[Torpedo Fodder]

Originally Posted by Kapitain

cant just fly or sail into iran do you think they wont fight back ?

Of course they'll fight back, but that doesn't mean they can win.

iran has a very good SAM systerm and air defence systerm

Eh? not really:

Originally Posted by [url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/airforce.htm

GlobalSecurity.org[/url]]By the mid-1990s Iran reportedly had small numbers of Chinese SA-2s, along with SA-5 and SA-6 SAMs. Total holdings seem to include 30 Improved Hawk fire units (12 battalions/150+ launchers), 45-60 SA-2 and HQ-2J/23 (CSA-1 Chinese equivalents of the SA-2) launchers. Some sources claim that Iran might have 25 SA-6 launchers, but other sources are doubtful. There are reports of the transfer of eight SA-6 launchers to Iran from Russia in 1995/1996. In January 1996 US Navy Vice Admiral Scott Redd said had recently added Russian-built SA/6 missile defense systems.

In 1997 the Iranian Air Defense forces declared the Almaz S-200 Angara (SA-5 'Gammon') low-to high-altitude surface-to-air missile (SAM) operational. The missile has a comparatively modest acceleration rate, and relies on its small wings for maneuverability. Furthermore, the mechanically steered radars used by the SA-5 are vulnerable to saturation by decoys. Sources disagree on the number deployed, with some claiming four batteries, while others claim ten. Another source reports that the Air Force had three Soviet-made long-range SA-5 units, with a total of 10-15 launchers -- enough for six sites.

There were reports that Iran was considering purchases of the highly capable SA-10 [S-300] missile system. The SA-10 is a highly capable long-range all-altitude SAM. As early as 1994 it was reported that Iran had six SA-10 batteries [96 missiles] on order from Russia [but as of late 2004 no deliveries had taken place]. In February 1997 a $90 million sale of 36 missiles to Iran and three older SA-10 SAM systems, made up of components from Russia, Croatia, and Kazakhstan, fell through. On 30 December 2000 an announcement was made in Russia that Iran had informed Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev about Iran's desire to purchase the S-300 anti-missile system. In March 2001 there were reports tha the Russians are close to cutting a deal with Iran on advanced missiles. Itar-Tass reported that Iran would soon close the deal on the Russian Tor-M1, Tor-M1T, and the S-300 surface-to-air missiles. After this report, there were no subsequent reports of Iranian interest in the SA-10.

There is no dispositive source of information on Iranian air defense deployment. Key SAM-defended areas include Tehran and centers involved in nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs. Iran appears to have deployed the SA-5 batteries to defend Tehran, major ports, and oil facilities, providing long-range medium-to-high altitude coverage of vital coastal installations. The I-Hawk and SA-2 batteries are reportedly located around Tehran, Isfahan, Shiraz, Bandar Abbas, Kharg Island, Bushehr, Bandar Khomeini, Ahwaz, Dezful, Kermanshah, Hamadan, and Tabriz, providing point defense for key bases and facilities. Some of these sites lack sufficient missile launchers to be fully effective.

Iran imported surveillance radars from the China National Electronics Import-Export Corporation. The radar can detect targets up to 300 km away and is now part of Iran's air defense system. But even with China's help, Iran's air defenses remained porous, perhaps on par with Iraqi capabilities demonstrated in the 1991 Gulf war. The launchers are scattered too widely prevent relatively rapid suppression. Iran lacks the low altitude radar coverage, overlapping radar network, command and control integration, sensors, and resistance to jamming and electronic countermeasures needed for an effective air defense net. The defenses operate a point defense mode. .

Note the bolded part. Basically, I don't see any reason Iran's IADS would be any harder to deal with than Iraq's was in '91.

Before the Gulf War, Iraq had the best IADS in the world in terms of concentration and integration (though most of it's SAMs were older than the best available at the time), yet it was still dismantled within days. Due to the size of Iran and how thinly their systems are spread out, it would take longer to supress the individual SAM sites, but the command & control nodes would still be taken out early in the operation, greatly reducing the effectivenss of those sites.

not only that they have three submarine which could pose a great threat to any ship or submarine nearin the coast

A threat that would be dealt with. It's a little known fact that Russia actually sold the acoustic signatuire of thse boats to the USA to make them easier to find. This was done to appease the Americans, who threw a fit over the sale.

over fly it with B52 and drop bombs those B52's would bearly make it home if at all those slow bombers would fall victim to the masses and masses of air defence missiles come to think of it so would many planes.

More like B-2s, which Iran would be completely unable to intercept. Such B-2 sorties would probably include that new 30,000lb superheavy penetrator bomb the USAF is working on, to take out the "superbunkers" at the Natanz and Eshafan facilities. If B-52s are used, they will be employed purely as stand-off cruise missile platforms like they were against Serbia in '99.

Please note that I am not advocating bombing Iran's nuclear sites; the political backlash would be far more trouble than the potential benefits of the strike are worth. All I am saying is that it the US has the wherewithal to accomplish this feat if it so desired.