Iraq War Expansion

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Turkey is also an Islamic country. Iran + Turkey + Iraq = problems. Not that that would happen, but you seem to think we could somehow launch an amphibious invasion (which it would be if the entire Islamic world was allied against us) that would succeed against all that. Not likely.

Not an amphibious invasion. The forces already IN the Gulf were capable of defeating "many Middle East nations". I do not count Turkey as a middle eastern state; rather it is part of Europe (or perhaps if the European part is ignored, part of Southwest Asia, along with Pakistan, the 'Stans & Iran; although I did take Iran as part of the "Middle East").

If we are going to make it ALL of Islam, from Central Asia to the Atlantic clearly the U.S. forces would be swamped. But against the forces that could be brough to bear against the troops already in Kuwait & the Gulf States prior to the 2003 invasion, with the carriers in the Red Sea, Arabian Sea, and Med as back up, with the U.S. forces being able to fight a defensive battle (inside the range of friendly SAM coverage from the Gulf Squadron); against forces speaking different languages, with different combat doctrine and no unified chain of command, and with a preponderance of second rate equipment; that are crossing open desert in full view of Satellites and subject to non-stop air attack, yes, I do like the American chances.
 
I'm still not clear why it wouldn't be amphibious. If all the Mid East states are hostile, from where are we launching our invasion?

In the first Gulf War, Iraq could probably have crushed our forces before we built them up - in a fight where the Saudis and Iraq are hostile, and for some reason allied to Iran, I don't see how we're going to manage it. There's only so much airpower - we have to defend our ships, support troops, attack Iranian and Saudi missile sites...

We'd have to land troops in sufficient force that the bridgehead can't be destroyed, fight in lots of varieties of difficult terrain in an areas the size of the United States... I think you may be underestimating the magnitude of this. We'd have to spend a lot of time building up and preparing, which the "Axis of Evil" could use to prepare, train, get weaponry from Russia, etc.

Not an amphibious invasion. The forces already IN the Gulf were capable of defeating "many Middle East nations". I do not count Turkey as a middle eastern state; rather it is part of Europe (or perhaps if the European part is ignored, part of Southwest Asia, along with Pakistan, the 'Stans & Iran; although I did take Iran as part of the "Middle East").

If we are going to make it ALL of Islam, from Central Asia to the Atlantic clearly the U.S. forces would be swamped. But against the forces that could be brough to bear against the troops already in Kuwait & the Gulf States prior to the 2003 invasion, with the carriers in the Red Sea, Arabian Sea, and Med as back up, with the U.S. forces being able to fight a defensive battle (inside the range of friendly SAM coverage from the Gulf Squadron); against forces speaking different languages, with different combat doctrine and no unified chain of command, and with a preponderance of second rate equipment; that are crossing open desert in full view of Satellites and subject to non-stop air attack, yes, I do like the American chances.
 
I would suggest adding neo-czarist Russia into the mix, maybe bringing some of Eastern Europe. After all, the Slavs are almost as tyrannical and bloodthirsty as American Republicans. To address AJNoltes first point, perhaps we could have Herr Popenfuher jump in on the crusade, leading to fascist governments being re-established in countries like Spain, Italy and the Philippines. Might also help placate folks like Pat Buchanan, who might otherwise be anti-war.

*re-engages brain*Sweet mother of God, this one's almost as bad as Domestic 9/11. :(

Yes, I can see it now; middle-aged suburban Evangelicals assemble under the banners of Robertson and Fallwell with the Prayer of Jabez in one hand and M-16 in the other. In fact, I think their slogan should be "ten steps to a more fulfilling personal crusade with Jesus". Rick Warren could play the role of a Bernard of Clairveaux, trying to stop the twenty-first-century crusaders from massacring the Muslims at home; the war is in the Holy Land...err, greater middle east. His book on the subject, "The Purpose-driven Crusade", would be yet another best-seller in that already successful franchize.

Of course, no crusade would be complete without a horde of right-wing Latin-American deathsquads swearing allegiance to Christ, the contras and Pinochet.

Can we please move this to the ASB forum...
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
I'm still not clear why it wouldn't be amphibious. If all the Mid East states are hostile, from where are we launching our invasion?

In the first Gulf War, Iraq could probably have crushed our forces before we built them up - in a fight where the Saudis and Iraq are hostile, and for some reason allied to Iran, I don't see how we're going to manage it. There's only so much airpower - we have to defend our ships, support troops, attack Iranian and Saudi missile sites...

We'd have to land troops in sufficient force that the bridgehead can't be destroyed, fight in lots of varieties of difficult terrain in an areas the size of the United States... I think you may be underestimating the magnitude of this. We'd have to spend a lot of time building up and preparing, which the "Axis of Evil" could use to prepare, train, get weaponry from Russia, etc.


Because the U.S. already had two Mechanized Brigades, as well as several fighter & attack wings, in the Gulf region before the proposed POD. There is no need to 'kick in the door" as this is written. At worst you have a reinforcement by sea and air into a stoutly defended perimeter where the U.S. can readily establish air superiority, if not air supremacy.

If it was an ASB scenario the initial poster could, magically, get all the U.S. forces in the region to return to the CONUS. In that case, the U.S. would be very hard pressed indeed to mount any sort of a landing operation.

The rest of the scenario, as posted, is so far out of the realm of the possible that it doesn't bear restating why it wouldn't work or happen.
 
I'm still not clear why it wouldn't be amphibious. If all the Mid East states are hostile, from where are we launching our invasion?

In the first Gulf War, Iraq could probably have crushed our forces before we built them up - in a fight where the Saudis and Iraq are hostile, and for some reason allied to Iran, I don't see how we're going to manage it. There's only so much airpower - we have to defend our ships, support troops, attack Iranian and Saudi missile sites...

We'd have to land troops in sufficient force that the bridgehead can't be destroyed, fight in lots of varieties of difficult terrain in an areas the size of the United States... I think you may be underestimating the magnitude of this. We'd have to spend a lot of time building up and preparing, which the "Axis of Evil" could use to prepare, train, get weaponry from Russia, etc.



Keep in mind that the Iraqi military was badly dgraded post-Gulf 1 to an extend which we couldn't fully comprehend until the post-war period (part of the reason behind the controvrsial decision to disband it).
 
Top