• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Iran Super Thread- Merged

Remius said:
They sort of did. But the US didn’t like who they picked so staged a coup, installing the Shah who was no Angel which eventually led to the monsters taking over in the 70s.

The US created this mess after WW2 while flexing its new found power and position in the free world.
Click to expand...
But Mossadeigh was a...social democrat. Abandon all hope.
 
KevinB said:
Do not mistake Government decisions for lack of Military capability.



Or maybe it’s just the lack of willingness to exert force in a meaningful manner, and over a required period of time.


FPV Drones are a social media clickbait their military value is very limited.

The biggest issue with the entire Iranian ‘campaign’ is the lack of a defined goal. What is the planned end state?

Folks from all walks of life seem to have forgotten how many troops it required and how many years it took to change Post WW2 Germany and Japan. If you get into ‘nation building’ you need to think in a decade or more and a few million troops.

Otherwise you waste blood and treasure for nothing.


I spent a decent amount of my adult life in Iraq and Afghanistan. I am not sure (well I am sure they don’t) that the West has the stomach to do what is required.

So the question is what does half measures get us?
Click to expand...

KevinB said:
Agreed.

They are separate despite what On War may describe. Capabilities and Willingness to use them are two separate items.
The Military has the capability to glass Iran - but that doesn’t mean it will get done.


Again Political errors / after Tet the VC was decimated and the NVA in RV was mangled. But Politics played its card and the American public decided it was time to bring the ball home.

I don’t disagree. But it won’t be significant from a Military aspect. Losing a few hundred troops while awful, doesn’t affect the capability of the Military to wage war.

Exactly.

Other than we need to understand that the other option was Israel conducting a nuclear strike in Iran.

So now the pile of shit we are in, isn’t as bad as it could have been.
Click to expand...

Kev, nobody here is saying FPV drones are some sort of super weapon. Of course they aren’t. By all accounts most don’t hit, and when they do it’s with a small payload.

But you seem to be dismissing them based on your other major position here, the hand waving-away of the political quality of war. War isn’t the ‘What?’ or the ‘Why?’. Politics is The what and the why. War is how those politics are accomplished when political leadership decide it’s the way to achieve political aims. That means the political calculus matters. Hell, you’ve already conceded that by crediting losses in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan to political actors rather than military capability. Domestic politics play a role in the willingness to continue expending blood and treasure.

The domestic politics don’t matter the same everywhere. China, Russia, North Korea… They could largely give a shit when they take losses. The U.S., however, has built an unparalleled exquisite military with a huge risk to casualty aversion. In the U.S., the fatalities are named and are briefly national or at least regional news. We see the faces, the biographies, the families get honoured personally… It’s all a very direct moral tie between America’s soldiers and its people.

FPV drones are like a combination of sniper and IED that don’t work most of the time, but when you do, you get high detail video of someone’s death, often with their face visible and recognizable. Most of us here have consumed some of the war porn out of Ukraine and have seen Russian or Ukrainian soldiers isolated, helpless and hunted, sometimes visibly pleading with the operator of the drone who then kills them. Sometimes we get the video shot ten minutes later of the body on the ground where the back half of their torso is gone and a bunch of what’s left is smouldering. And the pilots will make sure to capture the American Flag patches on the shoulder.

Do you think for a second America’s enemies don’t recognize the profound power of these kinds of videos against the American psyche? And again, we’ll see some published before families of the fallen even get the knock on the door. Politically, such graphic deaths of American troops are profoundly powerful, all the more so when the current administration campaign on avoiding foreign wars. We’ll see these kill videos slickly packaged alongside the portraits and biographies of the fallen they portray. It’s gonna be some of the sickest psyops shit we’ve ever seen. Will it enrage and even radicalize many too? Absolutely. But that will come from the support that’s already baked in anyway. But it will also cause many Americans to ask their political leaders even more strongly, “what the hell are we doing there?”

I desperately hope I’m wrong. I don’t think that I am. The enemy COAs here are pretty obvious.
 
brihard said:
Kev, nobody here is saying FPV drones are some sort of super weapon. Of course they aren’t. By all accounts most don’t hit, and when they do it’s with a small payload.

But you seem to be dismissing them based on your other major position here, the hand waving-away of the political quality of war. War isn’t the ‘What?’ or the ‘Why?’. Politics is The what and the why. War is how those politics are accomplished when political leadership decide it’s the way to achieve political aims. That means the political calculus matters. Hell, you’ve already conceded that by crediting losses in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan to political actors rather than military capability. Domestic politics play a role in the willingness to continue expending blood and treasure.

The domestic politics don’t matter the same everywhere. China, Russia, North Korea… They could largely give a shit when they take losses. The U.S., however, has built an unparalleled exquisite military with a huge risk to casualty aversion. In the U.S., the fatalities are named and are briefly national or at least regional news. We see the faces, the biographies, the families get honoured personally… It’s all a very direct moral tie between America’s soldiers and its people.

FPV drones are like a combination of sniper and IED that don’t work most of the time, but when you do, you get high detail video of someone’s death, often with their face visible and recognizable. Most of us here have consumed some of the war porn out of Ukraine and have seen Russian or Ukrainian soldiers isolated, helpless and hunted, sometimes visibly pleading with the operator of the drone who then kills them. Sometimes we get the video shot ten minutes later of the body on the ground where the back half of their torso is gone and a bunch of what’s left is smouldering. And the pilots will make sure to capture the American Flag patches on the shoulder.

Do you think for a second America’s enemies don’t recognize the profound power of these kinds of videos against the American psyche? And again, we’ll see some published before families of the fallen even get the knock on the door. Politically, such graphic deaths of American troops are profoundly powerful, all the more so when the current administration campaign on avoiding foreign wars. We’ll see these kill videos slickly packaged alongside the portraits and biographies of the fallen they portray. It’s gonna be some of the sickest psyops shit we’ve ever seen. Will it enrage and even radicalize many too? Absolutely. But that will come from the support that’s already baked in anyway. But it will also cause many Americans to ask their political leaders even more strongly, “what the hell are we doing there?”

I desperately hope I’m wrong. I don’t think that I am. The enemy COAs here are pretty obvious.
Click to expand...
Perfectly said.
 
Czech_pivo said:
But Kevin, wasn't that the same issue with both Iraq and Afghanistan? The naive belief that 'democracy' could be installed in both places by picking a person that the US - not the people - wanted to run the country and do their bidding?

In the case of Iran, they have at least dropped the facade of 'democracy' being installed.
Click to expand...
Technically Iran is in better shape, you have a highly educated population, they are used to voting, but just had no real choices. They have a long collective history, courts and are heavily business oriented and are connected with the world. They also have a government in waiting for the transition period and a plan to move through the transition, rebuild, referendum, selection of new political structure. They already said the army will not be disbanded and no major "Debaathistcation", instead a Truth and reconciliation process to separate the IRGC members into those that did it because they had to, and those with blood on their hands. Interesting in one video it was noted that the regions closest to Afghanistan are not seeing any real activity from Israel and the US, as if they are encouraging the IRGC to flee to that area and eventually push them out into Afghanistan, where some have already fled to.
There appears to be an armed group of Persians in Iran hunting the IRGC and Basij members, with video of them being sniped at checkpoint and gates. The IDF have set up a site to allow Iranians to report any activity of the regime, launchers, checkpoints and Israel will then check those coordinates, for targets. In turn the IRGC/Basij are driving around in civilian clothing in unmarked car raiding peoples homes and arresting anyone they find with any anti-regime stuff.
 
Remius said:
They sort of did. But the US didn’t like who they picked so staged a coup, installing the Shah who was no Angel which eventually led to the monsters taking over in the 70s.

The US created this mess after WW2 while flexing its new found power and position in the free world.
Click to expand...
The Shah was no where near as bad as the Islamists turned out to be and France had a hand in allowing the Islamists to succeed. The Shah's main targets were Islamists and communists, both a real threat and he was also trying to secularize the country and put in land reforms.
 
I'm still waiting to find out what the huge present was that Iran gave to Trump yesterday:
“They gave us a present, and the present arrived today. It was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. I’m not gonna tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize.”
Click to expand...
Meanwhile Iran has issued ITS conditions for ending the war...
(from CNN)

Iran responds to US proposal with its own conditions for ending the war, state media reports​

An Iranian official has outlined five conditions for ending the war in response to a 15-point proposal from the United States, state media outlet Press TV reported Wednesday.

It is unclear if the person, whom Press TV described as a senior political-security official with knowledge of the details of the proposal, is authorized to speak on behalf of the Iranian government. But it’s notable that the information was reported by Press TV — an English-language state-run media outlet — suggesting that its intended audience was the American side and other English speakers.

According to Press TV, the conditions include:

  • A complete halt to “aggression and assassinations.”
  • Establishment of concrete mechanisms to ensure the war on Iran does not resume.
  • Guaranteed and clearly defined payment of war damages and reparations.
  • The condition that the war is concluded across all fronts and for all Iranian proxies throughout the region (which would require an end to Israel’s attacks on Lebanon that are targeting Hezbollah).
  • Guarantee that Iran can exercise sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz and that its legal right to the strait is recognized.
Press TV also reported that the Iranian official said Tehran will not allow US President Donald Trump to dictate the timing of the end of the war, noting: “Iran will end the war when it decides to do so and when its own conditions are met.”

Remember: It is unclear who is calling the shots in Iran, and if officials speaking to Iranian state media and semi-official media outlets are authorized to do so. Earlier this week, Trump said his envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were involved in discussions that he said Iran initiated, but he did not share whom the US officials were talking with.
Click to expand...
Looking at these conditions I find it hard to come to the conclusion that Iran and the US are close to negotiating peace deal.
 
brihard said:
Kev, nobody here is saying FPV drones are some sort of super weapon. Of course they aren’t. By all accounts most don’t hit, and when they do it’s with a small payload.
Click to expand...
Oh I agree. My point was separating the Military capability from the Political.
brihard said:
But you seem to be dismissing them based on your other major position here, the hand waving-away of the political quality of war. War isn’t the ‘What?’ or the ‘Why?’. Politics is The what and the why. War is how those politics are accomplished when political leadership decide it’s the way to achieve political aims. That means the political calculus matters. Hell, you’ve already conceded that by crediting losses in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan to political actors rather than military capability. Domestic politics play a role in the willingness to continue expending blood and treasure.
Click to expand...

IF DJT decides to go all in on Iran, the casualties won’t play a part, as he’s got control. It may ensure no Republican gets elected for years - but at the end of the day I have already pointed out the main aspect is unlike Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, another state debating the use of nuclear weapons against another is a heck of a motivator to act.
As well as my point about you don't send Tier 1 NLI SMU's to go seize any old Russian flagged tanker - nor does POTUS tell the Russians that he will have the USN sink a Russian Frigate and SSN if they try to interfere with the seizure. A bunch of folks here know what the requirements are for NLI force usage.

Something sparked the Israeli's - and the USG into action. That tanker left Iran, bound for Venezuela - ran from the USCG, was reflagged by Russia while at sea, then boarded and seized by DevGrp/160th operating out of England.

brihard said:
The domestic politics don’t matter the same everywhere. China, Russia, North Korea… They could largely give a shit when they take losses. The U.S., however, has built an unparalleled exquisite military with a huge risk to casualty aversion. In the U.S., the fatalities are named and are briefly national or at least regional news. We see the faces, the biographies, the families get honored personally… It’s all a very direct moral tie between America’s soldiers and its people.
Click to expand...
Again it is all relative.
IF the case is made to the American public, that there is a need to expend blood and treasure - then that cost will be born.

What I do not see is a good case, or any attempt to make one. I am like many here not seeing an end state, nor a logical explanation for the actions.
I am however a little more in tune (I believe) to the lean of the current Admin down here.
brihard said:
FPV drones are like a combination of sniper and IED that don’t work most of the time, but when you do, you get high detail video of someone’s death, often with their face visible and recognizable. Most of us here have consumed some of the war porn out of Ukraine and have seen Russian or Ukrainian soldiers isolated, helpless and hunted, sometimes visibly pleading with the operator of the drone who then kills them. Sometimes we get the video shot ten minutes later of the body on the ground where the back half of their torso is gone and a bunch of what’s left is smouldering. And the pilots will make sure to capture the American Flag patches on the shoulder.

Do you think for a second America’s enemies don’t recognize the profound power of these kinds of videos against the American psyche? And again, we’ll see some published before families of the fallen even get the knock on the door. Politically, such graphic deaths of American troops are profoundly powerful, all the more so when the current administration campaign on avoiding foreign wars. We’ll see these kill videos slickly packaged alongside the portraits and biographies of the fallen they portray. It’s gonna be some of the sickest psyops shit we’ve ever seen. Will it enrage and even radicalize many too? Absolutely. But that will come from the support that’s already baked in anyway. But it will also cause many Americans to ask their political leaders even more strongly, “what the hell are we doing there?”

I desperately hope I’m wrong. I don’t think that I am. The enemy COAs here are pretty obvious.
Click to expand...
You probably remember the bodies of Delta and 160th folks being torn apart in Somalia Oct 3 1993.
President Clinton bailed at that time, while most of America wanted more troops in to get payback in blood.
I think any Enemy COA that believes that morbid death scenes of American service members will accomplish that same result against this Administration is deluding themselves. I suspect with this Administration, that would result in B-52's conducting a restructuring of that countries geographic make up, and make the Dresden firestorm look like an amateur bonfire, as the Sec of War has no moral compass (IMHO) and no compunction about using about anything he can. Again go back to that freighter/tanker we seized - and not just who we used, but also threatening to sink a Nuclear Countries (Russia) vessels during the process - one just don't do that for shit's and giggles.


In not way am I trying to justify the actions, or make any sense of them - I think Iranian leadership needs to change - I however think this isn't the best COA for that for a multitude of reasons.
OldSolduer said:
Democracy- you can’t install democracy in places that have never known democracy.

Case in point- Russia
Click to expand...
You can -- we did it post WW2 in Japan, and in South Korea. It just takes a decade to root, and a few more to start to stand on it's own.
The issue is the world (read Western Powers) are willing to sink the time and efforts in.
Either you go all in - total military occupation, and a massive influx of CIMIC type infrastructure and support, and have the buy in from your nation(s) that this is what is needed -- or you end up playing an endless game of whack-a-mole at various scales.

When you look at Iraq we failed significantly because the occupation was attempted on the cheap.
We failed in Afghanistan was we tried to push democracy with no support outside the cities -- it needed massive capital injections to give any tribal village a reason to reject tribalism (and the Taliban) - and most CIMIC projects failed due to either lack of understanding of what the people wanted -- or actually any efforts on the specific sponsor nations (@Good2Golf probably remembers driving past the "Italian School" that never was more than a bare foundation on the way to Bagram from Kabul -- before the "Bottle Route Range" :ROFLMAO: )

Hindsight is always 20/20, but we have a host of failures and some limited successes to base COA's off of, I don't think anyone with a few braincells think this operation had much planning into it.

1) IF we went in solely due to the Israeli's, we had two viable options:
A - delay the IDF until we could bring Allies into the fold and assets needed into the AO
B - walk away - and if the Israeli government did in fact nuke a part of Iran -- well, that is unfortunate, but really nothing specifically to do with us.

What shouldn't have been a COA was go in half assed like we did.

2) If there was other reasons (like whatever was on that freighter/tanker) - it is pretty clear we signaled to the enemies that we knew what was on it, so there is no Int capability disclosure by revealing what it was to allies - and the American (and worldwide) public.
Then it wasn't solely the Israeli's - but still a NLI issue, then we either go in with the Israeli's - but also warn allies - and try to get a coalition - but also move an ass ton of assets into the AO.

Me if it warranted a regime change effort I'd have had XVIII Airborne Corps in Iran after the first few Air waves -- JSOC and Ranger support for sensitive site exploitation, MARSOC and the SFG's out to find anti-regime forces and mobilize them - and several Divisions from Big Army (and Guard) to occupy large cities, and the Marines to grab to coast.
Then CIVPOL and Civil Affairs - and a slew of NGO's.
 
KevinB said:
Oh I agree. My point was separating the Military capability from the Political.


IF DJT decides to go all in on Iran, the casualties won’t play a part, as he’s got control. It may ensure no Republican gets elected for years - but at the end of the day I have already pointed out the main aspect is unlike Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan, another state debating the use of nuclear weapons against another is a heck of a motivator to act.
As well as my point about you don't send Tier 1 NLI SMU's to go seize any old Russian flagged tanker - nor does POTUS tell the Russians that he will have the USN sink a Russian Frigate and SSN if they try to interfere with the seizure. A bunch of folks here know what the requirements are for NLI force usage.

Something sparked the Israeli's - and the USG into action. That tanker left Iran, bound for Venezuela - ran from the USCG, was reflagged by Russia while at sea, then boarded and seized by DevGrp/160th operating out of England.


Again it is all relative.
IF the case is made to the American public, that there is a need to expend blood and treasure - then that cost will be born.

What I do not see is a good case, or any attempt to make one. I am like many here not seeing an end state, nor a logical explanation for the actions.
I am however a little more in tune (I believe) to the lean of the current Admin down here.

You probably remember the bodies of Delta and 160th folks being torn apart in Somalia Oct 3 1993.
President Clinton bailed at that time, while most of America wanted more troops in to get payback in blood.
I think any Enemy COA that believes that morbid death scenes of American service members will accomplish that same result against this Administration is deluding themselves. I suspect with this Administration, that would result in B-52's conducting a restructuring of that countries geographic make up, and make the Dresden firestorm look like an amateur bonfire, as the Sec of War has no moral compass (IMHO) and no compunction about using about anything he can. Again go back to that freighter/tanker we seized - and not just who we used, but also threatening to sink a Nuclear Countries (Russia) vessels during the process - one just don't do that for shit's and giggles.


In not way am I trying to justify the actions, or make any sense of them - I think Iranian leadership needs to change - I however think this isn't the best COA for that for a multitude of reasons.

You can -- we did it post WW2 in Japan, and in South Korea. It just takes a decade to root, and a few more to start to stand on it's own.
The issue is the world (read Western Powers) are willing to sink the time and efforts in.
Either you go all in - total military occupation, and a massive influx of CIMIC type infrastructure and support, and have the buy in from your nation(s) that this is what is needed -- or you end up playing an endless game of whack-a-mole at various scales.

When you look at Iraq we failed significantly because the occupation was attempted on the cheap.
We failed in Afghanistan was we tried to push democracy with no support outside the cities -- it needed massive capital injections to give any tribal village a reason to reject tribalism (and the Taliban) - and most CIMIC projects failed due to either lack of understanding of what the people wanted -- or actually any efforts on the specific sponsor nations (@Good2Golf probably remembers driving past the "Italian School" that never was more than a bare foundation on the way to Bagram from Kabul -- before the "Bottle Route Range" :ROFLMAO: )

Hindsight is always 20/20, but we have a host of failures and some limited successes to base COA's off of, I don't think anyone with a few braincells think this operation had much planning into it.

1) IF we went in solely due to the Israeli's, we had two viable options:
A - delay the IDF until we could bring Allies into the fold and assets needed into the AO
B - walk away - and if the Israeli government did in fact nuke a part of Iran -- well, that is unfortunate, but really nothing specifically to do with us.

What shouldn't have been a COA was go in half assed like we did.

2) If there was other reasons (like whatever was on that freighter/tanker) - it is pretty clear we signaled to the enemies that we knew what was on it, so there is no Int capability disclosure by revealing what it was to allies - and the American (and worldwide) public.
Then it wasn't solely the Israeli's - but still a NLI issue, then we either go in with the Israeli's - but also warn allies - and try to get a coalition - but also move an ass ton of assets into the AO.

Me if it warranted a regime change effort I'd have had XVIII Airborne Corps in Iran after the first few Air waves -- JSOC and Ranger support for sensitive site exploitation, MARSOC and the SFG's out to find anti-regime forces and mobilize them - and several Divisions from Big Army (and Guard) to occupy large cities, and the Marines to grab to coast.
Then CIVPOL and Civil Affairs - and a slew of NGO's.
Click to expand...

Or just do a deal to set up car factories in the country and let the unions do the rest ;)
 
Summary of the latest White House briefing (from BBC)
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt just spoke extensively about Iran at her regularly scheduled briefing.

Here's what we heard:

  • Leavitt claims Trump is still engaged in "productive conversations" with Iran despite Tehran's statement that it has rejected a peace plan from the US
  • She says a 15-point plan circulating on social media is "speculative" but with "elements of truth to it", refusing to go further into the "nitty gritty" details of how the talks are unfolding
  • Meanwhile in the US, consumers continue to complain about rising gas prices. Leavitt reassures that Trump is keeping them "as low as he can" during the war
  • The press secretary also refused to answer questions about the potential for US "boots on the ground" in Iran - but she did say formal authorisation from Congress to do so would not be necessary
  • The big recurring question - how close to the end of the war are we? Leavitt repeated the White House line that we are "ahead of schedule" and touted what the administration calls a very successful operation
Click to expand...
Meanwhile the take of one Republican member of Congress...
Republican congresswoman Nancy Mace says she will not be supporting the deployment of US troops in Iran after leaving a briefing by the House Armed Services Committee on the conflict.

The representative for South Carolina says in a post on X: "I will not support troops on the ground in Iran, even more so after this briefing."

She adds in another post that the gap between what was presented to the American public and the military objectives presented today is "deeply troubling".
Click to expand...
Sure doesn't sound like the briefing was very reassuring...
 
Iran may be prepared to go scorched earth.

www.theguardian.com

Middle East crisis live: US insists Iran has not rejected proposal to end war amid mounting confusion

White House claims 15-point plan was ‘never confirmed’ and that talks are continuing as sources suggest Iran unhappy with US proposal
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Iran has sent a warning to the United States that it will carpet bomb its own territory to attack any American troops landing there, according to diplomats from a third country who passed on the threat to Washington.

The US is sending thousands of ground troops to the Middle East, which could be deployed to forcibly lift the Iranian blockade of the strait of Hormuz, which is choking global oil and gas supplies from the Gulf. Kharg Island, a tiny island in the Persian Gulf, is thought by analysts to be a likely target for invasion.

Tehran is willing to bomb its own infrastructure at Kharg Island, a crucial export terminal for Iranian oil, or elsewhere, to target American soldiers there. Iran believes that, as any landing party will have limited missile defences available, this would mean a bloodbath for US forces.

“Iran says that they don’t care that they will have to blow up their own territory,” a diplomat involved told The Guardian. “They will do it to kill American soldiers.”

The presence of Americans on Iranian soil would cross a new red line for Iran. The US military could aim to seize territory, in order to make Iran open the strait. Aside from Kharg, options include deploying the forces along Iran’s coastline or taking one of the other small islands.
Click to expand...
 
That's a big 'nope'...

Iran calls US proposal to end war ‘maximalist, unreasonable’​

Diplomatic source tells Al Jazeera that Iran is dismissing the 15-point plan from the Trump administration as unworkable.

Updated: an hour agoUpdated: an hour ago

A high-ranking diplomatic source has confirmed that Iran received a 15-point plan from the United States aimed at ending the US-Israeli war on the country.

But the source told Al Jazeera on Wednesday that Tehran described the US proposal as “extremely maximalist and unreasonable”.

www.aljazeera.com

Iran calls US proposal to end war ‘maximalist, unreasonable’

Diplomatic source tells Al Jazeera that Tehran is dismissing the 15-point plan from Washington as unworkable.
www.aljazeera.com www.aljazeera.com
 
KevinB said:
1) IF we went in solely due to the Israeli's, we had two viable options:
A - delay the IDF until we could bring Allies into the fold and assets needed into the AO
B - walk away - and if the Israeli government did in fact nuke a part of Iran -- well, that is unfortunate, but really nothing specifically to do with us.

What shouldn't have been a COA was go in half assed like we did.
Click to expand...
You act as though Israel is in control. Israel will do what America says if America tells them what to do because their country is 100% dependent on it.

If America told them we will stop selling arms to you and give you the South Africa treatment if you carry on, then they wouldn’t act. And if they did they wouldn’t last long as a nation.

Somehow America has forgotten that they are the ones in charge of them not the other way around.

Israel launching a nuke would likely be the death of the country. Any public support the west has would die off and they would become completely isolated. That is a red line that cannot be tolerated by anyone.
 
Eaglelord17 said:
You act as though Israel is in control. Israel will do what America says if America tells them what to do because their country is 100% dependent on it.

If America told them we will stop selling arms to you and give you the South Africa treatment if you carry on, then they wouldn’t act. And if they did they wouldn’t last long as a nation.

Somehow America has forgotten that they are the ones in charge of them not the other way around.

Israel launching a nuke would likely be the death of the country. Any public support the west has would die off and they would become completely isolated. That is a red line that cannot be tolerated by anyone.
Click to expand...

As good a description of the Trump administration as I've heard anywhere...

“It would seem that Caesar's recurrent and deep-rooted fault was his concentration in pursuing the objective immediately in front of his eyes to the neglect of his wider object. Strategically he was an alternating Jekyll and Hyde.”

― BH Liddell Hart
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kirkhill
    • Like
Turks Arabs and Pakistanis
Replies
13
Views
1K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Yrys
US and UK pulling some military from Qatar
Replies
0
Views
407
Yrys
Yrys
B
    • Like
    • Wow
Drone threat against Belgian PM foiled
Replies
0
Views
463
brihard
B
Yrys
US base priority target for Russia
Replies
3
Views
3K
lenaitch
lenaitch
Edward Campbell
    • Wow
    • Like
    • Sad
PAK National Arrested in QC Plotting Attack in NYC
2
Replies
33
Views
16K
Colin Parkinson
Colin Parkinson
Back
Top