You've said that you predict and endorse avoiding a direct confrontation. How do you propose our Navy prevents the mining of the Strait of Hormuz without direct confrontation which would bring Iran's anti-ship missile batteries into play?
Well if they choose to do it, it infuriates pretty much the rest of the world so there’s WWIII. My course of action would be to bomb Iranian military assets close to the shore through the use of Stealth Bombers and Fighter Jets. Destroy their anti ship missile batteries to reduce the risk of a hit (which is already low with superior American technology). Smooth sailing from there especially with our allies.
Lol, you clearly didn't look it up. The war game was meant to demonstrate the superiority of US forces against Iran in a direct engagement, and it was supposed to be all about technological superiority. Van Riper, who commanded the Iranian side, used low-tech tactics like motorcycle couriers, brute force missile attacks, and small boat attacks to outmaneuver the US and completely overwhelm our sensor systems. We didn't adapt our tactics or tech to deal with the tactics he used, we re-ran the war game with a new rules which forbade the Iranian side from using those tactics. That's why Van Riper resigned; because he saw that the flaws in the US Naval defences weren't being fixed.
In 2002. It’s 2020. Recently an Admiral said that it would be a matter of days before the Strait would be reopened if Iran chose to close it off and initiate hostilities.
We're doing the same thing that Russian and Japan did: thinking that because we spend a lot of money on our fleets and are more advanced then another nation, we can just keep using the same tactics forever. They both got their asses handed to them by the Japanese because of their arrogance, regardless of how expensive ships like the Repulse were. It took new tactics and strategy, like the Thatch Weave and improvements in reconnaissance and espionage, for us to cripple the Japanese at Midway. Hint: the Japanese forces at midway were better trained and better equipped than our forces. It was a combination of strategy and tactics which won that pivotal battle for the US. Not technological superiority.
The idea that we would use nukes on Iran is too idiotic to entertain.
And how did we defeat the Japanese? Nukes. Something the Iranians don’t have. Midway is an example of luck. The Japanese Fleet was destroyed because of the desire of Yamamoto to rearm and refuel his fighters for an attack against the US Carriers after a wave of American fighters were destroyed. Little did they know that there were 2 waves launched but the second wave got lost and they came at the time when the ships were sitting ducks. Luck explained Midway. I think Japanese Reconaissance also spotted the carriers but misreported it. Same thing at Pearl Harbor. We got lucky that the carriers weren’t in port. But back to the nukes, it’s a last resort scenario similar to the Japanese. After all of their assets are destroyed and they still refuse to surrender, and the lose of American life is too high to ascertain, that option opens.
You have complete myopia here. I agree with the trade war that Trump is waging against China. Why? Because it hurts them more than it hurts us, and they're our chief rival. We should have done this a long time ago. The same logic applies to the Hormuz. China will be hurt by a global economic crash, but we will be hurt more, as the world's largest consumer market. It will also cause more internal unrest in the US, because the people here will blame the leadership who caused it to happen. In China, the collapse can be used to demonize a warmongering US and unite the people, minimizing internal unrest. Russia will be helped by the closing of the Hormuz because it will cause the price of oil to spike. Those are the three powers that really matter. Russia and China will be happy to watch us sweat it out. The other countries are largely aligned with us, and their course of action will be to pressure US to stop, as they don't have strong diplomatic ties to Iran.
Glad we agree on the trade war. We will hurt until the Strait is reopened, which with superior American technology and allied assets will be reopened in a matter of days per an Admiral. The Iranians will have to be the ones to remove the mines, if they refuse to, it’s fair game for national security interests. The other countries will want Iran to remove their mines. If that’s through negotiation, so be it. It’s in the benefit of the US anyways.
How did that work in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria? Whew, that morale sure did melt away!
Of course, it didn't. It stiffened. Because, for some crazy reason, bombing people makes them want to fight you.
Vietnam - we couldn’t close the Ho Chi Minh Trail.
Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria - All mistakes in my opinion. They were to fight terrorism not a sovereign nation anyways (except Iraq)
Difference here is the sovereignty of Iraq and the people which hate the government. Ho Chi Minh was loved by the people. With Iraq, we left allowing ISIS to form causing us to go back. Syria, Obama refused to enforce the red line he created. In any case, the Ayatollah is hated by the people of Iran. An attempt to remove him is popular.
