logoalt Hacker News

nicboutoday at 5:36 AM2 repliesview on HN

They did not manage to bomb Germany, North Korea, or North Vietnam into submission and they tried for years. Winning through bombing alone has never worked.


Replies

leonidasruptoday at 6:42 AM

Do not underestimate the effects of modern precision bombing, the technology moved forward (especially if we compare it with II. world war). Today it's much easier to destroy any kind of infrastructure, power plants, bridges, dams, water preparation facilities, waste treatment, cement, steel production, food silos, fuel storage, vehicle manufacturing, etc.

This is very important because, population in cities is much more dependent on infrastructure, than rural population. Rural population is mostly self sufficient. Over 60% of Iranians live today in cities, but under 20% of Vietnamese lived in cities at the time of Vietnam war. Vietnam was also strongly supported by China, with transportation using Laos and Cambodian.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-livin...

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-of-population-livin...

Iran is even now under sever water crisis.

https://www.wri.org/insights/iran-war-water-crisis-middle-ea...

So a large scale bombing of all Iranian infrastructure would probable not cause the fall of the regime, because they have the guns and can take anything they want, but the suffering and famine of Iranian people would be enormous.

Sometimes large scale bombing causes submission, for example fire-bombing of Japanese cities (atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was in the scale of destruction and loss of life comparable to Tokyo fire bombing, only much cheaper in the number of airplanes).

https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/d01171/

show 1 reply
tristanjtoday at 5:45 AM

No, it would achieve the three primary goals of this conflict.

It would cause catastrophic economic damage to Iran, and given how politically unstable Iran currently is (millions of people rioted earlier this year), the regime would not survive the oncoming civil unrest.

It would be a humanitarian disaster, but from the US/Israel's point of view, it would be a victory. An Iran with no electricity has no capacity for industry, and has no ability to manufacture missiles, drones, or have a nuclear program.

Without ability to manufacture missiles, Iran would be unable coerce people to buy into it's Hormuz transit toll system, and the strait would reopen.

This weakened Iran would have no ability to produce nukes, close the strait, and make missiles; for at least a decade while they recover economically.

show 7 replies