They’re gonna need the domestic contracts given the harm the administration is likely doing to foreign military sales in the long run.He's certainly given the US defence industry work for years to come. I expect they dug deeper into their arsenal than just the the stuff reaching the end of its shelf life.
Iran Super Thread- Merged
- Thread starter JasonH
- Start date
Maxman1
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 2,944
- Points
- 1,160
Just make sure to stir it properly.Although, ironically, they probably know what a White Russian is
- Reaction score
- 1,675
- Points
- 1,160
It is 6D chess you fool
More like checkers I think!!
Apparently not even the CJCS' advice.
I refuse to give this guy the benefit of doubt ever since he dunked on John McCain and said he knew more than the Generals. This is the obvious destination of that kind of ignorance and contempt for the military.
Or solitaire and he cheats at it.
HavokFour
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,052
- Points
- 1,040
With what he's just said, probably not. Unless he's about to contradict himself in the same speech.
It'll take Iran "months" to dig up the radioactive material.
EDIT: 19 minute circlejerk. Nothing of value said, no announcements. He basically read off the last week of his Truthsocial posts in chronological order.
- Reaction score
- 7,345
- Points
- 1,260
Well that was a great big yawn of a speech.
Basically announced he has no plan for the Strait and then crapped out on NATO. This won't do anything to get the Regime to stop.
- Reaction score
- 5,213
- Points
- 1,160
Perhaps he was planning on announcing his reprisal for something tragic that could have happened, but didn’t, this evening.
I found it interesting how much relative detail he went into about maintaining surveillance on the smashed nuclear sites, and being prepared to strike again if it looks like they're trying to recover the HEU. It was the only specific course of action he really outlined. He did make it clear a couple more weeks of ops remain.
There's been a fair bit of reporting today that he requested and was presented with a plan to launch a ground op to seize same. I wonder if the plan, presented to him, looks pretty grim; or alternatively if he wants to go for it and figured tonight's speech could insert a bit of deception til markets close tomorrow for the long weekend.
Meanwhile a bunch of A-10s still seem to be making their way east - 18 of them in the UK last I saw. That's incongruent with things immediately wrapping up.
Nothing he said tonight was particularly de-escalatory, nor did any of it really shine a light to a clear off ramp with objectives achieved.
There's been a fair bit of reporting today that he requested and was presented with a plan to launch a ground op to seize same. I wonder if the plan, presented to him, looks pretty grim; or alternatively if he wants to go for it and figured tonight's speech could insert a bit of deception til markets close tomorrow for the long weekend.
Meanwhile a bunch of A-10s still seem to be making their way east - 18 of them in the UK last I saw. That's incongruent with things immediately wrapping up.
Nothing he said tonight was particularly de-escalatory, nor did any of it really shine a light to a clear off ramp with objectives achieved.
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 21,986
- Points
- 1,260
Or Borat.....I now know that this is all Barrack HUSSEIN Obama's fault, and not just Joe Biden's
He's my go to guy for funny shit
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Fossil
- Reaction score
- 45,074
- Points
- 1,160
Airborne, all the way (there and back)
Since the start of the war, the US and Israel have been able to use air strikes alone to decimate Iran's navy, degrade its ballistic missiles and damage its industrial base. But unlike those other military objectives, experts said that securing Iran's enriched uranium could not be done without using ground forces.
The US could use elements of the 82nd Airborne Division - which were deployed to the Middle East - to secure the areas surrounding Isfahan and Natanz. Special operations forces that are trained to handle nuclear material would then be sent in to retrieve the enriched uranium. The uranium itself is in gaseous form and is believed to be stored in large metal containers.
Satellite imagery shows that the entrances to Isfahan and Natanz were badly damaged by US airstrikes. US forces would likely need heavy machinery to dig through rubble in order to locate the enriched uranium, which is believed to be stored in tunnels buried deep underground - all while facing potential counterattacks from Iran.
"You've first got to excavate the site and detect [the enriched uranium] while likely being under near constant threat," Campbell said.
www.bbc.com
'A million things could go wrong' - why seizing Iran's uranium would be so risky for the US
Since the start of the war, the US and Israel have been able to use air strikes alone to decimate Iran's navy, degrade its ballistic missiles and damage its industrial base. But unlike those other military objectives, experts said that securing Iran's enriched uranium could not be done without using ground forces.
The US could use elements of the 82nd Airborne Division - which were deployed to the Middle East - to secure the areas surrounding Isfahan and Natanz. Special operations forces that are trained to handle nuclear material would then be sent in to retrieve the enriched uranium. The uranium itself is in gaseous form and is believed to be stored in large metal containers.
Satellite imagery shows that the entrances to Isfahan and Natanz were badly damaged by US airstrikes. US forces would likely need heavy machinery to dig through rubble in order to locate the enriched uranium, which is believed to be stored in tunnels buried deep underground - all while facing potential counterattacks from Iran.
"You've first got to excavate the site and detect [the enriched uranium] while likely being under near constant threat," Campbell said.
Why seizing Iran's uranium would be so risky for the US
Seizing the stockpile would be one of the "most complicated special operations in history", a former defence official tells the BBC.
www.bbc.com
- Reaction score
- 11,569
- Points
- 1,040
For the US, the most coherent to emerge:
- "destroy" air force (no % specified, but probably counts as "done")
- "destroy" navy (same as above)
- "destroy" missile/drone manufacturing capability (same as above, except maybe not "done" enough)
- abandonment of Iran's attempt to develop nuclear weapon capability
Expecting 100% on anything would be unrealistic. The first three mainly seem to exist to simplify going in (repeatedly) to convince Iran to abandon nuclear weapons.
"Regime change" hasn't been consistently advanced. If it happens, they'll claim credit and that it was part of the plan; if it doesn't happen, they'll claim it was nice-but-not-necessary.
- Reaction score
- 7,345
- Points
- 1,260
Not saying that this is going to occur again, but the parallel's are there for certain.
- Reaction score
- 6,513
- Points
- 1,160
1,2 and 3 were simply steps to achieve 4. Memory fades but I don't recall any mention of neutralizing their military as a 'goal' at the beginning of this; only their nuclear program and regime change. If regime change wasn't a goal, when did they (US and/or Israel) target the hierarchy quite early on?
