Editor in Chief Bill | 15 Dec 2011 5:52 p.m. PST |
In the background fluff for Osprey/Ambush Alley Games' Tomorrow's War, Iran invades Iraq in 2263 and conquers the southern portion of that nation in a six-week war. How likely do you think an Iranian invasion of Iraq is? * very likely * likely * not sure * unlikely * very unlikely * no opinion |
Rudysnelson | 15 Dec 2011 5:59 p.m. PST |
According to some politicians IRAN has never invaded anyone. based on that then no. Personal opinion maybe likely. maybe nuke intimidation by diplomacy. Our at least their version. The Sunni countries are worried about them getting the nuke as much as the Isreali are. |
Little Big Wars | 15 Dec 2011 6:06 p.m. PST |
|
Lion in the Stars | 15 Dec 2011 6:06 p.m. PST |
I know that the Sunni countries are worried about nuclear-armed loose cannons, but I think the Sunni-Shia split has been overplayed in the western media. There's always the possibility of engineered events, but I don't think it's all that likely. |
Cardinal Ximenez | 15 Dec 2011 6:09 p.m. PST |
|
jpattern2 | 15 Dec 2011 6:09 p.m. PST |
In 2263? How likely is it that there will be two countries called "Iraq" and "Iran" with the current borders in 262 years? Now, move the timeline up 250 years or so, to right around the corner, and I'd say somewhere between "not sure" and "likely." If not an outright invasion, at least a war breaking out. |
John the OFM | 15 Dec 2011 6:09 p.m. PST |
The Sunni-Shia split has not stopped the close alliance with Syria. |
Mobius | 15 Dec 2011 6:18 p.m. PST |
|
zippyfusenet | 15 Dec 2011 6:41 p.m. PST |
You need to do some more reading, John. The Assad family are Alawite, as are the Syrian officer corps and police, and most of the leading cadres of the 'Baathist' dictatorship in Syria. The Alawites are a Shiite sect. They're a bit heterodox even for most Shia, but they've been accepted as allies by the Iranian mullahcrocy. Most Syrians are Sunni, and lately have been rising against the Assad regime. If Assad can't suppress the intifada soon, I look for a Turkish invasion of Syria to liberate the oppressed Sunni masses of Syria from the Assad dictatorship. I expect most Syrians would dance in the streets and give candy and flowers to the Turkish soldiers. That would be an interesting development, since it would give the increasingly neo-Ottoman Turks a land border with Israel. If the Iranians chose to intervene on Assad's behalf. they'd have to come through Iraq. I suspect the Iraqi Shia might welcome the Persians, and join them in their march west. Interesting times. Lots of scenarios. |
Mithmee | 15 Dec 2011 6:50 p.m. PST |
Very likely but I would expect it to happen long before 2263. More in the next 3-6 year range if not sooner. |
Agent 13 | 15 Dec 2011 6:52 p.m. PST |
Sounds like the Arab Spring is turning quickly into an Arab Winter, as one news commentator put it recently. I'm with the above. They wait 250 years?? |
Parzival | 15 Dec 2011 7:12 p.m. PST |
It's a powder keg in a desert and everyone is running around holding up magnifying glasses. Whattayathink is gonna happen? |
Ambush Alley Games | 15 Dec 2011 7:28 p.m. PST |
Just so folks who don't have the book are aware – our future history doesn't start until 2062. We purposefully left about half-a-century blank to avoid making completely bone-headed predictions. So it's quite likely that Iraq and Iran may have fought before the war mentioned in 2263, we just don't cover it. ;) We also used nation-states that folks were familiar with because we thought that was more accessible to players than a bunch of imagi-nations (we saved that for the political organizations and colonies). Since our background is just an example and not the "official play with this future history or we cancel your birthday" background, we figured folks who wanted to go further afield in their futurism would do so themselves. So . . . if you think our history is silly or it just doesn't trip your trigger, please don't let that bother you. It's just there as an example, not as a canon to be observed slavishly lest the wrath of our inquisitors fall upon you for your heresy. ;) Best wishes,
Shawn. |
Ghostrunner | 15 Dec 2011 7:41 p.m. PST |
Hard to tell which way the Middle East will go. Short term (<5 years), put the odds of Iranian invasion at about 50%. Mid term (10-20 years), I put the odds of some kind of armed dispute at about 75% – could be anything from a full on invasion to a series of border incursions and shipping blockades. Long term, Flip a coin: Heads = Nations dissolve and reform in an attempt to reunite ethnic groups into common geographic areas
that worked well for India and Pakistan (yes I'm being ironic). Tails = Iran and Iraq unite to reform Persia, creating a regional power that could rival Saudi Arabia and India both economically and militarily. I do like the history in Tomorrow's War, and the decision to NOT predict the next 20 years was smart. Played a lot of games back in the day that had the USSR stronger than ever at the dawn of the 21st Century. |
Cyrus the Great | 15 Dec 2011 8:10 p.m. PST |
All these questions set 250 years into the future with current nations are pointless. The last Iran/Iraq War went so well for both sides. Besides, Iran won't have to invade this time unless tourism is a new form of warfare. |
Dragon Gunner | 15 Dec 2011 8:35 p.m. PST |
Near future I could see a civil war in Iraq with the southern part joining Iran but no outright invasion just lots of covert help. |
skippy0001 | 15 Dec 2011 8:49 p.m. PST |
250 years? The whole area could be overrun by the Vatican/Swiss and Mongolia's Second Tour. Ambush Alley Games: Yes, I do like your stuff, just waiting for money. |
Old Contemptibles | 15 Dec 2011 9:19 p.m. PST |
That is way too far in the future. Lets ask if Iran will invade Iraq in the next 25 years. The answer is that they already own it. The Americans handed it to them on a silver platter. |
Cincinnatus | 15 Dec 2011 9:46 p.m. PST |
So how likely is it for the world (and the US) to sit back and let Iran take over Iraq? Might that be the thing that gets Iran headed down the path to regime change either from within or without (after losing a war)? |
Rich Trevino | 15 Dec 2011 10:12 p.m. PST |
Why would Iran invade ANY country? That's like a dream, another long sought hope/excuse to drop the hammer on the Persians. Iran seems to be doing fine pulling the levers behind the curtain. I have a feeling we'll no longer be dependent on oil by 2263. |
Lion in the Stars | 16 Dec 2011 12:15 a.m. PST |
I'd be surprised if we're still dependent on oil by 2050, 2100 at the latest. |
GarrisonMiniatures | 16 Dec 2011 12:41 a.m. PST |
Consider current US military expenditure. As China develops, will the US be able able to continue, or wll the US find itself in the position the USSR got itself into? – ie, military expenditure costs it the economic war? So go 40-50 years into the future and I don't see the US as a military superpower – China will be richer, possibly other countries like India will join them, so the US military role in the world will be reduced. On that basis, will the Middle East be left to its own devices, or will there be another 'major powers' power struggle? |
Tarleton | 16 Dec 2011 12:55 a.m. PST |
In 250 years, who cares
. |
Mako11 | 16 Dec 2011 1:02 a.m. PST |
I doubt they need to invade. Just wait for the final US pullout, and then Al Sadr and his buddies take over most of the country next Spring
.. Of course, the Sunni's won't be happy, so I foresee considerable friction for some time. |
Khusrau | 16 Dec 2011 3:57 a.m. PST |
As another poster pointed out, the Iranians have not invaded anyone in hundreds of years. They are basically not an aggressive militaristic nation. They believe in the superiority of their Persian background, and they are prepared to wait for the historical vindication of their innate sophistication and superiority. I think they will have far more problems wih their own 'Arab Spring' movements in the next 20 years, and the CIA should butt out, and leave the young Iranians to resolve this. After all this is the country that has the town of Shiraz (the wine was named after it), the great poets and a lot of cultural sophistication. Even now, the theocrats are having to repress the young people who would rather follow the Rubiyat and enjoy 'a glass of wine and thou!' I would be very surprised if the Iranians did not mature (of their own accord) into a relatively modern democratic and modern state in 20-30 years. The risk is that as they feel more and more encircled and threatened, that the theocrats use this as a tool to weld together a nationalism that substitutes for their progress. The best way to deal with Iran is to leave them alone
there is no way the current regime is sustainable. Even now the theocratic council is at loggerheads with the Ahmejinedad Government – which is 'relatively' reformist after Khomenei (don't believe the Faux News reports of fanatic anti-Israeli sentiment – there is some, but quite natural for any non-nuclear power who is told repeatedly by a nuclear armed near neighbour that they see them as an existential threat and are ready to use nukes..). Iran has always had a healthy Jewish and Christian community, unlike the usual allies in the really radical Wahabi Saudis. |
Stealth1000 | 16 Dec 2011 4:20 a.m. PST |
Give it 5 to 10 years tops I think. I expect the Islamic nations to attack the west within the next 10 years. There will be riots in the streets as islamic supporters rise to help the fight against the west. Iran and Iraq will then hit the holy land. Otherwise known as the end of days. Or it might not. But as it looks at the mo I would say yes. |
Connard Sage | 16 Dec 2011 4:28 a.m. PST |
I'm not getting involved, but it is amusing to watch people answering the question they wanted asked rather than the question that was asked. Clever Editor. |
Martin Rapier | 16 Dec 2011 4:42 a.m. PST |
To answer the OP, very likely. Historically Persia has invaded all sorts of countries and I see no reason why a re-run of that 1980s unpleasantness isn't on the cards. |
John the Greater | 16 Dec 2011 6:36 a.m. PST |
To answer the question asked: I would give the possibility of war to be about 80%, though sooner than 2263. Zippy's scenario of Turks fighting Iranians in Syria (with Iraqis and Israelis involved?) would make for great wargaming. In reality – SO bad! |
Old Slow Trot | 16 Dec 2011 7:45 a.m. PST |
Even money they will within 10 years,as a stepping stone to an even bigger goal. |
Legion 4 | 16 Dec 2011 8:04 a.m. PST |
Very Unlikely
once they crossed the border, or before, they'd be under constant CAS from US (and other allies) air assets. Not to mention US Tomahawk & SLAM
I don't think they have any aspirations in conquering Iraq
However, would make a good Wargame ! |
McKinstry | 16 Dec 2011 8:07 a.m. PST |
I think it is maybe 50/50 humanity still exists in 250 years and a far lower percentage that it will exist in any form of civilization we would recognize as modern technological nation states. Note – Some idiots thought it would be a clever to manipulate the DNA on the Bird Flu to make it highly contagious while retaining a 60% lethality and currently are arguing for the right to openly publish the results and the how to. All of this because it seemed intersting to see if they could do it. We are bright enough to survive conventional weapons and early nuclear technology probably but given the advance of science, we will find a way to off ourselves. |
(I make fun of others) | 16 Dec 2011 8:16 a.m. PST |
Iran has always had a healthy Jewish [
] community, Compared to other Muslim majority countries, yes, but the population has precipitously decreased in the past 30 years or so, due to emigration. It's down by 50-75% from what it had been in the 70s. Historically Persia has invaded all sorts of countries and I see no reason why a re-run of that 1980s unpleasantness isn't on the cards. Erm, Iran was invaded by Iraq in the 80s. |
Grand Duke Natokina | 16 Dec 2011 1:16 p.m. PST |
The real question becomes if Iran did invade Iraq, who would support the Iranians and who would support the Iraqis. |
Connard Sage | 16 Dec 2011 1:28 p.m. PST |
The real question becomes if Iran did invade Iraq, who would support the Iranians and who would support the Iraqis. In 2263? Who knows? Maybe the Chippy People's Republic of Scotland would support the Iraqis, and the Scandinavian superpowers would side with the Iranians? |
doug redshirt | 16 Dec 2011 7:19 p.m. PST |
Iran is a country with only 50% of the population being Persian, the rest are Arabs, Kurds, and a whole bunch of minor tribes near the Afghanistan and Pakistan border. So they want to take over even more Kurds and Arabs? Well never thought they did anything very logical. Then again most countries in this part of the world have a few elites ruling over sizable minorites. Also Iran is really a feudal state with multiple governments. You have the theocracy split into multiple factions, you have the varies Guards who actually control more then the theocracy, you have the regular military, plus all the minorities and so on. Sooner or later some one in the Guard will take over and get one of the theocracy to stand in as a figure head, now that will be scary with those nuts in charge. |
walkabout | 16 Dec 2011 10:13 p.m. PST |
|
Wartopia | 16 Dec 2011 10:34 p.m. PST |
There's no need for Iran to invade Iraq. They control it now
|
Mako11 | 17 Dec 2011 11:43 a.m. PST |
I think Wartopia is on target. |
Dragon Gunner | 17 Dec 2011 12:18 p.m. PST |
"So they want to take over even more Kurds and Arabs?" Probably just Basara and cut the Kurds and Arabs loose. |
Uesugi Kenshin | 17 Dec 2011 2:19 p.m. PST |
Not in the next 10-15 years. In Tomorrows War future, sure. |
Grand Duke Natokina | 17 Dec 2011 7:05 p.m. PST |
I would think that support would be necessary if all this happened within the next 15 years. The US has a vested interest in Iraq, but does Iran have any real friends? |