You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Syria-Lebanon-Iran
Iran readies for feared attack by U.S.
2005-02-19
Iran has begun preparing for a possible U.S. attack, announcing efforts to bolster and mobilize recruits in citizens' militias and making plans to engage in the type of "asymmetrical" warfare used against American troops in neighboring Iraq...

"Iran would respond within 15 minutes to any attack by the United States or any other country," an Iranian official close to the hard-line camp, which runs the country's security and military apparatus, said on the condition of anonymity.

In recent days, Iranian newspapers have announced efforts to increase the number of the country's 7-million-strong "Basiji" militia forces, which were deployed in human wave attacks against Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s. Iranian military authorities have paraded long-range North Korean-designed Shahab missiles before television cameras. Iranian generals have conducted massive war games near the Iraqi border.

One Western military expert based in Tehran said Iran was sharpening its abilities to wage a guerrilla war. "Over the last year they've developed their tactics of asymmetrical war, which would aim not at resisting a penetration of foreign forces, but to then use them on the ground to all kinds of harmful effect," he said on the condition of anonymity.

It remains unclear how much of the recent military activity amounts to an actual mobilization and how much is a propaganda ploy. Iranian officials and analysts have said they want to highlight the potential costs of an attack on Iran to raise the stakes for U.S. officials considering such a move and to frighten a war-weary American public...

Iran, in addition to developing plans for guerrilla warfare against an invading army, also is attempting to give the impression that it is bolstering its conventional forces. In December, Iran announced its largest war games "ever," deploying 120,000 troops as well as tanks, helicopters and armored vehicles along its western border. More recently, Iran's press reported that the Iranian air force had received orders to engage any plane that violates Iranian airspace. These reports followed the disclosure that unmanned American drone planes have been monitoring Iranian nuclear sites. "It is obvious that with Iran surrounded by the United States forces and America pressing the nuclear issue, Iran wants to make a show of force," said a Western diplomat from Tehran, speaking on the condition of anonymity.
Iran's army includes 350,000 active-duty soldiers and 220,000 conscripts. Its elite by non-Western standards Revolutionary Guards number 120,000, many of them draftees. Its navy and air force total 70,000 men. The armed forces have about 2,000 tanks, 300 combat aircraft, three submarines, hundreds of helicopters and at least a dozen Russian-made Scud missile launchers of the type Saddam Hussein used against Israel during the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Iran also has an undetermined number of Shahab missiles based on North Korean designs that have ranges of up to 1,500 miles.

But both outside military experts and Iranians concede that the country's antiquated conventional hardware, worn down by years of U.S. and European sanctions, would be little match for the high-tech weaponry of the United States. "Most of Iran's military equipment is aging or second-rate and much of it is worn," military expert Anthony Cordesman wrote in a December 2004 assessment of Iran's military. He said Iran lost between 50 percent and 60 percent of its military equipment in the Iran-Iraq war, "and it has never had large-scale access to the modern weapons and military technology necessary to replace them."

Iran's highly classified Quds forces, which have a global network of operatives and answer directly to Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, could create a myriad of woes outside Iran's borders. In neighboring Iraq, where the United States says Tehran already has been interfering, many brush off the current low-level infiltration as minor compared with the damage Tehran is capable of unleashing. "If Iran wanted, it could make Iraq a hell for the United States," Hamid al-Bayati, Iraq's deputy foreign minister, said in a recent interview.
Posted by:Anonymoose

#19  Keep busy is all they can do - doesn't make a difference. The average recruit knows that we cut through Saddam's Iraq $h!t through a goose. That leaves only the fanatic, and that's just another term for fodder. The only real variable is how we decide to proceed.
Posted by: Rex Mundi   2005-02-19 11:41:38 PM  

#18  Didn't Iraq also prepare for a possible American invasion in early 2003? That worked really well for them, and Iran fought Saddam's army to a standstill.... Still, I suppose it gives them something to do while they wait, and it makes it easier for us to find their weapons when the time comes.
Posted by: trailing wife   2005-02-19 11:20:23 PM  

#17  The Revolutionary Guards are paramilitary police, not a military force. Otherwise, the Mullahs are looking down the road and see they are going to lose Kurdistan and Khuzestan and they will go back to being the world's biggest exporter of pistachios.
Posted by: phil_b   2005-02-19 11:00:56 PM  

#16  we oughta be broadcasting to the Basij the admin "human wave" comments along with the previous "success/caualty" rates for the waves against lesser trained and armed forces, along with video - I'm thinking a music video
Posted by: Frank G   2005-02-19 10:50:46 PM  

#15  Basij, meet Gatling.
Posted by: ed   2005-02-19 10:45:44 PM  

#14  Human wave attack - I can't believe he even brought that up. Last I heard of that was some years back playing ASL....a replay of the fight for the tractor factory in Stalingrad. All it's good for is tying down a couple of HMGs...and that's only temporary. Stick to what you know Borchgrave - stay with the Sapphire.
Posted by: Rex Mundi   2005-02-19 10:23:40 PM  

#13  aka "We want Hillary for 2008".
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2005-02-19 9:39:19 PM  

#12  Eh, maybe they could make Iraq much more uncomfortable for us.. maybe we'd accept their DoW. I think they'd rather use Syria as a proxy to test what our response is.
Posted by: Dishman   2005-02-19 7:38:33 PM  

#11  TGA . . . very, very good . . .I like that one . .
Posted by: Jame Retief   2005-02-19 5:58:28 PM  

#10  regular troops = old kalashnikov
elite troops = new kalashnikov
Posted by: True German Ally   2005-02-19 4:44:14 PM  

#9  I think if an invasion occurs, this time, we'll make sure to wipe out the Iranian military. Every last one of them. But air attacks are much more likely. The regime will stay in place, but its military capabilities will be hobbled. Kind of like Saddam Hussein's before Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Article: "If Iran wanted, it could make Iraq a hell for the United States," Hamid al-Bayati, Iraq’s deputy foreign minister, said in a recent interview.

Somehow, I doubt this - as far as I'm concerned, the Iranians have shot their wad. But now we know whose side this guy is on.
Posted by: Zhang Fei   2005-02-19 4:43:03 PM  

#8  I liked the part about the elite Revolutionary Guards... who are mostly comprised of draftees! LOL! Why is it all of these "elite" units aren't as good as the most broke-dick, undermanned, spent all Saturday night at drill drinking hooch, National Guard postal detachment? C'mon Arnaud. Most of us caught on to that one after the second time we crushed the Iraqi Republican Guard.

My guess is that no Basiji unit would even get close to launching a human wave attack. Our UAVs would spot them in their assembly areas and before they could say Allahu Akbar, they'd be clobbered with ICM.

As far as an insurgency, why would we even occupy the Persian heartland where we would be most exposed? Go in there in and take away the nukes, but all we really need to control are the Kurdish and Arab areas (especially the later, where all the oil is). After that, we wouldn't need to worry about a nuclear Iran. Do you think that Putin, AQ Khan, Kimmy and the rest are going to want to sell their technology for dirt, goats, and mountains?
Posted by: 11A5S   2005-02-19 4:42:08 PM  

#7  As in Iraq, "elite" there obviously means something entirely different than "elite" here.
Posted by: Tom   2005-02-19 4:39:47 PM  

#6  How do you get 120,000 elite Revolutionary Guard troops from draftees? Geeze louise! Send over a few drones and satellite and they go bonkers. [Thought I imagine special forces clando ops are sticking in their craws]
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2005-02-19 4:32:32 PM  

#5  It is so cruel that the Kurds in Iran have to go without natural gas when the mullahs get cold.
http://www.kurdmedia.com/news.asp?id=6263
Posted by: Tom   2005-02-19 4:24:01 PM  

#4  Add Edward Luttwak to that list.
Posted by: Mrs. Davis   2005-02-19 4:18:26 PM  

#3  Okay, I'll be the straight man, heh:

"How cruel is it?"
Posted by: .com   2005-02-19 4:08:05 PM  

#2  He forgot the cruel Iranian winter...
Posted by: True German Ally   2005-02-19 4:05:40 PM  

#1  de Borchgrave, who has a "thing" for the Iranian regime - call it fear - as he did pre-Iraq and even pre-Afghanistan (Those winters, wow, nobody can take those!), sends someone to get a story tailored to his personal agenda and beliefs. Yawn. *golf clap*

I once respected this guy, thought he was pithy, insightful, learned, even wise. That was before I had the slightest inkling I was being manipulated. Now, well, now I think he's just a rather urbane cocktail circuit whore - smoother than the average MSM asshole, but no better or more ethical. Sad.
Posted by: .com   2005-02-19 4:03:01 PM  

00:00