It seems US wants war

[OCguy]

lmao, You can't give that assurance, period. You make it seem the United States can just waltz into Iran like it was a Tuesday at grandmas house.

There is no scenario in which the U.S. just initiates an air campaign against Iranian nuclear assets without reaping heavy losses and don't try and undermine what Iran can do.

There absolutely are those scenarios, and I have studied them. You probably aren't aware that KSA has an agreement to allow Israeli jets to use their bases for refueling, unlike 10 years ago when war was imminent.

If America attacks them, then Nuclear weapon will be built for sure.... It will only be a matter of time.

If America attacks them, there will be no leadership, funds, or ability to re-start the program for decades.

If America attacks them, then Nuclear weapon will be built for sure.... It will only be a matter of time.

By who? There will be no hardline clerics. America attack = New government, and no nuke program.

 

[bozorgmehr]

Time to kick out the yankees from the region ...

You've been saying that for 40 years! That pedophile khomeini used to say jang, jang taa piroozi... (War, war, till victory) and then after hundreds of thousands of Iranians death and incalculable economic damage he changed his mind overnight and agreed to bend over.

So they kick you out of Iran so that we can live in peace? Don't you think that will be a more workable solution?

 

[Oldman1]

Providing supplies and training is enough and you should not underestimate other nations. There are many countries that are looking to challenge the American hegemony over the world. Russia and China would love to entrap America in another 20-30 year war with the Iranis. Believe me the Arabs and Jews will not make a collation of the willing with the Americans. The Europeans won't send boots either. Iran and Russia entrapped America in Afghanistan with china buying all the mineral rights. Leaving America with a trillion dollar bill and nothing to show for it except an opiate crisis at home.

Trump is a jackass and this is a miscalculation. Wining a land invasion is one thing but holding land is another. Iran is a mostly mountainous country with a homogeneous population. They are not going to be a cake walk like Iraq. Iran has proxies in almost all Muslim countries. The Shia network is very well connected and organized.

You saw what happened in Syria when you have countries in the ME supporting proxy groups that pretty much destroyed the country and is still destroying the country. And Iran has suffered many casualties in that conflict. And the ME countries didn't get involved directly. And if you want to attack the U.S. and its allies in the ME, be my guest. Iran just make more enemies, which they are already are, it will just be worse. We don't need to invade Iran. Bombing Iran is good enough.

 

[graphican]

This is silly. We have land bases all around Iran. We have the most advanced weapons systems in the world, and the ability to project them via Air, land, and sea.

Sir having bases all around Iran doesn't mean you can attack Iran and will not be hit back. It is the hitting back part which is preventing you from using your "most advanced weapon systems".

You see actions speak louder than words. The reason we are having this text discussion is because most advanced weapon systems are silent and there is no action from USA - don't we all know why?

 

[Blue In Green]

There absolutely are those scenarios, and I have studied them. You probably aren't aware that KSA has an agreement to allow Israeli jets to use their bases for refueling, unlike 10 years ago when war was imminent.



If America attacks them, there will be no leadership, funds, or ability to re-start the program for decades.

Fully aware of that development but that still doesn't mean that America and Israel will come out victorious, if anything it will push the Iranians to the breaking point and have them go nuclear quickly irregardless of the strikes which we don't know how effective they will be to begin with, Iran's defense apparatus is adequate and their positioning of the facilities in mountains under heavy SAM protection can't be ignored. One thing they will be effective in is galvanizing regular Iranians against America since nuclear energy is something most Iranians want to have.

I'm under the impression Iran has other undisclosed sites that will be activated or used more readily for the production of nuclear weapons for deterrence purposes if it gets too bad. America can't win em' all.

Again, any strike against Iranian soil will be during an active shooting war scenario. We've seen Iran's ability to destroy with pinpoint accuracy any target of its choosing and Iran barely lifted a finger during the Aramco attack. What I can say with great certainty having followed Iran's military developments over the past decade is that Iran is as prepared for war as the United States is and this is full theatre war most likely not just confined to Iraq or Syria.

Iran's missile forces alone pose a serious threat to American bases and strategic assets the region over.

 

[Oldman1]

Agree. Iran doesn't have the ability to reach out to USA shores and challenge it. But is it really the scenario the USA is trying to avoid? Existence of Iran in its own region is a matter of displeasure to USA.

No the existence of the U.S. in the ME and Israel in its own region is a matter of displeasure to Iran.

 

[libertad]

Yeah there are bases around it. But that means Iran is nearby them as well. They willing to try that? And trying to control the Straits of Hormuz by blockading or mining it is pretty much challenging the U.S. directly because we won't stand for it. No doubt about it!

What we absolutely wont stand for is another war in Iraq especially by a president who campaigned on getting us out of there and condemning the first 2 wars. There is zero support for war across the board for another war. Trump has been busy trying to keep the phony stock market economy alive like the wizard of oz. A spike in oil prices plunges the economy and any hopes of reelection with it. It is actually Trump who is in a more precarious position. Iran, like North Korea are sanctioned to the max, there are no more cards to play there except war. Which is why Kim can fire all the missiles he wants and we can't do anything about it. Trump will not attack Iran so long as Iran does not attack US troops directly. Only thing is Iran has proxies and we dont.

 

[graphican]

No the existence of the U.S. in the ME and Israel in its own region is a matter of displeasure to Iran.

Do you want to say existence of USA outside its rightful land is a matter of displeasure for Iran? Don't we know who needs to leave that region?

If the intention is peace, USA would respect the territory of others as much as it does its own - but if the intention is peace.

 

[OCguy]

Sir having bases all around Iran doesn't mean you can attack Iran and will not be hit back. It is the hitting back part which is preventing you from using your "most advanced weapon systems".

You see actions speak louder than words. The reason we are having this text discussion is because most advanced weapon systems are silent and there is no action from USA - don't we all know why?

Because the US took deaths we didn't need to in every war since WWII, because we use restraint. We know where the sites are. We now have the weapons and delivery systems to wipe them out.

We don't want war. Iran doesn't want war. But we are in a classic ego death spiral, that leads to civilians needlessly dying. And you might not believe me, you probably don't...but I am really sick of seeing beautiful ME women and children crying over losing their loved ones over stupid wars.

 

[Oldman1]

What we absolutely wont stand for is another war in Iraq especially by a president who campaigned on getting us out of there and condemning the first 2 wars. There is zero support for war across the board for another war. Trump has been busy trying to keep the phony stock market economy alive like the wizard of oz. A spike in oil prices plunges the economy and any hopes of reelection with it. It is actually Trump who is in a more precarious position. Iran, like North Korea are sanctioned to the max, there are no more cards to play there except war. Which is why Kim can fire all the missiles he wants and we can't do anything about it. Trump will not attack Iran so long as Iran does not attack US troops directly. Only thing is Iran has proxies and we dont.

Is Iran ready for another war since the conflict in Syria? Would the Iranian people support it? Or would Iran just use proxies to keep attacking U.S. in Iraq as well as mining in Hormuz? You really believe Iran has no more cards to play except go to war?

 

[Blue In Green]

Is Iran ready for another war since the conflict in Syria? Would the Iranian people support it? Or would Iran just use proxies to keep attacking U.S. in Iraq as well as mining in Hormuz? You really believe Iran has no more cards to play except go to war?

Iran could just have its Proxies/Allies engage US assets in Iraq Ad hominem since that would be the smart way to go about it but Iran does have different options at its disposal.

 

[PakFactor]

If those play stocks might wanna do put options and sell for a quick profit.

 

[graphican]

Because the US took deaths we didn't need to in every war since WWII, because we use restraint. We know where the sites are. We now have the weapons and delivery systems to wipe them out.

We don't want war. Iran doesn't want war. But we are in a classic ego death spiral, that leads to civilians needlessly dying. And you might not believe me, you probably don't...but I am really sick of seeing beautiful ME women and children crying over losing their loved ones over stupid wars.

Sir since you the weaponry and delivery system now, let's settle Afghanistan first. That war has been shattering for your economy and military credit. USA should not handover a country to the extremist who it came to eliminate 18 years ago. No?

Speaking of innocents getting killed, one million has lost their lives in Afghanistan, some 70,000 in Pakistan. Please don't tell people of this region who is sick of seeing people die in the hands of invaders.

 

[Oldman1]

Do you want to say existence of USA outside its rightful land is a matter of displeasure for Iran? Don't we know who needs to leave that region?

If the intention is peace, USA would respect the territory of others as much as it does its own - but if the intention is peace.

Iraq doesn't belong to us no different than Kuwait or Saudi Arabia. We never owned them. Iran's mentality is equivalent to Osama Bin Laden who doesn't want U.S. troops in the ME which by the way happened because of Gulf War 1. Thats not their decision to make. It was the countries. Iraq kicked the U.S. out over the immunity of U.S. soldiers in 2008. Then invited them back in during the ISIS conflict. And is that the same Iranian mentality over Israel as well on who needs to leave the region?

 

[M.Bison]

You saw what happened in Syria when you have countries in the ME supporting proxy groups that pretty much destroyed the country and is still destroying the country. And Iran has suffered many casualties in that conflict. And the ME countries didn't get involved directly. And if you want to attack the U.S. and its allies in the ME, be my guest. Iran just make more enemies, which they are already are, it will just be worse. We don't need to invade Iran. Bombing Iran is good enough.

First, I am not attacking the United states. Second, My point is that if you bomb Iran then they will retaliate. If you will not invade Iran with troops then what is the point? Can't send al-qaeda there like in syria. So, again it will be waste and your checks will keep coming in the mail but the people that work for a living will have to foot the bill.