Iran Did Do It..............says Trump

cnocbui

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Yeahhh...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

You have to be kidding me. The US are not going to do a Dunkirk. That link only emphasises my point. You also don't seem to have a grasp of the basics.

Jimmy Garlic

cnocbui wrote: »

You have to be kidding me. The US are not going to do a Dunkirk. That link only emphasises my point that you don't seem to have a grasp of the basics.

Tell us General Armchair, what would happen? What's your professional opinion.

ArchXStanton

cnocbui wrote: »

You have to be kidding me. The US are not going to do a Dunkirk. That link only emphasises my point. You also don't seem to have a grasp of the basics.

This would be the same US who have to call in an airstrike on a single probably highly stoned Taliban fighter armed with a kalashnikov in the Afghani mountains who's taking pot shots at them and stopping them in their tracks....wow what a waste of taxpayer $$$

Jimmy Garlic

ArchXStanton wrote: »

This would be the same US who have to call in an airstrike on a single probably highly stoned Taliban fighter armed with a kalashnikov in the Afghani mountains who's taking pot shots at them and stopping them in their tracks....wow what a waste of taxpayer $$$

And that's when they are not blowing up weddings, funerals, goat herders and hospitals.

cnocbui

Modern warfare as conducted by the US relies on air power and air superiority via which they eliminate the command and control and anti-air capabilities of any opposing force. Iran's swarm of small boats would be taken out from the air in a matter of hours after that had been achieved.

If I were the US, I wouldn't have any surface vessels in the gulf before I started phase one and would only send them back in once Iran no longer had an air force and after the smoke from every coastal military facilities destruction had died down enough visibility was back to 20 km.

Gatling

Jimmy Garlic wrote: »

And that's when they are not blowing up weddings, funerals, goat herders and hospitals.

Didn't bother you when russian did it in Syria did it

cnocbui

ArchXStanton wrote: »

This would be the same US who have to call in an airstrike on a single probably highly stoned Taliban fighter armed with a kalashnikov in the Afghani mountains who's taking pot shots at them and stopping them in their tracks....wow what a waste of taxpayer $$$

You also seem to have next to no grasp of just how much $$$ the US has.



So the US calls in an airstrike. The result is Afghanistan has a few more small craters and The US has many citizens as it did before.

While it may seem like expensive overkill, A; they can afford it and B; it delivers unarguable results.

archer22

cnocbui wrote: »

Modern warfare as conducted by the US relies on air power and air superiority via which they eliminate the command and control and anti-air capabilities of any opposing force. Iran's swarm of small boats would be taken out from the air in a matter of hours after that had been achieved.

If I were the US, I wouldn't have any surface vessels in the gulf before I started phase one and would only send them back in once Iran no longer had an air force and after the smoke from every coastal military facilities destruction had died down enough visibility was back to 20 km.

Bejasus so that's how it's done and of course all those Iranian assets will be sitting around in the open painted in high viz colours I presume

Gatling

cnocbui wrote: »

Modern warfare as conducted by the US relies on air power and air superiority via which they eliminate the command and control and anti-air capabilities of any opposing force. Iran's swarm of small boats would be taken out from the air in a matter of hours after that had been achieved.

If I were the US, I wouldn't have any surface vessels in the gulf before I started phase one and would only send them back in once Iran no longer had an air force and after the smoke from every coastal military facilities destruction had died down enough visibility was back to 20 km.

It's widely believed the us alone would have airsuperiourity in 3 days ,
The fact of the matter they can hit targets surgically 24/7 from both Sea and air while maintaining standoff ranges something iran doesn't have the ability to match.

archer22

Reminds me of Vietnam when the north Vietnamese air force's Mig 15 was supposed to have no hope against the 'superior' state of the art american aircraft.

However a lot of American pilots had doubts about that conclusion as they spiralled earthwards in flames after being ambushed in hit and run attacks by the Mig15s.

Ah but shur the Viets didn't fight fair boo hoo :mad:

cnocbui

Instead of this militaristic willy waving, you know what would be really good?

If Iran would stop acting like such a silly prat and stop being so stupidly provocative.

Same goes for that utter moron who was elected as US idiot in chief, and all his senile and demented advisers and hangers-on.

Why Britain would assist the US in prosecuting US sanctions by seizing the Iranian tanker in the first place is (almost) beyond me. I can only assume it's another sign of the their complete political dysfunction and lunacy brought about by their illegitimate brexit referendum. I suspect the US said do this or no trade deal, or some such. Why the UK would even contemplate a trade deal with those >unprintable expletive< is beyond me. The US want them to basically tear down the NHS. I mean WTF?

I blame the US for all this and the UK are just getting what they deserve for being so gobsmackingly thick in being a US lapdog. Iran should calm down, behave itself, and keep pressure on the EU for the rapid creation of the trade obfuscation mechanism to get around US sanctions. It's going to take time to unwind the near total US$ hegemony, so they should just chill for a bit and stop with this 'we will now behave badly again' nonsense.

cnocbui

Gatling wrote: »

It's widely believed the us alone would have airsuperiourity in 3 days ,
The fact of the matter they can hit targets surgically 24/7 from both Sea and air while maintaining standoff ranges something iran doesn't have the ability to match.

Let's hope some very stupid people calm down so we don't get to use a stop watch to find out exactly how long it does take. Whether it's 3 hours, 3 days or 3 weeks hardly matters, the US would quickly get the job done and the world would see several more decades of shocking terrorist incidents.

Trump's re-imposition of sanctions was so stupid. Did Israel actually get him elected and make it look like the Russians did it or something? The US effectively a puppet of Israel - what weird world we live in.

ArchXStanton

cnocbui wrote: »

You also seem to have next to no grasp of just how much $$$ the US has.



So the US calls in an airstrike. The result is Afghanistan has a few more small craters and The US has many citizens as it did before.

While it may seem like expensive overkill, A; they can afford it and B; it delivers unarguable results.

Tell me how many years the US are in Afghanistan? The US has many citizens that return home from there in a wheelchair,not that the US government gives a fcuk about them at that stage...and still they believe they are over there protecting muh american freedams

ArchXStanton

cnocbui wrote: »

Instead of this militaristic willy waving, you know what would be really good?

If Iran would stop acting like such a silly prat and stop being so stupidly provocative.

Same goes for that utter moron who was elected as US idiot in chief, and all his senile and demented advisers and hangers-on.

Why Britain would assist the US in prosecuting US sanctions by seizing the Iranian tanker in the first place is (almost) beyond me. I can only assume it's another sign of the their complete political dysfunction and lunacy brought about by their illegitimate brexit referendum. I suspect the US said do this or no trade deal, or some such. Why the UK would even contemplate a trade deal with those >unprintable expletive< is beyond me. The US want them to basically tear down the NHS. I mean WTF?

I blame the US for all this and the UK are just getting what they deserve for being so gobsmackingly thick in being a US lapdog. Iran should calm down, behave itself, and keep pressure on the EU for the rapid creation of the trade obfuscation mechanism to get around US sanctions. It's going to take time to unwind the near total US$ hegemony, so they should just chill for a bit and stop with this 'we will now behave badly again' nonsense.

There would be no issues in the strait of Hormuz if the US didn't have a military presence there,or are you anothet brainwashed fella who thinks the west can act with impunity because the others are them brown fellas? I'll say it again,fair play to Iran for taking zero sh*t off the US regime and its axis of evil "poodles"

cameramonkey

cnocbui wrote: »

I blame the US for all this and the UK are just getting what they deserve for being so gobsmackingly thick in being a US lapdog. Iran should calm down, behave itself, and keep pressure on the EU for the rapid creation of the trade obfuscation mechanism to get around US sanctions. It's going to take time to unwind the near total US$ hegemony, so they should just chill for a bit and stop with this 'we will now behave badly again' nonsense.

The pressure in on from Israel and Saudi to destroy Iran, US middle east policy is run by a cabal that are singing from a hymn sheet written in Jerusalem and Riyadh. It plain to see. Bolton, Kushner, Netanyahu and Bin Salan.


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/06/18/donald-trumps-new-world-order

ArchXStanton

Gatling wrote: »

It's widely believed the us alone would have airsuperiourity in 3 days ,
The fact of the matter they can hit targets surgically 24/7 from both Sea and air while maintaining standoff ranges something iran doesn't have the ability to match.

Again more nonsense from you that you seem to pull from thin air,no wonder you have no credibility on this forum...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Deir_ez-Zor_missile_strike

Cheerful Spring2

Gatling wrote: »

Who said anything about occupation .

Iran can maybe muster 250,000 men ,now take Iraq as an example one of the largest and feared militaries in the world were embarrassed not once but twice ,
Your claim of millions willing to fight for Iran - I believe your quite wrong -
Religious leaders and military revolutionary guard are not popular by any means so you think Iranians will fight a war they have zero interest in .


Your making assumptions off what seems to be social media postings oh Iran has missiles ,iran has mountains ,iran has anti this and anti that.

Big difference between having the best of weapons technology repeatedly proven to be put on targets 24 /7 with surgical precision ,
And Having weapons you have never used or fought a real war in 30 years

Iran shot down a slow unarmed drone wow


Come back in another 30 years and tell us about it

Iraq attacked and invaded Iran at a time when its professional army was in disarray. They just had revolution in the country and most of the army units defected and some were were disbanded after the chaos. Iraq attacked Iran when it was most vulnerable. Iraq initial success ended when the Iranians counter attacked and drove the Iraq army back over the border. Iranian forces invaded Iraq near Basra and got and reached the Baghdad highway. Saddam forces in panic resorted to using chemical weapons and the war became a stalemate. Eventually a ceasefire was brokered and Saddam dream of destroying Iran ended.

Saddam army was poorly managed and ill-equipped to fight the allies during the first gulf war .

Saddam had Russian made scuds and they were not accurate like modern missiles are today. Iran has cruise missiles and they are precision weapons, and Iran is only one of few countries that had developed anti- carrier missiles. Iran missiles are far more accurate and deadly and they have thousands of them spread through the country.

Saddam also made a mistake of leaving his tanks out in the open in the desert to be destroyed by allied air power. The first gulf war was fought only in Kuwait a small stretch of land. Iran is a massive country.

Iran army is 500,000 strong already, with 300,000 in reserve. With population of over 80 million.

250,000 men are you joking? Iran population is deeply patriotic and religious men would flock to defend their homeland if attacked.

Any war likely will not be a shortone and to beat the Iranians you have to invade and take the country. Airpower alone is not going to win a war.

cnocbui

ArchXStanton wrote: »

There would be no issues in the strait of Hormuz if the US didn't have a military presence there,or are you anothet brainwashed fella who thinks the west can act with impunity because the others are them brown fellas? I'll say it again,fair play to Iran for taking zero sh*t off the US regime and its axis of evil "poodles"

Connect the dots for me: The US having a military presence near the strait of Hormuz made Iran seize three British registered ships and blow holes in the side of I forget how many others - how?

I am not on the side of the US. I think they are well and truly in the wrong. Iran certainly has just grievance with the US for reneging on their nuclear non-proliferation agreement and imposing sanctions. That was stupid and reckless. That said, the reality is the US could obliterate Iran in an armed conflict if it chose.

The US, Iran, UK and Israel are all behaving badly here. If you want an example of brainwashing, I suggest you look in the mirror.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Stop making claims that is not true your Iran this and Iran has that and Iran can do this .

Your talking nonsense literally .

Nobody is talking about invading iran only you and one or two others on here nobody else

You don't have clue about the people of Iran and what they will do or will not do .


This the same Iranian military which turned it's tanks and weapons on unarmed protesters several times in the last few years and

Cheerful Spring2

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Iran is no joke,put no pass on Rambo here posting who has a wargasm every time the US is involved,they have thousands of missiles and for very good reason....

"In a tweet Wednesday, Javad Zarif said that Iran's missile program grew out of the 1980-1988 war against Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

"For 8 YEARS, Saddam showered our cities with missiles & bombs provided by East & West," Zarif wrote. "Meanwhile, NO ONE sold Iran any means of defense. We had no choice but building our own. Now they complain."

Iraq had showered Iranian cities with 500 missiles killing thousands.

An attack on iran would engulf the whole region in war and seriously disrupt the US oh so important oil..

As an Iranian at the time said "Iran will always strike back" its the only way to deal with scumbag bullies

Iran has its own industrial weapons industry. They have have built these factories underground for 30 years. Iran has learned they can not beat the US in a open conventional war. They are going to use asymmetrical tactics to wear down an aggressor. Iran war industry is sophicated despite what you hear on Fox News. China and Russia are also helping them.

By the way its forgotten now Iranian cyber units took control of a stealth drone in flight. US command and control lost there drone and US operators controling it, could not do anything to stop the drone from landing in Iran. It shows Iran cyber capabilities are very advanced.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident

Cheerful Spring2

ArchXStanton wrote: »

Yeahhh...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

Little know exercise and US changed the tactics after they lost. US commander adapted asymmetrical tactics the Iranians wold use and they lost the battles.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Little know exercise and US changed the tactics after lost

It was America vs America

In a scripted scenario .

There was no losers ........



This doesn't help either

Edit
"Millennium Challenge" redirects here. For The Millennium Challenge Corporation, see Millennium Challenge Corporation.
Learn more
The neutrality of this article is disputed.


Ohhhhh

Didn't fact check again lol

Cheerful Spring2

Gatling wrote: »

It was America vs America

In a scripted scenario .

There was no losers ........



This doesn't help either

Edit
"Millennium Challenge" redirects here. For The Millennium Challenge Corporation, see Millennium Challenge Corporation.
Learn more
The neutrality of this article is disputed.


Ohhhhh

Didn't fact check again lol

False.

Red, commanded by retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper, adopted an asymmetric strategy, in particular, using old methods to evade Blue's sophisticated electronic surveillance network. Van Riper used motorcycle messengers to transmit orders to front-line troops and World-War-II-style light signals to launch airplanes without radio communications.

Red received an ultimatum from Blue, essentially a surrender document, demanding a response within 24 hours. Thus warned of Blue's approach, Red used a fleet of small boats to determine the position of Blue's fleet by the second day of the exercise. In a preemptive strike, Red launched a massive salvo of cruise missiles that overwhelmed the Blue forces' electronic sensors and destroyed sixteen warships. This included one aircraft carrier, ten cruisers and five of six amphibious ships. An equivalent success in a real conflict would have resulted in the deaths of over 20,000 service personnel. Soon after the cruise missile offensive, another significant portion of Blue's navy was "sunk" by an armada of small Red boats, which carried out both conventional and suicide attacks that capitalized on Blue's inability to detect them as well as expected.

Exercise suspension and restart
This led to accusations that the war game had turned from an honest, open, free playtest of U.S. war-fighting capabilities into a rigidly controlled and scripted exercise intended to end in an overwhelming U.S. victory, alleging that "$250 million was wasted".[5] Van Riper was extremely critical of the scripted nature of the new exercise and resigned from the exercise in the middle of the war game

yrreg0850

cameramonkey wrote: »

The pressure in on from Israel and Saudi to destroy Iran, US middle east policy is run by a cabal that are singing from a hymn sheet written in Jerusalem and Riyadh. It plain to see. Bolton, Kushner, Netanyahu and Bin Salan.


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/06/18/donald-trumps-new-world-order

Totally agree with this.

Of course anybody who dares to criticize is Isreal is accused of being antisemetic.
While people are actually criricizing the state, it suits Isreal NOT to seperate church and state and, thus scream antisemetism.

ArchXStanton

cnocbui wrote: »

Connect the dots for me: The US having a military presence near the strait of Hormuz made Iran seize three British registered ships and blow holes in the side of I forget how many others - how?

I am not on the side of the US. I think they are well and truly in the wrong. Iran certainly has just grievance with the US for reneging on their nuclear non-proliferation agreement and imposing sanctions. That was stupid and reckless. That said, the reality is the US could obliterate Iran in an armed conflict if it chose.

The US, Iran, UK and Israel are all behaving badly here. If you want an example of brainwashing, I suggest you look in the mirror.

Let's break out the crayons here for you,the US backed out of a deal that was working fine and Iran was complying with according to all relevant agencies,the rest of the signatories to the deal tried holding it together,the US imposes sanctions on Iran,the US sends a battle group to the strait of Hormuz to put pressure on,the US sends a drone into Iranian airspace which quite rightly they shoot down,the US gets its poodle to detain an Iranian tanker,the iranians respond by detaining tankers....and here we are today,those tankers that were attacked? I'm reminded of that prop of a vial of anthrax at a UN meeting,you know that one? The one that cost a million lives...

Gatling

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

False.

Your wrong it was a scripted and restricted war game it's pretty common occurrence.


Again your taking your opinion and using it as fact .



add the note of the Edit
"Millennium Challenge" redirects here. For The Millennium Challenge Corporation, see Millennium Challenge Corporation.
Learn more
"The neutrality of this article is disputed."


Bit like the claim of Iran has this and Iran can do that

Cheerful Spring2

cnocbui wrote: »

Connect the dots for me: The US having a military presence near the strait of Hormuz made Iran seize three British registered ships and blow holes in the side of I forget how many others - how?

I am not on the side of the US. I think they are well and truly in the wrong. Iran certainly has just grievance with the US for reneging on their nuclear non-proliferation agreement and imposing sanctions. That was stupid and reckless. That said, the reality is the US could obliterate Iran in an armed conflict if it chose.

The US, Iran, UK and Israel are all behaving badly here. If you want an example of brainwashing, I suggest you look in the mirror.

I don't see this at all. US armed forces failed to beat North Vietnam, China and North Korea. They were peasant armies back then and US was the strongest military in the world back then too.

There only real success was beating Iraq. There literally no evidence at all they could take on Iran and win in days or weeks. Iran influence is massive and spread throughout the region.

Houtis have effectively knocked UAE out of the war in Yemen and they are scandal wearing peasants too. Saudi Arbia and UAE use US military equipment to fight the war and they are failing to win.

US military might is overblown in US hollywood movies, and Gatling is into all that.

ArchXStanton

uote="Cheerful Spring2;110748826"]I don't see this at all. US armed forces failed to beat North Vietnam, China and North Korea. They were peasant armies back then and US was the strongest military in the world back then too.

There only real success was beating Iraq. There literally no evidence at all they could take on Iran and win in days or weeks. Iran influence is massive and spread throughout the region.

Houtis have effectively knocked UAE out of the war in Yemen and they are scandal wearing peasants too. Saudi Arbia and UAE use US military equipment to fight the war and they are failing to win.

US military might is overblown in US hollywood movies, and Gatling is into all that.[/quote]

I don't know if you've ever been to Vietnam,I've spent extensive time there,a lovely,friendly and quite resilient people,the US were never going to win that war,it was like kicking an ant nest,they could mow down thousands of them and there would be 100 to take 1 mans place,the Cu chi tunnels are quite interesting,they had to widen them to fit western tourists but Jesus do you get claustrophobic in them,even simple Punji bamboo traps accounted for 11% of casualties,add to that the Viet Cong knew the jungle like the back of their hands, it must have seemed to a US soldier like the jungle was alive,they ended up resorting to using agent orange ,the effects of which you can still see there today,the rotten b*stards....but don't tell that to Gatling about his childhood sweethearts

Gatling

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

US armed forces failed to beat North Korea.

US military might is overblown

You poor sod is this the Korean war you made up a whole historical alternative universe theory about that left many in tears.


So anyhow did anyone get an answer why iran was going to attack mainland America and what would happen if they did

The Late Late Show

cameramonkey wrote: »

The pressure in on from Israel and Saudi to destroy Iran, US middle east policy is run by a cabal that are singing from a hymn sheet written in Jerusalem and Riyadh. It plain to see. Bolton, Kushner, Netanyahu and Bin Salan.


https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/06/18/donald-trumps-new-world-order

Definitely. I think Saudi Arabia have been ruling the roost since this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis