It seems as though all the relevant actors haven't sat down to smooth out their story. The low flying slow drones evading the patriot missile systems could be accepted to an extent but cruise missiles?
plus the fact that a missile fired from Iranian territory would physically have to pass Bahrain. fecking clowns trying to engage in subterfuge.Bahrain is the new Belgium.It seems as though all the relevant actors haven't sat down to smooth out their story. The low flying slow drones evading the patriot missile systems could be accepted to an extent but cruise missiles?
If it was missiles the US would have no difficulty proving it. Clearly it wasn't.
If Yemen displayed the remains of British and american missles, would that be seen as an act of war?
I don’t think as well US wants to be involved in a war but between Iraq and Iran is a difference , US invaded Iraq but Im sure they wouldn’t invade Iran because Trump doesn’t want to be involved in any war (2020) and probably they would completely destroy all the military bases and government buildings which would cause a bigger disaster to the 80 million people, also the attack if came from Iran was in the right time because again elections next year and they are afraid if Trump wins then.....
It is no secret the Iranians have been supplying arms to the Yemeni fighters. Doesn’t prove Iran did the deed themselves - I am sure they aren’t that dumb.
I don’t think the US know what it wants at the moment. Their actions are incoherent. All they have done is strengthen both Iran and Saudi Arabia at the expense of the US.
We should not be in this situation in the first place.
And if the attack didn't come from Iran?
When it comes to war. There are deeper.state that orchestrated this. I dont believe a president alone can decise such thing as a full scale invasion.
The Military-Industrial Complex you mean?
Probably. But if america decided to go to war it wont be down to just the potus. He'll have people behind the screen orchestrating, instructed, or at the very least made into the final decision of going to war with a web of lies and misinformation.
Its an old concept -- suspect since Eisenhower who coined the phrase.
The occupation no, the wars though were considered 2 of the most one sided wars in history. Iran would be the same, people forget just how powerful the US military is,
Agreed. It all depends how far the US want to go. If it's purely the US flattening the place, it can be done real quick.
Kinda, yes. Though I believe Iran's military is less of a paper tiger than Iraq's was. There's no way they can beat the Americans, obviously, but with enough modern hardware they can make it hurt a little bit. It also has more than twice the population, is four times the size, and is quite mountainous.
Talking about UK here - that's why I bolded that part.
Tend to agree... It wouldn't be that straight forward
Oh in terms of the UK it would last a bit longer but they would have air dominance in less than a week and would have destroyed our bases and capabilities in that time. Then they wouldn't have to invade, they could just starve us out from the sea cutting off all incoming supplies. The only weapon that would last that long would be our submarines but once the dominance is asserted its too small a force to last out. We would give them a bloody nose for their efforts for the first day or two but the inevitable would happen and again with ease. The scary part is they could do it to us with only their Atlantic Navy.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Your subs will be crucial indeed - the only hope against the carrier groups.
The US would achieve subsurface supremacy by taking out any Iranian subs and/or mines before putting any surface assets in the area. Similar to how above the surface, the Air Force achieves air supremacy before clearing the way for Army and Marine assets to launch ground invasions.
Imagine if Hillary's responce to an embassy being attacked was to call for a local uprising ...
Still talking about the UK here
. Sorry, we micro derailed the thread a bit.Oh right.Still talking about the UK here
Think it would take a bit longer... But yeah... In many ways invading UK would be easier than Iran
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Cost the bastard nothing beyond a few seconds of typing. Luckily no one in Iraq will bank on his empty twitter bravado, but rather trust their own sense of the situation.
Excellent muppetry
Sorry there's secondary conversation that s happened to illustrate the power of the USA and that response was to a hypothetical US UK which the US would easily win as well. I'll stop that so as to not confuse the thread,
Problem with those vids I find is it never takes into account the USA ability to attack all targets at once through shock and awe tactics continously or total war tactics when facing enemy forces. While the terrain in Iran is tricky they would be able to bypass it as they did in Afghanistan
