Nah, Good ole Europe will join in after the wave or terrorist attacks following the US intervention.
Iran v US confrontation
- Thread starter 4bars
- Start date
2013...there’s always a relevant tweet from ze orange one.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
There has been chatter about it online for years. I don’t think that a nuclear tipped Sunburn would necessarily be in play, but, if Iran has them, they would be apt to use them than Iran.
A swarm attack with Sunburns mounted on small boats would be as equally deveastating on a carrier group or an amphibious assault group.
Bolton's wet dream is inching closer to reality.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
And so the hidden hand reveals itself...
It's not really hidden, the Saudis and Israel have been wanting this for a long time
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Trump doing the bidding of his financial backers?Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
So when I started a thread just 1 year ago it was impossible a war with Iran and now looks like the most normal thing to happen? what did I miss?
Whilst the UK seem to be falling in line behind the US. State of our governments
Nothing, the practical situation is unchanged. If the US start a war the cost in both Iranian and US lives will be shocking. That doesn’t mean the chickenhawks like John Bolton won’t push to do it anyway, but it would be incredibly stupid and the US won’t win.
If anyone on this earth has a more punchable face than Don and Don Jr it surely is John Bolton.
True that.
McConnell, Gaetz, Kavanaugh... the list goes on.
Speaking form my utter ignorance on Iranian army strength and geographical strategic advantages, I think It would be a walk for the US and any allies. As bloody as it could be.
Though of course, again. I am 100% ignorant on this matter
But I was talking about the % possibility of an invasion compared on 1 year ago. As I perceive that it increased?
I'm not convinced there is the political will for American boots on the ground.. But with Iran and Afghanistan on either side plus Saudi giving whatever additional support required I suspect a very intensive air campaign could be mounted pretty quickly ... I'm sure pakistan could be pressured into cutting off supplies and a naval blockade in the gulf could again be implemented pretty quick
I can't see Azerbaijan or Turkmenistan taking too much buying off and pretty quickly you have the country isolated
The hope would probably be at that point for internal forces to topple the regime but who knows after Syria... And would Russia (and China) just sit back
Who knows.. trump might just nuke them because meh it's trump
Last edited:
Iraq was the 4th biggest military before US invaded them and took what ? A couple of weeks? US would destroy completely their infrastructure in first place then a routine bombardment to keep them occupied and waiting for starvation and disease to kick in, but Trump doesn’t want war so don’t worry
Iraq was quick because their army capitulated and ran away. The US didn't have to fight a pitched battle on the streets of Baghdad against irregular insurgents.
I'm in no way saying that the US couldn't in theory flatten Iran with supieror firepower, but taking over cities like Tehran, Isfahan, Tabriz or Mashhad will cost the lives of countless American college dropouts because unlike Iraq, Iran have the means and will to carry out an asymmetric Counter insurgency.
The Iraqis had the same ability and used it effectively - both among Sunni insurgent groups to the Mehdi Army in Baghdad and in the south. Not that there will be an invasion of Iran or anything.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If he knew who Napoleon was, he would be fancing himself as him.
I think you might have missed out on close to a couple decades of recent history there, friend...
How bro? I get that the Iraq quagmire fell into a counter insurgency but that counter insurgency wasn't planned nor was the tactics practiced before the war, it was all off the cuff. Iranian military and militia proxies on the other hand have been training in counter insurgency and asymmetric warfare techniques for a very long time now.
So what do you think Trump really wants by cooking up data to attack Iran?
‘Babies in incubators’ sounds similar to what was said to Congress by Kuwaitis in the lead up to the first gulf war.
Different terrain, different quality of weaponry, different training, & religious leaders are four reasons why invading Iran will not be close to as easy as Iraq was to soften up & invade.
Then the after action pacification would begin. We did so well in Iraq.
Thankfully, I agree with you that we don’t have the stomach for another prolonged & protracted excursion into the Middle East. Unfortunately, it will only take a handful of people in alignment to start a conflict.
That's not quite how war works.
As @calodo2003 pointed out, the terrain of Iran makes invasion a different beast altogether. There's also the issue of morale and motivation. Iran > Iraq in that regard.
I've talked to some friends and relatives in Iran over the last few days and no one seems concerned or worried....at least not yet. Everyone is deeply frustrated with the falling Rials and every-day decreasing spending power as of the weak economy.
Fingers crossed it remains this way. I believe starting a war with Iran is Trump's surest way of losing re-election.
One of the few things he has going for him so far is that unlike his predecessors he hasn't started any new wars or conflicts yet....start something with Iran and that immediately goes out the window.
Having said that, anything is possible....because the two nations with the most influence on US politics and politicians badly want this to happen and are pushing for it hard...so we'll see.
Fingers crossed it remains this way. I believe starting a war with Iran is Trump's surest way of losing re-election.
One of the few things he has going for him so far is that unlike his predecessors he hasn't started any new wars or conflicts yet....start something with Iran and that immediately goes out the window.
Having said that, anything is possible....because the two nations with the most influence on US politics and politicians badly want this to happen and are pushing for it hard...so we'll see.
I think the central part of Rouhani's election pitch was economic revival via a nuclear deal and lifting of sanctions. He got the deal, but a lot of the sanctions are back, and the economy has worsened.
Do you know if he or someone like him has any chance whenever the next election is?
Wouldn't Russia be secretly (or even blatantly) be providing Iran with the tools necessary to drag the US in a difficult war that's going to suck significantly more resources than expected? If the quotes from certain Russian authorities are to be believed than that is exactly what they are looking forward to. Strengthen their influence while weakening US resources and standing in the middle east.
I like to think Iran's government knows what it's doing with regards to making statements about not wanting war. Bolton and his neocon cronies shouldn't be allowed to score any kind of sympathy votes here.
I like to think Iran's government knows what it's doing with regards to making statements about not wanting war. Bolton and his neocon cronies shouldn't be allowed to score any kind of sympathy votes here.
This wont (hopefully) happen but you guys can't compare this to Iraq at all.
Despite the numbers they were quite weak, had no allies or any significant advantage in terrain or power. Of course America will "win" but it will cost A LOT more than Iraq.
Despite the numbers they were quite weak, had no allies or any significant advantage in terrain or power. Of course America will "win" but it will cost A LOT more than Iraq.
That's exactly what the War Machine and Trump want. It's all great business.
Yes. People were quite optimistic of the economic situation back in 2015 which proved to be a big big nothing burger.
Every 4 years, just before the presidential "elections", the regime props up a bat-shit insane candidate, so people go and vote to their "reformist" candidate who throws hints of more social and economic freedoms just before elections, yet backtracks on all of them once elected.
Know many who votes for Rouhani in 2017 with genuine hope, but are now saying they'll never vote again no matter what. Let's be honest, there's little point in elections, where one person can veto basically everything really.
There's also the internal house of cards inside the regime that could add a new dimension to this. We had Rafsanjani (the second most powerful person of the regime) very suspiciously "die" in 2017, his kids jailed after that....Ahmadinejad, a former president, barred from running for president in 2017...FM Zarif resigning from his post a couple of months ago, just for it to be declined and him to flex his muscles.
Looking back, it's hilarious that the one president who actually had the balls to issue Executive Orders on more social freedoms (allowing women to the stadiums, which was rejected and vetoed by the supreme leader) was the super conservative hardliner populist Ahmadinejad. I think he has big plans for a post-IR Iran personally....If you follow his Twitter account closely, he's been learning English, regularly tweets about American pop culture, NBA/NFL/etc, criticizing the regime indirectly and even once said: "We had more freedom during the Shah era than now"....Unbelievable that this is the same guy that the ruling power literally rigged the 2009 election so he wins re-election and been hosting the other two candidates under house arrest since then, now 10 years.
Despite financial corruption going over the roof (even by IR standards) during his 8-year reign and of course some of his outrageous international claims, I still maintain if there's one regime insider that the Supreme Leader genuinely feels threatened by and is afraid of, it's Ahmadinejad.
Then there's the issue of succession. There's lots of rumours and speculation re: Khamanei's health ....if he was to drop dead today, there's no clear candidate to immediately take over that role and keep the hierarchy of the regime...if it happens, it'll be the house of cards of all house of cards. There can simply be no reforms without the position of "Supreme leader" being removed. As long as that position exists, everything else is just for show.
I like Iran. They don't really cause trouble, they generally seem pretty matter-of-fact, Tehran is a cracking city for a weekend break.. America behave like a bunch of cnuts - the people should sharpen up and sort their leaders out. It's not Trump, it's the lot of them.
we desperately need a regime change in the US
So some pollster tells Numpty-in-Chief that the racist vote is not enough to get him re-elected.
He needs to start a war to put the Dems on the defensive.
It may just work.
He needs to start a war to put the Dems on the defensive.
It may just work.