Re: OT: Video of a MOAB
The MOAB is an over pressure weapon. That makes it effective against many targets that are resistant to cluster bombs. It can also inflict casualties on troops that are hardened against traditional FA weapons and cluster bombs. It is not a weed whacker! It is a weapon of psychological value. By wiping out large concentrations of entrenched troops, the surrounding troops will doubt the effectiveness of their fortifications. This is of great value against conscript troops. Also, it should be noted that this is just the first in a series of these very large weapons.
I have no idea as to what the order of battle will be against Iran. But I would look for strikes on their nuclear facilities and the elimination of their ability to project force into the gulf as first target sets. Then the armored formations and artillery units would be eliminated. I don�t see their air force as being a threat; it�s no better than Iraq�s. We will of course take out their missiles as we find them, but will probably have to absorb some of them. If they resort to terror attacks in the west, then look for a general bombing campaign against their infrastructure and government facilities. If they mass their fanatical army units and conscripts as they did against Iraq, it will be the Highway of death all over again with a lot of infantry added to the count. You can not mass an army when you do not have air superiority. And a few missiles are worse than none at all. A few just piss people off and make them more determined to put you out of business.
So what can Iran do? Stop its nuclear activities? I think we would just find another reason, or add so many stipulations that they would never agree. Gun up and resist us? They can�t afford to, their economy is in ruin and the people are not too happy with things at the moment. I think they will stall for time and get their terror cells ready to act. They will also take control of the outside terror groups that they are funding and use them together in a coordinated fashion. This will give them some short-term gains but in the long run cause them more harm then good.
If I were in their shoes, I would attack southern Iraq now and as soon as my momentum petered out, seek a cease-fire from the UN. All the while I would be infiltrating units across the border to the north, creating a logistical nightmare for the occupying US troops. I would also mass my anti-shipping weapons against any US navy targets in the gulf, perhaps hurting them enough as to cause a general withdrawal. Might as well use them before you loose them. Then use my gains as bargaining chips while I bought time to create a dirty bomb. And then, having a real weapon of terror, they could buy more time. In the end, this would cost them a large portion of their standing army, but they have shown very little regard for taking casualties in the past. And time is the only thing that will save them, so at what cost will they buy it.
The general offensive that they are backing in Afghanistan has more or less petered out, so we will increase the numbers of irregular units that are infiltrating Iran from our bases there. Once the battlefield is prepped, you�ll have the first strikes, probably in the fall IMHO. Once Iran is dealt with and Syria isolated, terror attacks will fall off, again IMHO.
__________________
Think about it
|
Linear Mode
