Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Persian Predicament Q&A! (Patreon)

Published:
2025-02-06 14:10:55
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

I've been thinking of a good way to round out the Persian Predicament series and the obvious answer is to let you guys pose some questions for Luka and I to try and answer.

I have no idea what format we'd do this in, or whether it would work at all, but if you have any questions about the game, the scenario, the plans, the results, etc. leave a comment with them down below and we'll give this a try!

Files

Comments

Suity Bois Page (edited)

Comment edits

2026-09-08 14:00 Have you read Swort Point by Harold Coyle? If not you definitely should if you like combat mission.
2025-02-06 14:14

Suity Boi

What would you have done with the forward observer and significantly more of your infantry force if your AT assets had killed all the enemy vehicles in the mortar area fight?

Ben Kerry

What would you do differently to the scenario if you were to do it again?

Ben Kerry

Read a bit of it, not really my favorite to be honest. Btw recommend John F Antal’s fictions back in the 90s

Ben Kerry

And another question, where do you think the “decisive point” lies in this game?

Ben Kerry

One last question: Why not have the 82nd take the Bandar Abbas international airport? That one is far larger. And with the Soviet recon battalion coming down is task force ridgeway really ready to deal with a Soviet motor rifle regiment? What would the defense area be for the first phase of operation?

Ben Kerry

Really, most of my “Persian Predicament: the DLC” writing has been fleshed out. What I really need right now is just the “big picture” on an operational level

GLG

I guess the interesting part of all this for me is the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan and how this complicates the Iran conflict. We have the Soviets at odds with Islamic fundamentalists and that will make things very complicated for them in both Afghanistan and Iran. The USA is not necessarily 'friends' with the fundamentalists either given the loss of US influence in Iran via the Shah. So, in Iran you have at least a three-way conflict between Communist, Islamic and Royalist(the Shah) forces. In Afghanistan it's more two sided between Communist and Islamic, though there are many shades of grey within Islamic circles and has been since the 8th century. With respect to USA vs USSR, it's wide open at this point, I would think. The use of a tactical nuke, for whatever reasons, was really bad news. The USA just lost a key Middle East asset in the Shah's Iran, and yet the USSR is very nervous about a superpower playing next to their border. The last time that happened they spent over 3 years clearing their country of the invaders. The 'Shah avenue' provides the USA a foot in the door for reclaiming control of Iran, but it's going to be very dicey and fraught with nuclear peril. On the flip side, the Soviets are maybe in it far more than they'd like and quickly see their involvement in Afghanistan as squandering military resources at a critical theater of operations. I suspect the USSR would come to some official(or unofficial) agreement in Afghanistan before too long, in order to better focus on the Iran situation. I don't see the USSR backing down from the US threat in Iran, as this is their backyard. The whole thing could de-escalate into a shadow conflict, while each side park forces along opposite sides of Iran in order to protect 'interests.' Who knows what happens after that? In any case, fascinating scenario from a Cold War perspective.

Ben Kerry

Actually, it's really complicated. Iranians are majority Shia, unlike majority Sunni Afghanistan. In fact there's a huge ton of pressure points down there because of this. (a big problem Western countries have during early GWOT is their belief that all the enemies are somehow in the same "Islamic fundamentalist" camp, nope, Sunnis hate Shias and vice versa). Even to this day, the Taliban is vehemently anti-Tehran to the point they declare Shias as infidels. However, pan-Islamism is also a thing, with significant foreign support and outrage petty sectarian conflict can be overlooked. In fact, the early leadership of Al Qaeda is believed to have strong connections with Tehran. Bin Laden for example boasts an pan-Islamist unity, and the concept of America and Israel as "Great Satan" and "Lesser Satan" are very prominent Khomeinist talking points. The interesting thing is what Pakistan will do actually. Pakistani ISI is perhaps the most overlooked intelligence agency in the world. They practically enabled what would then mature into modern day jihadism in the 80s. The doc posted by Hapless says that Pakistani government is in fact ready to commit troops straight into Iran against Soviet forces. This may theoretically trigger a massive war involving India and China if the situation continues to escalate. I believe the Soviet invasion of Iran will be exceedingly bloody and can be easily sensitized. The "Soviet massacre of Tehran" will be featured everywhere, lots of unemployed and angry Muslim youth will be riled up easily, Pakistani Imams will soon offer them the gate to paradise then send them across the border to martyrdom. Still, all these forces are going to take some time. Initial Iranian insurgency and resistance down south will be mostly army straggler units, especially parts of the more "elite" commando units who may have a depth defense plan. What would become the IRGC and Basij would be first concentrated in Tehran with very few mobilized individuals forming up bands. They are likely to be some sort of speedbump against Soviet troops, Green Beret ODAs will probably be sent to help them mine roads and blow bridges before leaving them to die fighting the Soviets. There's no way they can resist Soviet forces effectively at first. In this timeline, Khomeini may have taken a more pragmatic attitude towards Americans. He may even flip 180 and declare Soviets as "Greatest Satan" instead. A big chunk of Tehran regime know it's mostly for show, they are definitely not above collaborating with "muh Zionists" if it means benefit to the regime. At this point in the timeline I see the conflict escalating into WW3, there is little chance it's going to be anything else. An unnerving fact is that the Soviets allegedly has their own "Green Light" program with Soviet Spetsnaz troops armed with miniaturized nuclear demolition munitions. Still I do not believe the war is destined to turn into "Threads". It can still go like Hackett's book and only Birmingham got nuked. The thing about Iran is that it's an economy of force theatre. When WW3 broke out you want everyone in West Germany. US will definitely escalate horizontally by calling in all regional partners to stir things up and relieve stress on the outnumbered Iranian front. The US objective would be somehow establishing a defense line along the mountain ranges that separates Southern and Northern Iran. (the reliability of whatever Iranian resistance would be problematic) Soviets are very unlikely to back down anywhere, and this may cost them everywhere. In a "shadow war" scenario both Soviet and American forces may attempt to "Vietnamify" the situation with neither side directly engaging each other but through regional proxy

Ray L

Question for Luka: why were the 120mm mortars tasked with neutralizing by smoke or fire the American supporting fires from the high ground. Even without spotting any enemy the terrain alone suggested the threat.

Andrew Offen

My question - WHERE IS MY MEDAL????😤🤬

Andrew Offen

3 “BMP,s” and a T-72!! That’s almost ace status in 1 mission. Definitely Silver Star worthy….if not higher…..🤣

Ben Kerry

The actual problem is political There’s a quota for medals and if too much medals went to one unit of one division things can get weird. One for Dogie Burns, One for you, One for Duck (maybe he get a better one, Meritorious service cross). FO “Begrudging” get a Meritorious service cross or Medal of Honor. That’s five big medals being handed out. And if DC want to get one for winning the first battle of the next war it’s 6. One in twenty. Maybe a bronze star for Duck since his squad didn’t come under much fire and everyone pretty much made it in one piece. DC don’t get any cause glory hounding suck. Then it’s 3 silver stars plus a medal of honor, can probably work I think OK, according to wikipedia medalflation is possible, everyone I named probably can get a silver star at least

Ben Kerry

Standby for medal

Eldar1944

Question for the USSR, why go in for the flanking attack down the road and into the rear objective as it seemed to me that loosing that force was the piont at witch you ran out of options. Why not sit on the hill or attack the front objective out of the two by the road.

Nicholas Shaler

How do you think things would have gone if either 1) 2nd Plt had not tried to contest the far objective at all or 2) if you had tried to retreat survivors to the middle objective. A dozen extra men in there might have made CM count it as a victory for you.

Ben Kerry

Nope, CM only checks whether or not there are enemy pixeltruppens in. I think sending 2nd plt to contest south was the right call, there’s a chance it can end in the other way, plus it delays the reds for 18 minute whole

Jeffrey Allan

I enjoyed the interview style Q and A you did for the Deathride series. A video where you ask each other questions about thought process would be interesting

Nicholas Shaler

I meant that a dozen men might have stopped those stragglers from getting in.

Ben Kerry

Well, it might lead more men to their doom as Colonel Luka reported to the general that the operation is a minor victory and a bridgehead has been established in the airport. Stacking the 2nd platoon into north airport may in fact result in greater casualty. The presence of BMPs practically means each fireteam only have one chance