Exclusive: Supreme Leader's military adviser says Iran's response will be 'against military sites'

[Maxpane]

Shrine

if he is talking about shrine then USA have to fight in every coner of the land cuz people wont care about death

 

[TheImmortal]

Yesterday USA secretly sent a message to Iran , " If you retaliate , we will target the desicon maker - supreme leader "


This won't get un answered , after the public funeral which will be attended by the leader and make security measures to assure his safety, USA will get bloody ....

They really are scared , or else they wouldn't send so much messages ....

proof?

 

[OldTwilight]

proof?

From some unofficial sources ....

 

[TheImmortal]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1213862509763055621

 

[Sineva]

Please do something enouh talking

First things first,honor soleimanis memory and lay him to rest as befits his status.......then go out and avenge him.

 

[Black Stone]

Battle tested against whom? The Talibans? An Iraq weakened by two wars and years of sanctions? The Vietnamese?

What are the Taliban doing now? Are they stronger?. Iraq weakened and sanctions, Why did Iran struggle for 8 years despite being a neighbor while the US military did it in a month despite being oceans away?. Vietnam? The US military didn't lose to the Vietnamese forces, they lost to US politics.

You will be losing your super power status because your aircraft carriers and your military bases in the Middle East, the main source of energy in the world, will be attacked and damaged. And once that happens, your petrodollar agreement with Arab states will be useless and the main reason for the world's financial system to rely on the US dollar and banking system will be gone. You are risking an economic collapse as well in my opinion.

Opinion that is fine, The US is expected that the only assets Iran can target are the bases and perhaps like you said the Aircraft carriers. However, when you attack those assets, the US military will have many choices dotted around Iran to hit and with heavy fire power. Let's say if (big if) you manage to damage or destroy some assets, but most of Iran will be destroyed with many deaths. Is it worth it?.

If you think that a war with Iran means a war inside the Iranian territory only, you are oversimplifying the issue too much. Just today your naval base in Kenya came under attack. All anti-American forces, whether supported by Iran or not, will use this opportunity to weaken you because it is the best opportunity to attack you. Unless you think you are loved around the world, that's food for thought. Iran alone is capable of engaging you in a war that will be played in more than 5 million kilometers squared for months.

When you have bases in a foreign country and if it's a volatile place, attacks by militants is to be expected. While these militants hit and run, there is no place to run or hide for Iran.

The US will not be weakened because of Mickey Mouse attacks. We have bases dotted around the Middle East for many years, so we have the experience and capability to handle any threat.

Iran alone capable to engage a war with the US military? Do you mean the same capability Iran engaged with Iraq for 8 years?.

in our Deen, death is a beginning of reality - I remember when Indiatv asked Musharraf that if India strikes Pakistan what will be the response and he replied, no sir, I'm not worth my salt If I don't strike you back. Full stop - the attack from Iran is imminent, watch out.

Yes, I also believe an attack is imminent, the question is what kind and what scale. Reason being is that The US has just taken out the supreme leaders favorite general, Iran cannot let this slide without an appropriate reply. If there is no reply from Iran, the Iranian people will turn on their leaders for incompetence and the people would be enraged.

Having said that, I do not wish to see war between us and the Iranians, but it looks like it is heading that way.

We have already reached a point where both sides can't back down.

 

[Arian]

What are the Taliban doing now? Are they stronger?. Iraq weakened and sanctions, Why did Iran struggle for 8 years despite being a neighbor while the US military did it in a month despite being oceans away?. Vietnam? The US military didn't lose to the Vietnamese forces, they lost to US politics.

The US was helped by the NATO and nearly all countries neighboring Iraq in the war. It was a coalition of forces. And Iraq had already been weakened by Iran during the Iraq-Iran war. And I have discussed the Iraq-Iran war at the end of my reply.

I'm sorry, but were the Taliban strong ever? You helped them gain power in Afghanistan because you wanted to kick the Soviets out and you didn't want Afghanistan to fall into the hands of Iran.

I'm sorry, maybe it's me, but last time I checked, South Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos all became communist countries. How's that a win for the US after your direct involvement in that war? Please enlighten me.

Opinion that is fine, The US is expected that the only assets Iran can target are the bases and perhaps like you said the Aircraft carriers. However, when you attack those assets, the US military will have many choices dotted around Iran to hit and with heavy fire power. Let's say if (big if) you manage to damage or destroy some assets, but most of Iran will be destroyed with many deaths. Is it worth it?.

If you want to secure your victory completely, you will need a ground invasion at the end. Otherwise Iran's regional proxies won't stop and they can target Israel and your interests after the conflict is over. How do you plan to invade Iran with 83 million people and an army with more than 1 million professionally trained soldiers and nearly 500,000 proxy militias without your aircraft carriers and your military bases in the Middle East? Add to it Iran's natural terrain, its missile arsenal, its drones, its A2/AD and cyber warfare capabilities.

When you have bases in a foreign country and if it's a volatile place, attacks by militants is to be expected. While these militants hit and run, there is no place to run or hide for Iran.

And that's the beauty of it. Do you think Iran will confront you directly only? You will be engaged in an area that is larger than the US itself. Iran, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan will get very easily destabilized by Iran's proxies. And those proxies are extremely loyal to Iran because they know that if Iran falls, they will fall too. So, fighting for Iran will be like fighting for their own survival for them. That aside, all anti-American forces around the world can and most possibly will use this opportunity against you. Look at what happened in Kenya, for example.

The US will not be weakened because of Mickey Mouse attacks. We have bases dotted around the Middle East for many years, so we have the experience and capability to handle any threat.

Do you know what is the most important product that the US produces? The US dollar. You can print the US dollar and sell it higher than what it costs you to print it because the US dollar is in demand. One of the main reasons that your currency is so popular in forex reserves is that you have the Petro-Dollar deal in place. Do you think after Iran takes out the oil and gas fields of your allies in the region, foreign banks will continue to keep the dollar as the dominant currency in their reserves considering the fact that China nowadays can produce nearly everything you produce? I don't think so.

That aside, your aircraft carriers give you the ability to project power globally. Losing even one air craft carrier, not only will be a significant economic and humanitarian loss, but will take you years to replace it. And you are already losing most of your power in East Asia to China. How do you plan to take on China with a weaker economy and a weaker army?

Iran alone capable to engage a war with the US military? Do you mean the same capability Iran engaged with Iraq for 8 years?.

Yes. The same ability that prevented Iraq to invade even one inch of Iran, considering the fact that the Iranian army had been dismantled by the new revolutionary regime and all of its major generals had been executed, the country was in chaos and the Soviet Union, the Europeans, the United States and the Arab League all supported and funded Iraq against Iran. Yet, after two years, not only Iran liberated its occupied territories, but was on the offensive mode for the last 6 years. The Iran-Iraq war was by no means easier than a future US-Iran war. The US did all it could do to damage Iran in that war and imposed its cost on Iraq. This time it will be you who will pay the price, not Iraq.

 

[Baba Google]

Yes, I also believe an attack is imminent, the question is what kind and what scale.

that is a secret I'll never tell, xoxo gossip baba.

 

[Aramagedon]

Iran fired missiles to occupier yankee (great satan) bases in Iraq. The first news in our tv: (so honorable)

 

[Black Stone]

The US was helped by the NATO and nearly all countries neighboring Iraq in the war. It was a coalition of forces. And Iraq had already been weakened by Iran during the Iraq-Iran war. And I have discussed the Iraq-Iran war at the end of my reply.

I'm sorry, but were the Taliban strong ever? You helped them gain power in Afghanistan because you wanted to kick the Soviets out and you didn't want Afghanistan to fall into the hands of Iran.

I'm sorry, maybe it's me, but last time I checked, South Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos all became communist countries. How's that a win for the US after your direct involvement in that war? Please enlighten me.

The US did most of the work in Iraq, the coalition is just a banner that the US did not want make it look like she was going it alone. The US knows that when it comes to war, the Europeans are weak. If as you said was true, Iran took 8 years to weaken a neighboring enemy country which she shares a border while the US destroyed it in a month despite oceans away. This already speaks volume in itself when it comes to military capability between the US and Iran.

If you want to secure your victory completely, you will need a ground invasion at the end. Otherwise Iran's regional proxies won't stop and they can target Israel and your interests after the conflict is over. How do you plan to invade Iran with 83 million people and an army with more than 1 million professionally trained soldiers and nearly 500,000 proxy militias without your aircraft carriers and your military bases in the Middle East? Add to it Iran's natural terrain, its missile arsenal, its drones, its A2/AD and cyber warfare capabilities.

The US goal or victory is not to destroy or invade Iran, the US has already achieved it's goal and that was to eliminate the supreme leaders favorite general. Now, the ball is in Iran's court and how the US responds would depend on Iran's so called "severe revenge". From what we have seen now, we are not impressed and I don't think the Iranian public would be impress if this so called "severe revenge"is some missile causing cosmetic damage to US bases. The supreme leader calls it a "slap in the face"if you ask me, that looked more like a scratch.

And that's the beauty of it. Do you think Iran will confront you directly only? You will be engaged in an area that is larger than the US itself. Iran, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan will get very easily destabilized by Iran's proxies. And those proxies are extremely loyal to Iran because they know that if Iran falls, they will fall too. So, fighting for Iran will be like fighting for their own survival for them. That aside, all anti-American forces around the world can and most possibly will use this opportunity against you. Look at what happened in Kenya, for example.

Proxies and ragtag attacks is already a norm in the ME region for the US bases, The US military is capable and experienced to handle these threats, how long have we been in the ME? Just like my signature, currently, there is no force on earth that can stop the United States. The supreme leader talks about the ultimate revenge as kicking US presence from the ME region. I am afraid this is just a pipe dream. The only way the US military will leave the region is to the defeat of US politics.

Do you know what is the most important product that the US produces? The US dollar. You can print the US dollar and sell it higher than what it costs you to print it because the US dollar is in demand. One of the main reasons that your currency is so popular in forex reserves is that you have the Petro-Dollar deal in place. Do you think after Iran takes out the oil and gas fields of your allies in the region, foreign banks will continue to keep the dollar as the dominant currency in their reserves considering the fact that China nowadays can produce nearly everything you produce? I don't think so.

Currency aside, if we get into the main part, u mentioned taking out the oil and gas fields of our allies, I presume when you say allies you mean the other countries in the region. If you do that, Iran would be waging a war not just with the US, but neighboring countries too. In this situation, I am pretty sure that Iran would be destroyed, is this worth it? and is it worth it to provoke your neighbors?.

That aside, your aircraft carriers give you the ability to project power globally. Losing even one air craft carrier, not only will be a significant economic and humanitarian loss, but will take you years to replace it. And you are already losing most of your power in East Asia to China. How do you plan to take on China with a weaker economy and a weaker army?

I am afraid Iran doesn't have the capability to sink an aircraft carrier, do you think the US will let this happen? the US military will counter any attacks. Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt that you sink an aircraft carrier, that would be 1000s of US lives lost. Do you think Trump will give Iran a "scratch" like you did to our bases? Trump will surely give you a true meaning of "severe revenge" and this would mean the destruction of Iran.

Yes. The same ability that prevented Iraq to invade even one inch of Iran, considering the fact that the Iranian army had been dismantled by the new revolutionary regime and all of its major generals had been executed, the country was in chaos and the Soviet Union, the Europeans, the United States and the Arab League all supported and funded Iraq against Iran. Yet, after two years, not only Iran liberated its occupied territories, but was on the offensive mode for the last 6 years. The Iran-Iraq war was by no means easier than a future US-Iran war. The US did all it could do to damage Iran in that war and imposed its cost on Iraq. This time it will be you who will pay the price, not Iraq.

In war, excuses of your army dismantled and weakened will not prove anything. In the end, it is judged by who is the victor and who is the defeated. The US supported Iraq and the war struggled for 8 years, but this time, should there be a war again, the US will be doing the damaging. This Iraqi power is nowhere comparable to the US capability.

However, as it stands by the "scratch" missile strikes by Iran, the US knows that Iran wants to de-escalate the current tensions. I think this is a good thing, nobody wants to see a war between the US and Iran.

that is a secret I'll never tell, xoxo gossip baba.

Judging by your nation flag, I presume you are a Pakistani, does that mean you know Iran's secrets?

 

[Arian]

The US did most of the work in Iraq, the coalition is just a banner that the US did not want make it look like she was going it alone. The US knows that when it comes to war, the Europeans are weak. If as you said was true, Iran took 8 years to weaken a neighboring enemy country which she shares a border while the US destroyed it in a month despite oceans away. This already speaks volume in itself when it comes to military capability between the US and Iran.

Again, here is what happened:
Iraq-Iran war: Iran (in the middle of a revolution) versus Iraq, US, Soviet Union, Arab League, Pakistan and Europe.
US-Iraq war: Iraq (after 8 years of war with Iran) versus US, NATO, Israel, Arab League.

Just knowing the belligerents of the wars tells a lot.

The US goal or victory is not to destroy or invade Iran, the US has already achieved it's goal and that was to eliminate the supreme leaders favorite general. Now, the ball is in Iran's court and how the US responds would depend on Iran's so called "severe revenge". From what we have seen now, we are not impressed and I don't think the Iranian public would be impress if this so called "severe revenge"is some missile causing cosmetic damage to US bases. The supreme leader calls it a "slap in the face"if you ask me, that looked more like a scratch.

As I have said before, taking out one person does not mean anything. The reason that Soleimani is highlighted as an exceptionally important general is merely for public consumption to direct anger toward the US instead of local problems. Other than that, generals are expendable and replaceable. Soleimani was replaced by his strategist in few hours and everything is the same as before now. And as the CNN showed inside Ain Al-Assad Base, the damage is much more than just cosmetic damage. Iraqi reporters say that the American part of the US base has been flattened. And your president backed off after he threatened to hit Iranian cultural sites VERY HARD and VERY FAST if Iran threatens them. I suppose hitting a US military base is indeed a high level threat. Or you're fine with people striking your military bases now? So much for a super power. lol

Proxies and ragtag attacks is already a norm in the ME region for the US bases, The US military is capable and experienced to handle these threats, how long have we been in the ME? Just like my signature, currently, there is no force on earth that can stop the United States. The supreme leader talks about the ultimate revenge as kicking US presence from the ME region. I am afraid this is just a pipe dream. The only way the US military will leave the region is to the defeat of US politics.

Yet, your so-called experience did not help you in the 1983 barracks bombings in Beirut. I wonder why.

Currency aside, if we get into the main part, u mentioned taking out the oil and gas fields of our allies, I presume when you say allies you mean the other countries in the region. If you do that, Iran would be waging a war not just with the US, but neighboring countries too. In this situation, I am pretty sure that Iran would be destroyed, is this worth it? and is it worth it to provoke your neighbors?.

Nearly all of these countries completely depend on foreign labor to function normally. Have you ever been to one of the Arab kingdoms around the Persian Gulf? A war will cripple them completely. And that is why they are currently begging Iran and the US to deescalate even though they have shown a great desire for a US-Iran war times and times again.

I am afraid Iran doesn't have the capability to sink an aircraft carrier, do you think the US will let this happen? the US military will counter any attacks. Even if I give you the benefit of the doubt that you sink an aircraft carrier, that would be 1000s of US lives lost. Do you think Trump will give Iran a "scratch" like you did to our bases? Trump will surely give you a true meaning of "severe revenge" and this would mean the destruction of Iran.

I am afraid that expert analyses greatly differ from yours. We have increased the range of the Persian Gulf missile to 700 kilometers (~430 miles). It has been specifically designed to target US aircraft carriers.

In war, excuses of your army dismantled and weakened will not prove anything. In the end, it is judged by who is the victor and who is the defeated. The US supported Iraq and the war struggled for 8 years, but this time, should there be a war again, the US will be doing the damaging. This Iraqi power is nowhere comparable to the US capability.

LOL. You know it better than me that this part of your post is nonsense.
Meanwhile, Iran after the war grew to become a regional power and recovered from it in less than a decade. Iraq on the other hand never recovered from the war. Iraq was the aggressor who had three objectives and failed in achieving all of them. It was both a tactical and strategic failure for Iraq, while Iran won the strategic aspect of the war at least.

However, as it stands by the "scratch" missile strikes by Iran, the US knows that Iran wants to de-escalate the current tensions. I think this is a good thing, nobody wants to see a war between the US and Iran.

If you want to downplay an attack on US military bases from the Iranian territory, do it by all means. But by the looks of it, I wouldn't call a crater several meters deep as a scratch

And it has just started. You'll have to wait and see how it develops over time.

 

[Sina-1]

even though they have shown a great desire for a US-Iran war times and times again.

not war dadash. They wished US to bomb Iran to pieces. The retards didn’t think Iran could retaliate and that it would be a one sided affair. That’s why they are quite like mouses now.

 

[Black Stone]

gain, here is what happened:
Iraq-Iran war: Iran (in the middle of a revolution) versus Iraq, US, Soviet Union, Arab League, Pakistan and Europe.
US-Iraq war: Iraq (after 8 years of war with Iran) versus US, NATO, Israel, Arab League.

Just knowing the belligerents of the wars tells a lot.

This doesn't change the fact that the military gap between the US and Iran is too great. The Iranians needs to understand this. Chanting death threats doesn't help with anything.

As I have said before, taking out one person does not mean anything. The reason that Soleimani is highlighted as an exceptionally important general is merely for public consumption to direct anger toward the US instead of local problems. Other than that, generals are expendable and replaceable. Soleimani was replaced by his strategist in few hours and everything is the same as before now. And as the CNN showed inside Ain Al-Assad Base, the damage is much more than just cosmetic damage. Iraqi reporters say that the American part of the US base has been flattened. And your president backed off after he threatened to hit Iranian cultural sites VERY HARD and VERY FAST if Iran threatens them. I suppose hitting a US military base is indeed a high level threat. Or you're fine with people striking your military bases now? So much for a super power. lol

So are you saying Soleimani was a nobody and a expendable person? I am suprised that you have said that so casually, many proud Iranians in this forum and in Iran would highly disagree with you. From what I have heard, he was a hero in Iran and highly respected, not to mention that he was the architect of expanding IRGCs international operations and influence.

Flattened? I am afraid that is a casual word used too often. The thing I agree with you is that the US should not attack cultural sites whether it's Iran or other country. This is never acceptable and it achieves nothing.

In conflicts, every country involved will expect to get hit back, this does not mean you are no longer a superpower. Striking military bases by any aggressor is never fine, just like if the US were to hit Iranian bases, this will never be ok
with the Iranians.

The difference here is if Iran hits US bases (I mean really hit, not cosmetic damages) then perhaps the US will get a bloody nose, depending on the damage and deaths in the US bases, but in return, the US will flatten Iranian bases and the US definition of "Flatten" will mean more than your definition.

Yet, your so-called experience did not help you in the 1983 barracks bombings in Beirut. I wonder why.

The US military is experienced in the field, but this does not mean we are invincible and will not get hit, just like the best sports team in the world of any sport, will expect to drop points.

Nearly all of these countries completely depend on foreign labor to function normally. Have you ever been to one of the Arab kingdoms around the Persian Gulf? A war will cripple them completely. And that is why they are currently begging Iran and the US to deescalate even though they have shown a great desire for a US-Iran war times and times again.

I don't see neighbors begging Iran but I do see US bases dotted around the front door of Iran.

I am afraid that expert analyses greatly differ from yours. We have increased the range of the Persian Gulf missile to 700 kilometers (~430 miles). It has been specifically designed to target US aircraft carriers.

In order to hit us, it is not just the increase in range, there are many factors including your tech in precision and the enemy's inability to counter it. The US has the capability to defend from such missiles.

From what I have seen and the world has currently seen, I wouldn't put too much faith in the design and capability of missiles. You cannot even differentiate between a missile and an airliner.

LOL. You know it better than me that this part of your post is nonsense.
Meanwhile, Iran after the war grew to become a regional power and recovered from it in less than a decade. Iraq on the other hand never recovered from the war. Iraq was the aggressor who had three objectives and failed in achieving all of them. It was both a tactical and strategic failure for Iraq, while Iran won the strategic aspect of the war at least.

I am afraid it is not nonsense, but a failure to face reality. The point is Iran struggled against Iraq despite being a neighbor and all I can see is your excuses that Iran was weak due to the revolution etc.

If you want to downplay an attack on US military bases from the Iranian territory, do it by all means. But by the looks of it, I wouldn't call a crater several meters deep as a scratch

And it has just started. You'll have to wait and see how it develops over time.

I am not downplaying anything, the crater is the result of the impact of a missile attack just like any other, You didn't cause any deaths, there is nothing there that cannot be fixed, in other words as I have said before, cosmetic damages. I don't see what you have achieved.

All I see is the US took out your favorite general and you retaliated by destroying empty buildings. We all know who got the better deal.

I agree that this will develop over time, but I think you have a more pressing task at hand, the settlement of the airliner killing.

 

[Arian]

This doesn't change the fact that the military gap between the US and Iran is too great. The Iranians needs to understand this. Chanting death threats doesn't help with anything.

And that doesn't have anything to do with what was being discussed.

So are you saying Soleimani was a nobody and a expendable person? I am suprised that you have said that so casually, many proud Iranians in this forum and in Iran would highly disagree with you. From what I have heard, he was a hero in Iran and highly respected, not to mention that he was the architect of expanding IRGCs international operations and influence.

The architect of expanding IRGC's international operations was Mostafa Chamran as I told you. The IRGC's influence in Lebanon and Palestine exists thanks to him. And yes, he was expendable. The only reason that there's a lot of media hype about it is to rally support behind the IRGC against the Americans throughout the region.

The difference here is if Iran hits US bases (I mean really hit, not cosmetic damages) then perhaps the US will get a bloody nose, depending on the damage and deaths in the US bases, but in return, the US will flatten Iranian bases and the US definition of "Flatten" will mean more than your definition.

Iraqi sources tell that the American part of the Ain Al-Assad base has been literally obliterated. CNN reports show only debris, dust and ashes. And you had a 6 hour prior notice to reduce casualties. Your radars in the region were all active and directed at Iran, yet you couldn't intercept even one incoming missile.

I don't see neighbors begging Iran but I do see US bases dotted around the front door of Iran.

It's not about what you see or don't see. It's about facts. Maybe a simple Googling would help you learn a thing or two before you comment on something?
https://www.arabnews.com/node/1610106/middle-east
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jan/09/saudi-arabia-urges-de-escalation-of-midde-east-crisis
And many other links that you can find on your own.

In order to hit us, it is not just the increase in range, there are many factors including your tech in precision and the enemy's inability to counter it. The US has the capability to defend from such missiles.

This is where the attack on Ain Al-Assad becomes relevant. The precision of our hits was pretty impressive as admitted by Western analysts. And none of our missiles were intercepted by you. So, that kind of answers both of your concerns.

From what I have seen and the world has currently seen, I wouldn't put too much faith in the design and capability of missiles. You cannot even differentiate between a missile and an airliner.

If you're going to stoop so low to take advantage of an unfortunate incident which caused 170 civilian deaths, I should remind you that thousands of your soldiers went back home crippled. Some of them lost their manhood and many of them committed suicide because of war traumas. Most of that happened thanks to the IDEs in Iraq that we were responsible for. Not to mention that the security of your military establishments is so ridiculous that allows things like the Beirut barracks bombings to happen.

I am afraid it is not nonsense, but a failure to face reality. The point is Iran struggled against Iraq despite being a neighbor and all I can see is your excuses that Iran was weak due to the revolution etc.

Again, the belligerents say it all. Iraq versus Iran ended as a strategic victory for Iran and a tactical stalemate for both sides. Iraq widely used chemical weapons against the Iranians, both civilians and soldiers, and had the direct support of the Soviet Union, the US, the UK, France, Western/Eastern Germany, Italy, Belgium, Austria, all Arab countries except Syria, Lebanon and Algeria, etc. Iran on the other hand was in the state of chaos after a revolution that marked a turning point for the region and the world. The US got directly involved to prevent Iraq from losing the war on numerous occasions. Particularly, after Iran destroyed 80% of the Iraqi Navy, the US helped Iraq continue to export oil.

US coalition invasion of Iraq in 2003 involved more than 50 countries supporting the US coalition, including European powers, Arab countries and Iraq's neighboring countries and it has been an ongoing situation. Although it was a tactical victory, it has been a strategic failure and you're now getting the boot in Iraq.

I am not downplaying anything, the crater is the result of the impact of a missile attack just like any other, You didn't cause any deaths, there is nothing there that cannot be fixed, in other words as I have said before, cosmetic damages. I don't see what you have achieved.

I'm surprised that you can't use your native language properly. A 'scratch' is not several meters deep.

All I see is the US took out your favorite general and you retaliated by destroying empty buildings. We all know who got the better deal.

You took out one person whom was replaced hours later immediately. Your hegemony was pissed on, two of your bases were flattened and you don't even dare to admit that your soldiers were killed because you're afraid of being dragged into a war, you chickened out and took back your threats, your allies soiled their pants, and you are now getting kicked out of one of the world's leading oil producer countries which happen to host your largest embassy in the world. Yeah, it's quite obvious that Iran got the better deal.

I agree that this will develop over time, but I think you have a more pressing task at hand, the settlement of the airliner killing.

It was settled. The cause of the incident has been announced and the victims will receive compensation. That's pretty much it. Case Closed.

--- REMARK: I am leaving defence.pk again. My presence here was only temporary and it is now over. So, I'm afraid I won't be able to read and respond to your next comment. Sorry for that. Fare well. ----

 

[Ich]

Extrem drone war in Syria against US troops and bases there looks good.