Pentagon says Iran attacked two Iraqi bases housing US forces

a reply to: rickymouse

Well, that would be the third time your nation used nuclear weapons in anger.

Coz that's about the only way you would ever destroy Tehran without losing 1000s of troops in a sustained ground battle.

And all you would serve to achieve is to make them stronger and reinforce their primitive ideologies.

Everyone understands that killing Salami was in response to 2 things;

1) his forces attacked US embassy
2) his forces responsible for hundreds of US deaths

Killing him was not the “start”.

I keep hearing “what did you expect? You killed their general.”

Iran drew first blood.

POTUS Trump can accomplish two objectives. Remove US forces from ME and reduce Iran’s military capabilities with little or no risk to US personnel or citizens.

Missiles to take out Iran military targets and infrastructure, primarily their refineries and ports.

Minimal civilians hurt. Tehran not even touched.

Now I guess we have to wonder what countries will side with Iran. It's looking Biblical....

a reply to: PilSungMtnMan

So if they were to say assassinate Trump then that would be fair play?

Somehow i imagine Iran would be glowing in the dark for the next few thousand years if that happened.

originally posted by: olaru12
Now I guess we have to wonder what countries will side with Iran. It's looking Biblical....

Many countries will “side” with Iran.
None will actually help them.

originally posted by: olaru12
Now I guess we have to wonder what countries will side with Iran. It's looking Biblical....

Actually, not many countries want to get tangled up with Iran, the leader there is a power hungry jerk who will take over any country that helps him and stick it under his control.

a reply to: Bluntone22

Not overtly anyroad, but they will indeed, especially if paid handsomely.

And that's something Trump does understand.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: toysforadults
Iran has birds in the air now

I believe they're called "skeet."

LMAO!!!

Yeah, I don't see this escalating very far. Iran knows we could pound them even further into the dark ages than they are.

So it begins. This has been coming since the 70's. The Iranian people want to be free and we will deliver said freedom. To you who havent served...this is what we are trained for, this is what we do and we do it quite well. My only worry is the Dems wont let us take the gloves off....which will end up killing a lot of service members.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: PilSungMtnMan

So if they were to say assassinate Trump then that would be fair play?

Somehow i imagine Iran would be glowing in the dark for the next few thousand years if that happened.

They don’t have that ability first of all. They have a $30b military budget. They are finite in their war making capability. They can’t operate outside their own borders en masse.

Again, their guy died because Iran is the worlds leader of state sponsored terrorism. If that’s your global presence, then you are not militarily a threat. Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan are incapable of conquering or dominating an enemy.

Iran does not have mass destruction or casualty capabilities.

What we are seeing is the Iran government flexing for their people so the people do not think this is the time to rebel.

I wonder when Israel will play their trump card! did I mention Biblical?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: rickymouse

Well, that would be the third time your nation used nuclear weapons in anger.

Coz that's about the only way you would ever destroy Tehran without losing 1000s of troops in a sustained ground battle.

And all you would serve to achieve is to make them stronger and reinforce their primitive ideologies.

Umm... Their air Force would last about 10 mins, their navy less.

Their only tough but is ground to air defense, and we would crush that eventually. Once that was done we would bomb their army till it cracked then invade

Russia can't do much force projection this far, Syria has its own issues, and nobody else would care enough to send troops.

Would their be losses sure, but to think the initial stages of the war would be a meat grinder is laughable.

Before you say we'll join up tough guy... 18 yrs in usaf and pissed I will miss the next deployment due to knee problems.

Listening to Mike Pompeo's news conference, it was obvious he, the DOD, and trump were all aware that Iran would respond. Trump warned what he would do. Pompeo assured that our response would be legal.

To be honest, I am sure Trump haters and others will be trying to continue their spin that this is all Trump's fault and he is evil. Yet, I am under the impression and somewhat confident that Trump, DOD, and our government are knowing we are many steps ahead in this tit for tat situation. If I am wrong, I will humbly admit such.

a reply to: andy06shake

The chemical attacks came later. In the lead up to the 1980 war, relations between Iraq and Iran were greatly improving. Iraq was attempting to normalize relations with the Shah and the Shah was doing the same. When the Islamic revolution occurred, the Ayatollah council rededicated the Ba'athist Iraq regime as an enemy of Shi'ah Islam and essentially poked and prodded Iraq into retaliation as an exercise in border defense, which escalated to war. Prior to the clerics taking over, Iran was neither attacking nor getting attacked by Iraq.

Therein is part of the problem with the "Iran hasn't started a war in 200 years" untruth... The hardline Islamists have only been in control of Iran for 40 years and the country has been a provoker of war and supporter of terrorism that entire time... usually against countries that haven't directly attacked Iran.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: ridgerunner

Yes let's spread possible radioactive isotopes and contaminants into the atmosphere, that will work.

Good time to let cooler heads prevail if you ask me.

But chance would be a fine thing indeed.

So you agree Iran has a UN declared illegal nuclear weapons program.
Time for them to go...

Iran May be crazy but they are not Epsteinish. They shot missiles at targets that would have low risk of US casualties.

They know if they killed Americans they’d get pummeled.

originally posted by: olaru12
Now I guess we have to wonder what countries will side with Iran. It's looking Biblical....

None so far. They've made a tremendous list of enemies over the past 4 decades. China is likely selling them weapons and tech behind the scenes and Turkey may ultimately be their primary ally in an actual war, but ultimately this will look similar to Iraq or Afghanistan and foreign fighters will enter their country in support (if the Pentagon is foolish enough to put a US boot in country rather than handling the entire conflict with missiles, bombs, and drones), but they will lack allies of note.

a reply to: Irishhaf

I would never suggest you fight for the banker's pal knee problems or otherwise.

I won't be a cakewalk just down to terrain and the tactics employed against any invading army.

Never take down that regime without boots on the ground and even then, all you would serve to do is be hated for doing so by the rest of the Muslim world.

As to there air defense network, one of the best in the world and not exactly obsolete, there will be losses and not just on the ground.

originally posted by: olaru12
Now I guess we have to wonder what countries will side with Iran. It's looking Biblical....

So you believe in the Revelations in the Bible ?
If you did , you would understand that what has to happen before , has not happened.