AHC: US invades Iran between the Gulf Wars

I have to wonder the casualties in an event like this?
Based the casualty figures for Lebanon in 2006, Korea, and Chechnya, (very) roughly 4,000-12,000 KIA and 30,000-100,000 WIA.

Of course, the US couldn't sustain an army that big without the draft, so maybe as many as half those casualties would be from other countries
 
Based the casualty figures for Lebanon in 2006, Korea, and Chechnya, (very) roughly 4,000-12,000 KIA and 30,000-100,000 WIA.

Of course, the US couldn't sustain an army that big without the draft, so maybe as many as half those casualties would be from other countries
With those kind of figures who would even be likely to support us in that kind of war? I know there is the whole Shitte-Sunni rivalry but in the mid-1990's it was not what it is today. Other than Israel and maybe the UK? Unless the Iranians do something that earns them the wrath of NATO I just can't imagine any nation willingly sending personal to a blood bath like that. The US would need to draft otherwise.
 
With those kind of figures who would even be likely to support us in that kind of war? I know there is the whole Shitte-Sunni rivalry but in the mid-1990's it was not what it is today. Other than Israel and maybe the UK? Unless the Iranians do something that earns them the wrath of NATO I just can't imagine any nation willingly sending personal to a blood bath like that. The US would need to draft otherwise.

Well... Democracies are more willing to take casualties than people generally give them credit for. The issue is: why is the US in Iran? If the Casus Belli is seen as being a weak excuse by most foreign politicians, or being seen as something that is only important to the US, yes, I can see allies being reluctant to put troops in harm's way.

But if it is seen as being important by the allied politicians and military leaders, the US will have allies in Iran.

fasquardon
 
Well... Democracies are more willing to take casualties than people generally give them credit for. The issue is: why is the US in Iran? If the Casus Belli is seen as being a weak excuse by most foreign politicians, or being seen as something that is only important to the US, yes, I can see allies being reluctant to put troops in harm's way.

But if it is seen as being important by the allied politicians and military leaders, the US will have allies in Iran.

fasquardon
I don't disagree with you, but the question is who would join us in something like that?
 
If Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz is the casus belli, I don't think that the US has to go into this alone. Especially if we are talking about a time period shortly after the Gulf War. Any attempt by Iran to shut down the flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf would cause most of the industrialized West to come down on the Islamic Republic like a sledgehammer.

It would be relatively easy for the US to assemble another Gulf War-type coalition to reopen the Straits and generally help Iran to get rekt.
 
I don't disagree with you, but the question is who would join us in something like that?

at the very least the British and depending on when possibly France and others. Most of the Mideast oil goes to Japan and Western Europe, not to the Continental United States (we get ours or at least did from places like Nigeria, Venezuela, Canada, Mexico etc). Certainly the Gulf States will be partners, they hate the Persians and need to sell their oil
 
at the very least the British and depending on when possibly France and others. Most of the Mideast oil goes to Japan and Western Europe, not to the Continental United States (we get ours or at least did from places like Nigeria, Venezuela, Canada, Mexico etc). Certainly the Gulf States will be partners, they hate the Persians and need to sell their oil
I figured that, I am thinking something along the Iraq war lines plus or minus Canada, more European nations and New Zealand as well. However, if its more flimsy I think the gulf states at least, and until Blair I am uncertain about Britian
 
Top