Russian options...

Hello all,

Mark Katz, a Professor of Government and Politics at George Mason University, recently involved his students in a "war-gaming" exercise aimed at determining possible Russian responses to increasing tensions between Iran and the US.
Here is the link to the story:

news.monstersandcritics.com...

Granted these are University students, not foreign affairs or military specialists.

But, in their scenario Russia, after pursuing extensive diplomatic efforts, decides to place contingents of Russian soldiers around Iran's most valuable installations in hopes of forestalling, or limiting, the scope of an American attack.

Do you think this would be a likely scenario, if events come to a head in the region.

If so, what do you think America's response would be?

As I recall, during the onset of the Kosovo Campaign, the Russians grabbed a strategic airfield ahead of the American forces, and Gen. Wesley Clark (now retired) seriously considered attacking them there.

What do you think?

Russia became what it is because of what it was. We could defeat them and China within weeks if we wanted too. We have more ports and bases around this globe and our enemies know this. We can strike anybody anytime an Putin and China know this. Who really thinks we would waste a second invading these two counrtries when a few good hits could do it for us? Remember the light's we left on during the Iraq war? We could have knocked it out and all communication but we did'nt. They boasted we were 3 hundred miles back and being held up buy a phantom Iraqi army. Meanwhile M1Abrams were pulling up to Saddams Mansion. Saddam watched TV all day and night and he knew his time was up.

But, in their scenario Russia, after pursuing extensive diplomatic efforts, decides to place contingents of Russian soldiers around Iran's most valuable installations in hopes of forestalling, or limiting, the scope of an American attack.

Do you think this would be a likely scenario, if events come to a head in the region.

Thats an incredibly unlikely scenario. Russia isn't going to go to all out thermonuclear war with the US becuase of the money that they get from iranian nuke plans.

Cellerdweller
We could defeat them and China within weeks if we wanted too

We can zap them, and they can zap us, its mutual.

[edit on 15-4-2006 by Nygdan]

Originally posted by Nygdan

But, in their scenario Russia, after pursuing extensive diplomatic efforts, decides to place contingents of Russian soldiers around Iran's most valuable installations in hopes of forestalling, or limiting, the scope of an American attack.

Do you think this would be a likely scenario, if events come to a head in the region.

Thats an incredibly unlikely scenario. Russia isn't going to go to all out thermonuclear war with the US becuase of the money that they get from iranian nuke plans.

I think the student's idea was that Russia would attempt to be an actual "brake" to American military plans while also gaining influence in the negotiation process and, perhaps more influence in Iran itself.

I think the idea was to forestall a nuclear assault; however, after thinking about it, I don't think it would be a likely scenario because of what I think is Ahmadinejad's
desire to face-down America on his own. esdad71 provided this link in another thread to an article about the Iranian president;

www.globalsecurity.org...

I think both Ahmadinejad and Grand Ayatollah Khameini view this in terms of a projection of independant Islamic power to the world.

Cellardweller: sorry, I forgot to hit the quote button for your post... ...but I think the idea of defeating China, and especially Russia, in a matter of weeks is unrealistic. We fought a few hot wars against both of their client-states (N. Korea, Vietnam) but were unwilling to take things to the nuclear stage (even though it was considered in both cases) because of the quite reasonable fear of MAD (and world opinion).

The Soviet Union may not be around anymore, but Russia still has plenty of nukes and enough of a formidable military to make things dicey.

I am not speaking of invading such countries as Russia or China, take my word for it considering we charted many schemes to devour them since post WW2. Thousands of schemes and plenty filled with such simplicity that it actuall would be over with a week. As for China llook at their geography! They have nowhere to go of hide. This is why their Navy has become so important. Nothing a few subs can't destroy in no time.

Here is a liitle film of The largest nuke ever built ( by the USSR ) to compensate for lack of pin-pointing targets. It's impressive yet how are they going to send something that big even near America without a bunch of red lights. Mind you the stock is old, but their modern research cannot match our outcomes. If Russia was such a power you would think they'd have a say in our 2 invasins of Afghanistan and Iraq. They did'nt do squat. As for China? If they want to destroy their economy that is more or less bulid for America so be it.


video.google.com...

Originally posted by Cellerdweller
Russia became what it is because of what it was. We could defeat them and China within weeks if we wanted too. We have more ports and bases around this globe and our enemies know this. We can strike anybody anytime an Putin and China know this. Who really thinks we would waste a second invading these two counrtries when a few good hits could do it for us? Remember the light's we left on during the Iraq war? We could have knocked it out and all communication but we did'nt. They boasted we were 3 hundred miles back and being held up buy a phantom Iraqi army. Meanwhile M1Abrams were pulling up to Saddams Mansion. Saddam watched TV all day and night and he knew his time was up.

Russia and China together !!! I DONT THINK SO !!! Not even one of us without leading to a disaster of both sides , the war would not even last a week . For the record better read this


Putin’s Show of Strength Triggers Fear of Fresh Nuclear Arms Race
Created: 26.12.2005 12:42 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 18:44 MSK
Frazer Nelson
Scotsman.com




Vladimir Putin has sparked fears of a new arms race between Russia and the United States by deploying a nuclear ballistic strike force system that officials made clear could penetrate U.S. anti-missile defenses.

On Christmas Eve, the Russian army activated a new fleet of Topol-M missiles that can fit a nuclear warhead and travel 6,000 miles, changing trajectory to foil any enemy interception device.

The accompanying hawkish rhetoric of the Russian military commanders and the frenetic response of the U.S. navy have stoked concern that the former Cold War adversaries have quietly resumed the arms race.

General Nikolai Solovtsov, commander of the Russian missile forces, has mobilized a new battalion for the Topol-M missiles, which have a capacity for a one megaton impact — 75 times the power of the 1945 Hiroshima bomb.

General Solovtsov, a critic of U.S. anti-missile defense technology, said the Topol-M missile “is capable of piercing any missile defense system” and is immune to electromagnetic blasts used by current U.S. anti-missile systems.

While Russia disbanded two missile divisions last year, it has now formed more than 20 new units — in the fastest increase of nuclear spending since the run-up to the Cuban missile crisis.

Last month, the U.S. navy carried out its most ambitious and successful test of an anti-missile interceptor, which can be launched from an Aegis class cruiser in the Pacific Ocean. A warhead from an incoming rocket was destroyed 100 miles above sea level — the first time an anti-missile defense has succeeded, in tests, when launched from a ship.

Originally posted by apocalypticon
I think the student's idea was that Russia would attempt to be an actual "brake" to American military plans

Then the students are delusional. Russia, especially in its current state, isn't going to try this, let alone by using its people as the equivalent of human sheilds.

Honestly, it sounds like this professor is a tool and trying to 'lead' the students into reachign that conlcusion.
Or, he's a real crappy teacher, because that scenario is so wildly improbable that it can only be that his students are clueless.

The Soviet Union may not be around anymore, but Russia still has plenty of nukes and enough of a formidable military to make things dicey.

Nukes, yes, conventional force, definitly not. The ruskies army fell apart, and can barely field itself, they definitly can't send an army over to iran, though this situation doesn't call for that.

Nygdan,

I surrender to your superior logic and knowledge of the situation... and your "distracting" avatar (hard to stay on track in a debate with that avatar)....

The idea sounded possible to me for awhile, given the fact that Russia grabbed that airfield in Bosnia in the face of American forces led by Gen. Clark. I suppose that any attack on Iran would put the Russian military in the path of a great deal more firepower than was used in the Bosnia campaign.

Plus, Russia hasn't exactly been victorious in Chechnya, despite the level of force and resulting destruction there.

Just out of curiosity, what do you think the US response would be if Russia did start using it's heavy-lift capabilities to move forces into the region? Just a hypothetical...

Well now...this new avatar is downright intimidating Looks like my dad, years ago, getting ready to give me the "once-over"

Originally posted by apocalypticon
The idea sounded possible to me for awhile, given the fact that Russia grabbed that airfield in Bosnia

Bosnia might be a different story. Serbia and the balkans is a traditional area that the russians have a long history of interest in, that was part of their sphere of influence in a sense. From what I understand, the russians will take action regarding places that used to be former "Soviet Republics" within the USSSR and the like.


Nice jobby on the avvy there!

Just out of curiosity, what do you think the US response would be if Russia did start using it's heavy-lift capabilities to move forces into the region? Just a hypothetical...

The problem with any analysis like that is, how far are the russians willing to go? The US will certainly threaten the russians, hell, they might even just bomb the places with 'smart bombs' and chalk up any casualties as the russians own fault. On a global scale, the US can't really afford to not do that, to change track on such a major issue because the russians have a few troops acting like human sheilds.

Alternatively, if we're just talking nuke plants, the US could ignore it, heck, having the russians there might even prevent the Iranians from being able to blow them up and spread radio-waste everywhere, or other terror groups within iran from getting any processed materials. But there'd definitly be tensions, as 'who knows what the russians are going to do with the material'. But the US should be able to accomplish its basic objectives of destroying the military and the regime and occupying the country and securing the oil supply without having too physically attack the plants. Then, whatever puppet regime the US installs should be able to waltz past the russians, perhaps having to pay them an 'fee' under the 'previous contract'.

[edit on 17-4-2006 by Nygdan]

Originally posted by Nygdan
Nice jobby on the avvy there!

Got the help from you...

Alternatively, if we're just talking nuke plants, the US could ignore it, heck, having the russians there might even prevent the Iranians from being able to blow them up and spread radio-waste everywhere, or other terror groups within iran from getting any processed materials.

I tend to agree with this...I really doubt Russia wants anything making it's way to the Chechens.

But the US should be able to accomplish its basic objectives of destroying the military and the regime and occupying the country and securing the oil supply without having too physically attack the plants.

I agree that attacking the plants might actually prove a distraction of resources, endangering strike elements over what would certainly be heavily defended areas.
That is, if occupation were the goal.

I'm not so sure how we would do trying to occupy Iran, though. Are there any groups, other than the Kurds, who would welcome us? Or do we end up in the middle of another civil war, like in Iraq? Or does it just unite everybody but the Kurds against us?


[edit on 4/17/2006 by apocalypticon]

Originally posted by Russian Boy

Originally posted by Cellerdweller
Russia became what it is because of what it was. We could defeat them and China within weeks if we wanted too. We have more ports and bases around this globe and our enemies know this. We can strike anybody anytime an Putin and China know this. Who really thinks we would waste a second invading these two counrtries when a few good hits could do it for us? Remember the light's we left on during the Iraq war? We could have knocked it out and all communication but we did'nt. They boasted we were 3 hundred miles back and being held up buy a phantom Iraqi army. Meanwhile M1Abrams were pulling up to Saddams Mansion. Saddam watched TV all day and night and he knew his time was up.

Russia and China together !!!

I DONT THINK SO !!! Not even one of us without leading to a disaster of both sides , the war would not even last a week . For the record better read this


Putin’s Show of Strength Triggers Fear of Fresh Nuclear Arms Race
Created: 26.12.2005 12:42 MSK (GMT +3), Updated: 18:44 MSK
Frazer Nelson
Scotsman.com




Vladimir Putin has sparked fears of a new arms race between Russia and the United States by deploying a nuclear ballistic strike force system that officials made clear could penetrate U.S. anti-missile defenses.

On Christmas Eve, the Russian army activated a new fleet of Topol-M missiles that can fit a nuclear warhead and travel 6,000 miles, changing trajectory to foil any enemy interception device.

The accompanying hawkish rhetoric of the Russian military commanders and the frenetic response of the U.S. navy have stoked concern that the former Cold War adversaries have quietly resumed the arms race.

General Nikolai Solovtsov, commander of the Russian missile forces, has mobilized a new battalion for the Topol-M missiles, which have a capacity for a one megaton impact — 75 times the power of the 1945 Hiroshima bomb.

General Solovtsov, a critic of U.S. anti-missile defense technology, said the Topol-M missile “is capable of piercing any missile defense system” and is immune to electromagnetic blasts used by current U.S. anti-missile systems.

While Russia disbanded two missile divisions last year, it has now formed more than 20 new units — in the fastest increase of nuclear spending since the run-up to the Cuban missile crisis.

Last month, the U.S. navy carried out its most ambitious and successful test of an anti-missile interceptor, which can be launched from an Aegis class cruiser in the Pacific Ocean. A warhead from an incoming rocket was destroyed 100 miles above sea level — the first time an anti-missile defense has succeeded, in tests, when launched from a ship.

Yeah, I've been talking about the Topol-M for so long. Its a great toy but America seems to have a response for it. Each country will keep making new weapons, each country will keep making counter-weapons. This will get nowhere.


Anyway, back on topic, Russia is not going to fight the Americans, right now anyway, so all we can look forward to is a US and Iran war, and maybe some Brittish, and middle eastern countries participating, perhaps, I don't know for sure, but don't expect Russia in there.

Yeah i would have to agree w/ Russian Soldier. There is no way that Russia can afford getting involved in the whole Iran situation right now as they have to avoid a direct conflict w/ America in their best interests.

However if America does get involved w/ Iran its going to strech American resources too thin and they would be overwhelmed if Russia took advantage of the situation.

Which is why i think Russia might be fueling the tension between the U.S. and Iran.....I mean wouldn't it made sense to use a Middle eastern country as bait to lure America in? At that point America wouldn't even be able to mount an offensive against Russia as the entire region would be inflammed. America's economy would be brought to its knees as gas would go through the roof.

The trade off for Russia would be dibs on oil from Iran, the trade off for Iran would be weapons technology for their tiff w/ Isreal.

Just my two bits.

What I know from periodically reading Russian news sources, is that Russian scientists are already present in Iran, which is a deterrent for US attack. They are working on Nuclear technologies, and are conviniently stationed near potential targets in Iran. I don't know how much of a deterrent they are, because they are not really military officials, but I am sure US is thinking about not upsetting any interests between the US and Russia.

As for military personel- Russia will not send them to Iran to deter an attack of that I am sure. Russia deliberately missed its chance to deter US attack in Serbia, even though relations between Milosevich and Moscow were very good. If it wanted to it could have prevented the US attack on Serbia, but because of some unknown to us reason Russia pulled out most of its personel from there before the attack. And it had much better relations with Serbia than it does now with Iran. Iran has deceived Russia on several vital issues recently, and Putin is not very trustful of the Mulahs anymore.

posted by apocalypticon

Prof. Mark Katz recently involved students in a "war-game" exercise aimed at determining possible Russian responses to tensions between Iran and the US. In their scenario, Russia decides to place contingents of soldiers around Iran's most valuable installations to forestall or limit the scope of a possible (or probable?) American attack. [Edited by Don W]

At some time during WW2, the USSR did this. I do not know if it was at the invite of the Shah or at the suggestion of the Allies, but it was obviously done to thwart any German drive south from Russia or across the Suez and Sinai if Rommel had captured Cairo. The Ruskies left reluctantly, after War 2 ended, perhaps in part due to the Truman Doctrine.

Do you think this would be a likely scenario, if events come to a head in the region. If so, what do you think America's response would be.

Normally, you could rely on common sense to furnish a reasonable answer. However, we know Geo W is not “normal” so that is out. Geo W prides himself on being a “risk taker” who so far has not been caught. Well, not prosecuted. We did catch him on WMDs, but what the hey? Perhaps his experiences as an inside trader and the Texas Rangers thing have spoiled him? As in the AWOL from the Guard, maybe he feels invulnerable? Or is it invincible?

I have a low regard for the Russian military capability. Not the patriotism of the soldiers on the ground, but the lack of money to fund any kind of foreign adventure. If you think American finances are in trouble, Russian finances are in quicksand. I’d wager the US is presently paying 20% of the cost of the Russian military. At least the cost of those who are guarding the nuclear weapons. No, I do not see Russia going outside its borders.

posted by Cellerdweller
Russia became what it is because of what it was. We could defeat them and China within weeks if we wanted too. We have more ports and bases around this globe and our enemies know this. We can strike anybody anytime and Putin and China know this.

Hmm? So how come we can’t stop 15,000 insurgents in Iraq? Or 5,000 Talibans in Afghan? We do have a quick strike capability, but that’s it. Face it, we are good at one thing only. The world has passed us by. Asymmetric warfare is killing us. 2,486 of us anyway. This is one time when the critics are dead-on, we’re fighting the last war.

Who really thinks we would waste a second invading these two countries when a few good hits could do it for us? Meanwhile M1Abrams were pulling up to Saddam’s Mansion. Saddam watched TV all day and night and he knew his time was up.

And so, History 101 Murdoch style, as seen on Fox TV.


[edit on 6/6/2006 by donwhite]