britishboy]

I personally am communist. But the immigrants are not.

a lot of people flee to the Western world from places like China because of communism

[Stronk Serb]

agreed but do you really want communism? and you prepared to lose freedom of speech? the right to remain silent? I mean look at China, north Korea, and even Russia, Russia isn't that bad though



The only ones who went to detention camps were the ones who were working against Yugoslavia's interests. Not simple protesters. In 1969. students made a protest wanting a even more communist country, with more financial equality between the classes. They got it. Tell me, if we were so opressed, why did almost all of Yugoslavia cry when Tito died? If he was a dictator asshole, everyone would be celebrating. And, if he was an detested dictator, why did 160+ leaders from other states, including the US an the UK attend his funeral and some even cried?

[britishboy]

The only ones who went to detention camps were the ones who were working against Yugoslavia's interests. Not simple protesters. In 1969. students made a protest wanting a even more communist country, with more financial equality between the classes. They got it. Tell me, if we were so opressed, why did almost all of Yugoslavia cry when Tito died? If he was a dictator asshole, everyone would be celebrating. And, if he was an detested dictator, why did 160+ leaders from other states, including the US an the UK attend his funeral and some even cried?

we attended for political reasons propaganda makes people love him like northe Koreans love there leader and what are you only allowed to protest if the dictator likes the idea? that's not freedom of speech, for example I can say I hate my leaders ( I dont) but I still can and I'm perfectly safe

[Stronk Serb]

we attended for political reasons propaganda makes people love him like northe Koreans love there leader and what are you only allowed to protest if the dictator likes the idea? that's not freedom of speech, for example I can say I hate my leaders ( I dont) but I still can and I'm perfectly safe




And some people hated Tito. They did not go to the detention centers.

[tovaris]

we attended for political reasons propaganda makes people love him like northe Koreans love there leader and what are you only allowed to protest if the dictator likes the idea? that's not freedom of speech, for example I can say I hate my leaders ( I dont) but I still can and I'm perfectly safe

People who hated or disliked TITO were in no danger, read a nevspaper ot two from that tim you will see that even completly oposite thinking was tolerated as long as it wasent dangerous and/or nationalistic. As far as the propaganda goes TITO did not planingly make a kult of himself like the Korean leders or Stalin ect. people love him because of his actions. And the protests they were tolreated even if they were protesting for completly wrong resons, like the Janša trail for example. Ti da si varen, pa ja, reci laj slabega čez kraljico pa bomo videli.

[Stronk Serb]

People who hated or disliked TITO were in no danger, read a nevspaper ot two from that tim you will see that even completly oposite thinking was tolerated as long as it wasent dangerous and/or nationalistic. As far as the propaganda goes TITO did not planingly make a kult of himself like the Korean leders or Stalin ect. people love him because of his actions. And the protests they were tolreated even if they were protesting for completly wrong resons, like the Janša trail for example. Ti da si varen, pa ja, reci laj slabega čez kraljico pa bomo videli.



People who disliked Tito had the same treatment as the people who liked Tito.

[tovaris]

People who disliked Tito had the same treatment as the people who liked Tito.

Exactly.

[Stronk Serb]

Exactly.

Plus, if they did not like Yugoslavia at all, they could just take their passport and go to a country they wished to live and live there.

[tovaris]

Plus, if they did not like Yugoslavia at all, they could just take their passport and go to a country they wished to live and live there.

Yes everibody got paseports and was free to travel the world.

[chrisf55]

Iranians, being Muslim and fighting on their land, would fight fanatically. The US and the Brits will either have to retreat or to exterminate the Iranians, essentially commit large scale genocide. If they commit genocide, it is certain to get a very bad response from the UN. Probably a bunch of nations will be called up to fight against the US and the Brits.

Being Muslim has nothing to do with their abilities in battle.
The US has the best Military in the world, and the UK has the SAS, one of the best Air Forces in the world. With this combination we would devastate the Iranians and cause them to surrender early on. This war would probably be over too quickly for it to turn into anything like a World War.

[Sir Suomi]

Here is some statistics for those who still believe Iran would win in a war against the UK and the US...

http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp?form=form&country1=Iran&country2=United-States-of-America&Submit=Compare+Countries
(US armed forces VS. Iranian Armed Forces)

http://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-comparison-detail.asp?form=form&country1=Iran&country2=United-Kingdom&Submit=Compare+Countries
(UK armed forces VS. Iranian Armed Forces)

[Stronk Serb]

Being Muslim has nothing to do with their abilities in battle.
The US has the best Military in the world, and the UK has the SAS, one of the best Air Forces in the world. With this combination we would devastate the Iranians and cause them to surrender early on. This war would probably be over too quickly for it to turn into anything like a World War.

The SAS are not an air force, they are special forces. The fact that I mentioned that the Iranians are Muslim is because Muslim people tend to fight more fanatically.

[britishboy]

The SAS are not an air force, they are special forces. The fact that I mentioned that the Iranians are Muslim is because Muslim people tend to fight more fanatically.

lol the SAS is the worlds best special forces we have an average air force, the best air force is probably American and it's better for them to fight more fanatically, then we can send in ground troops, they would be unorganized and so can be taken out quickly whereas if you invaded a country where they worked together more it would be harder anyway no matter how hard you fight you cant stop a bomb, haha only rich countries can stop bombs:D

[Stronk Serb]

lol the SAS is the worlds best special forces we have an average air force, the best air force is probably American and it's better for them to fight more fanatically, then we can send in ground troops, they would be unorganized and so can be taken out quickly whereas if you invaded a country where they worked together more it would be harder anyway no matter how hard you fight you cant stop a bomb, haha only rich countries can stop bombs:D



Not really. The SAS is above average, but not the best. There is no best special force. You cannot stop a bomb, but you can move and evade it's area of effect.

[britishboy]

Not really. The SAS is above average, but not the best. There is no best special force. You cannot stop a bomb, but you can move and evade it's area of effect.

they are the best even the Americas say they are the best, and how are you gonna stop a bomber from carpet bombing your town?

http:// listverse.com/2010/01/11/top-10-badasses-of-the-worlds-special-forces/

http:// www.eh-dah.com/2013/02/top-10-special-forces-in-world.html?m=1

[Stronk Serb]

they are the best even the Americas say they are the best, and how are you gonna stop a bomber from carpet bombing your town?

http:// listverse.com/2010/01/11/top-10-badasses-of-the-worlds-special-forces/

http:// www.eh-dah.com/2013/02/top-10-special-forces-in-world.html?m=1

AA guns, AA missiles. Pretty easily. SAS has had so many problems in the past in the Middle East, so they would have poblems now. They are not a major factor.

[britishboy]

AA guns, AA missiles. Pretty easily. SAS has had so many problems in the past in the Middle East, so they would have poblems now. They are not a major factor.

theyre not foot soilders, we could use them to assassinate there leaders and maybe we should use a few cruise missiles and we managed to bomb you beloved Serbia easily with no resistance and Serbia isn't a third world country

[Stronk Serb]

theyre not foot soilders, we could use them to assassinate there leaders and maybe we should use a few cruise missiles and we managed to bomb you beloved Serbia easily with no resistance and Serbia isn't a third world country

Assasinations would inspire the people to rise against the oppressors. There was resistance in Serbia. The US lost one stealth fighter and had two heavily damaged. Your drones were getting shot out of the sky. We took down a bunch of helicopters you sent and some more fighters. There was resistance. You never used carpet bombers here also.

[britishboy]

Assasinations would inspire the people to rise against the oppressors. There was resistance in Serbia. The US lost one stealth fighter and had two heavily damaged. Your drones were getting shot out of the sky. We took down a bunch of helicopters you sebt and some more fighters. There was resistance. You never used carpet bombers here also.

drones are out of most AA reach and we could carpet bomb you but that would only really kill civilians its the same as we could nuke you but never would.

[Stronk Serb]

drones are out of most AA reach and we could carpet bomb you but that would only really kill civilians its the same as we could nuke you but never would.

Out of AA reach? Serbian AA guns took off your drones from the sky. Or we wouldd send in a outdated MiG-21 or two. Might be outdated, but it is very good at shooting down drones.

[britishboy]

Out of AA reach? Serbian AA guns took off your drones from the sky. Or we wouldd send in a outdated MiG-21 or two. Might be outdated, but it is very good at shooting down drones.

I thought we bombed your hospitals and bridges? and that were the reason why your country has no economic success? make your mind up

[Stronk Serb]

I thought we bombed your hospitals and bridges? and that were the reason why your country has no economic success? make your mind up


First of all: Most manned enemy aircraft were above 5000 meters. Above all danger from AA systems we possesed at the time. The drones were an exception since they flew lower and could be targted by our AA defenses. The real danger came from 5 unmaintained MiG-29s of which 3 survived and 2 were canniballised for parts. There were cases when enemy aircraft would get lower and be suscetible to AA targeting. We took down one stealth fighter by mere ingenuity of one of our AA officers. We heavily damaged two, took down a dozen of regular fighters and destroyed dozens if not hundreds of drones. Compared to wat damage we took, the resistamce was weak, but present.

[britishboy]

First of all: Most manned enemy aircraft were above 5000 meters. Above all danger from AA systems we possesed at the time. The drones were an exception since they flew lower and could be targted by our AA defenses. The real danger came from 5 unmaintained MiG-29s of which 3 survived and 2 were canniballised for parts. There were cases when enemy aircraft would get lower and be suscetible to AA targeting. We took down one stealth fighter by mere ingenuity of one of our AA officers. We heavily damaged two, took down a dozen of regular fighters and destroyed dozens if not hundreds of drones. Compared to wat damage we took, the resistamce was weak, but present.

we walked all over you and it wasnt even a war and stealth bombers are only good for avoiding radar and AA guns that use radar to aim stop hating NATO we helped you

[tovaris]

we walked all over you and it wasnt even a war and stealth bombers are only good for avoiding radar and AA guns that use radar to aim stop hating NATO we helped you

You were luckey you dident walk bacause a land imvasion would ba a desastor on your part.
Those stealrh bombers were hit by radar aiming AA guns.
NATO did not help us, stop loving it.

[Stronk Serb]

we walked all over you and it wasnt even a war and stealth bombers are only good for avoiding radar and AA guns that use radar to aim stop hating NATO we helped you



If you truly wanted to help us, you would've assasinated Milosevic and put a quick end to it. The rest of that scum were and still are incompetent. You have you opinion on NATO, I have mine. Our freedoms of speech, our choices. End of discussion.

[britishboy]

You were luckey you dident walk bacause a land imvasion would ba a desastor on your part.
Those stealrh bombers were hit by radar aiming AA guns.
NATO did not help us, stop loving it.

no we could have just sent in talks and the worlds best special forces, your lucky we didn't really care, and NATO is great it does so much for world peace

If you truly wanted to help us, you would've assasinated Milosevic and put a quick end to it. The rest of that scum were and still are incompetent. You have you opinion on NATO, I have mine. Our freedoms of speech, our choices. End of discussion.

fair enough but an assassination may have looked bad

-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[tovaris]

no we could have just sent in talks and the worlds best special forces, your lucky we didn't really care, and NATO is great it does so much for world peace

We seem to be gettimg a bit of topic here i advise to migrate to: www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=175006&highlight=NATO,

Remember WW2 and how our nation won it...

[britishboy]

We seem to be gettimg a bit of topic here i advise to migrate to: www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=175006&highlight=NATO,

Remember WW2 and how our nation won it...

you didn't win the war the allies did as a team thats what's NATO is about and it was the USA UK Canada and France after they had bweb freed they were the main players, the allies did have help from smaller nations.

and Iran is unlikely to go to war the UK and. USA and Iran is no weak country, if we did go to war it would be a long and bloody war

[tovaris]

you didn't win the war the allies did as a team thats what's NATO is about and it was the USA UK Canada and France after they had bweb freed they were the main players, the allies did have help from smaller nations

Check your history. The war in Yugoslavija was won by yugoslavians the war in europe was won by the Soviat union wit help from the western alies while the war in the pasific was won by the unitedstatians, not to mis china where the war was won by the united white and red forces.

NATO: www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=175006&highlight=NATO,

[britishboy]

Check your history. The war in Yugoslavija was won by yugoslavians the war in europe was won by the Soviat union wit help from the western alies while the war in the pasific was won by the unitedstatians

you nred to cheek yours, the allies freed the french and the soviets attacked from the other side ( soz forgot about Russia they was a massive player) and in fact Germany was making a lot of progress invading Russia

NATO has no reason to attack Iran and to be honest that's good, they are no weak country


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

[tovaris]

you nred to cheek yours, the allies freed the french and the soviets attacked from the other side ( soz forgot about Russia they was a massive player) and in fact Germany was making a lot of progress invading Russia

France surenderd and coloborated (this excludes DeGaul)

[britishboy]

France surenderd and coloborated (this excludes DeGaul)

they still helped when we freed them and they spied for us

[Stronk Serb]

fair enough but an assassination may have looked bad

Who cares? We would celebrate! Milosevic took us to the grave and back. We would celebrate, the Slovenians, the Croats, the Bosnian Muslims...

[tovaris]

they still helped when we freed them and they spied for us

You sunk their navy. Besides even germans had reseston movements.
We freed ourselves did not need no foreighn invadors to do our job for us.
www.virtualteen.org/forums/showthread.php?t=177125,

[britishboy]

You sunk their navy. Besides even germans had reseston movements.
We freed ourselves did not need no foreighn invadors.

and where are you from?

[tovaris]

and where are you from?

Dražgoše, Slovenija, like it sais on my profile

[Carlsen]

you nred to cheek yours, the allies freed the french and the soviets attacked from the other side ( soz forgot about Russia they was a massive player) and in fact Germany was making a lot of progress invading Russia

-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

.
After Generale Carl Mannerheim h e will not lead Finland army to Leningrad so this make Germany success to fail in Russia



.

[Carlsen]

NATO has no reason to attack Iran and to be honest that's good, they are no weak country


-merged double post. -Emerald Dream

.
I agree NATO have no reason t o attack in Iran and this i s good thing. It is Israel that have missile that can attack anywere i n EU




.