|
 lmao
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 12:02 |
|
|
Grondoth posted:Chuds don't think. They feel. Pulling troops away from the kurds was good because it felt like we were getting out of the middle east. Killing officials is good because it feels like we're not taking any guff, mister! It doesn't matter that none of this makes sense, it's not about making sense. It's about acting on your feelings. Not your empathy or moral code or anything, just your feelings. Your gut.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
Raccooon posted:I meant what is the Mahdi Army? They are going to shout Paul Atreides' fremen name at the US invaders, killing them psychically.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:05
|
|
|
Atrocious Joe posted:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Sadr_City 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:06
|
|
|
We've managed to turn back the clock in Iraq to 2004-06. Cool stuff. Wonder if we'll recreate ISIS again!
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:08
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1213048308257710086?s=19 So he's been the deputy of the Quds Force since '97. Do we know anything else about him?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:12
|
|
|
Dreylad posted:Yasha Levine's documentary about water in California revealed that all the pistachio farmers in the state funnel tons of money to the anti-Iran lobby because the country is direct competition for them. It's not out yet but they're in post-production and I assume they'll want to get it out soon given the news. Thanks for the update, I chipped in for that. I'm pretty pissed by my institution just took more money from those Resnick fucks. For get this...a sustainability institute!
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:12
|
|
|
Love the Danish media making Soleimani sound like the mid-game boss of the latest Call of Duty installment. Eager to join our American allies for some more military adventurism 
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
RaySmuckles posted:i think iran's response is clear: they literally don't need nukes to do what they want to do
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:16
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1213048308257710086?s=19 https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1213157572552929280 DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:they literally don't need nukes to do what they want to do The nukes are to deter us from bombing the gently caress out of them if they counterpunch too hard. As long as we have escalation dominance, their options are limited.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:20
|
|
|
Mayor Pete functionally endorses the assassination but is upset Trump didn't call congress first. We learned nothing and thousands of Iranians will die because of it. Cool! https://twitter.com/PeteButtigieg/status/1213139943901614080
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:21
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1213157572552929280 Iran has modern SAMs, so us options for bombing would be limited to cruise missiles and other low sortie density standoff weapons. Kill a lot of civilians but not an existential threat to the Iranian government, and one they could match by shutting down shipping in the Persian gulf
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:25
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1213048308257710086?s=19 He's the worlds no. 1 bad guy
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:Iran has modern SAMs, so us options for bombing would be limited to cruise missiles and other low sortie density standoff weapons. Kill a lot of civilians but not an existential threat to the Iranian government, and one they could match by shutting down shipping in the Persian gulf Radio War Nerd episode talked about Iran could shut down Saudia Arabia by taking out their refineries and water production. Also use their missiles to push a US fleet out of range.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:27
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PiYuq6Ac3a0
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:28
|
|
|
Raccooon posted:Radio War Nerd episode talked about Iran could shut down Saudia Arabia by taking out their refineries and water production. Also use their missiles to push a US fleet out of range. Yeah, they can deny the Persian gulf to any naval traffic quite easily. US strikes would be cruise missiles from submarines and perhaps b-1 and b-2 high altitude missiles, and shutting down the straight of hormuz while destabilizing Saudi Arabia would hurt the US as much as those strikes would Iran
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
Raccooon posted:Radio War Nerd episode talked about Iran could shut down Saudia Arabia by taking out their refineries and water production. Also use their missiles to push a US fleet out of range. poo poo, they wouldn't even have to try that hard. The houthis halved Saudi production with just a handful of drones iirc
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:Iran has modern SAMs, so us options for bombing would be limited to cruise missiles and other low sortie density standoff weapons. Kill a lot of civilians but not an existential threat to the Iranian government, and one they could match by shutting down shipping in the Persian gulf I'm extremely skeptical about their ability to deny us air superiority for long, but I hope we never find out. Shutting down the Gulf is obviously the biggest weapon in their arsenal, but it's also kind of a one time thing, because they'd be absolutely hammered if they did it. IMO the case of North Korea demonstrates that while they did seem to have the ability to deter us from attacking them before they had nukes, they still demonstrated a willingness to accept a shitload of pain to pursue and acquire nukes nevertheless, because they didn't trust the level of deterrence they had. Similarly, while Iran's been able to deter us thus far, I think they'd be crazy not to want the added security nukes would offer, as long as the push for nukes doesn't bring about the catastrophe they hope to avoid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:36
|
|
|
I mean you are just shooting missiles at buildings filled with explosive liquids. Can't be hard. RWN was talking about how the southern region of Saudia Arabia is dependent plants to produce water. Taking those out leaves a population in the 100,000s with no water.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:36
|
|
|
The Dengue Nerd edit: whoops, thought this was the RWN thread, but yeah, SA relies heavily on desalinization for drinking water
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:The nukes are to deter us from bombing the gently caress out of them if they counterpunch too hard. As long as we have escalation dominance, their options are limited. aside from nuclear weapons there isn't much we can do to "bomb the gently caress out of them." they have near-peer air defense systems and well-developed area denial doctrine to keep the us navy far away.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:43
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:aside from nuclear weapons there isn't much we can do to "bomb the gently caress out of them." they have near-peer air defense systems and well-developed area denial doctrine to keep the us navy far away. There's no way for either one of us to know how well we'd fare against their air defenses for sure until war breaks out, which I hope it doesn't, but I just don't believe they're that capable. It feels like threat inflation/wishful thinking to me. I'm not saying all our planes would be flying at will in their skies from day one, but I think their systems would get degraded pretty quickly by high altitude bombers. People talked up Yugoslavia's air defenses before the Kosovo intervention too, and other than one shootdown when we got lazy because we thought we were invincible, they weren't anything special. Dr Kool-AIDS has issued a correction as of 19:48 on Jan 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:46
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:There's no way for either one of us to know how well we'd fare against their air defenses for sure until war breaks out, which I hope it doesn't, but I just don't believe they're that capable. It feels like threat inflation/wishful thinking to me. I'm not saying all our planes would be flying at will in their skies from day one, but I think their systems would get degraded pretty quickly by high altitude bombers. People talked up Yugoslavia's air defenses before the Kosovo intervention too, and other than one shootdown when we got lazy because we thought we were invincible, they weren't anything special. Military technology has changed in 25 years and Iran has resources far beyond what Yugoslavia did atelier morgan has issued a correction as of 19:55 on Jan 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:53
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:Military technology has changed in 25 years and Iran has resources far beyond what Yugoslavia did Fortunately for them, the US hasn't done anything over the last 25 years to improve. Iran's poor as gently caress, and I think people are seriously overestimating their conventional capabilities. They're great at unconventional war because conventional war hasn't been an option for them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:57
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Fortunately for them, the US hasn't done anything over the last 25 years to improve. Iran's poor as gently caress, and I think people are seriously overestimating their conventional capabilities. They're great at unconventional war because conventional war hasn't been an option for them. Unironically we pretty much haven't (the aim-9x is a wonderful marvel of engineering and completely useless if the enemy doesn't actually send up any planes). And yes it'd be an 'unconventional' war because Iran would not put a fighter, tank or plane in the field. But they can deny battlespace to those assets very well. atelier morgan has issued a correction as of 20:01 on Jan 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:There's no way for either one of us to know how well we'd fare against their air defenses for sure until war breaks out, which I hope it doesn't, but I just don't believe they're that capable. It feels like threat inflation/wishful thinking to me. I'm not saying all our planes would be flying at will in their skies from day one, but I think their systems would get degraded pretty quickly by high altitude bombers. People talked up Yugoslavia's air defenses before the Kosovo intervention too, and other than one shootdown when we got lazy because we thought we were invincible, they weren't anything special. But the Yugoslavs had mostly SA-3s, which were designed in the 60s. Iran has something like 10 times the amount of SAMs, including S-300s and modern local designs
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:Exactly. They also make their own modern radars rather than relying on intentionally crippled export models Completely untested homemade radars seem like exactly the kind of thing that would be likely to turn out to be dogshit though. They have every reason to want us to believe they're super capable, but I just don't see why that's the likeliest scenario.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Fortunately for them, the US hasn't done anything over the last 25 years to improve. Iran's poor as gently caress, and I think people are seriously overestimating their conventional capabilities. Iran isn't "poor as gently caress" compared to any country the US bombed since Korea, with the sole exception of Lybia. They are an actual industrial country.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Fortunately for them, the US hasn't done anything over the last 25 years to improve. Iran's poor as gently caress, and I think people are seriously overestimating their conventional capabilities. They're great at unconventional war because conventional war hasn't been an option for them. sure bro not that conventional warfare working in 2020 is a loving fallacy perpetuated by the terrorist nation home to lockheed and northrop grumman
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Completely untested homemade radars seem like exactly the kind of thing that would be likely to turn out to be dogshit though. They have every reason to want us to believe they're super capable, but I just don't see why that's the likeliest scenario. Untested? They just shot down a us drone last year, at 50,000+ feet and over 30km out
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
Ross DaouThot posted:sure bro I don't think it can work in the sense of producing a positive outcome. I just think the idea that it's literally impossible for the US to bomb Iran is nuts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
Looks like it's know it all season
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
Here's what I know America
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:There's no way for either one of us to know how well we'd fare against their air defenses for sure until war breaks out, which I hope it doesn't, but I just don't believe they're that capable. It feels like threat inflation/wishful thinking to me. I'm not saying all our planes would be flying at will in their skies from day one, but I think their systems would get degraded pretty quickly by high altitude bombers. People talked up Yugoslavia's air defenses before the Kosovo intervention too, and other than one shootdown when we got lazy because we thought we were invincible, they weren't anything special. The Serbians never turned on their Air defense systems. It was kept in place and made it so NATO had to fly high altitude bombing raids to remain safe. Causing the bombing against the Serbian military to be largely ineffective. Decoys were used to great effect. It's why we started bombing Serbian infrastructure. The idea is area denial. The other side is more powerful so you practice area denial. Degrading the US and NATO's control of the sky. Iran is not going to fight the war we want.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Fortunately for them, the US hasn't done anything over the last 25 years to improve. well we developed the f-35 so you're right. we've gotten considerably worse. let's all pray iran doesn't invent a rain bomb
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:I don't think it can work in the sense of producing a positive outcome. I just think the idea that it's literally impossible for the US to bomb Iran is nuts. Of course the US can bomb Iran. I said it was impossible to invade, and bombing would be limited to cruise missiles and possibly B-1/B-2 strikes. Sitting the Harry Truman closeby off coast and launching hundreds of sorties a day like Iraq is not happening.
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
I feel like Iran’s conventional capabilities are being underestimated, if anything. not to say they would win a conventional war, but I don’t think it’d be that easy. they have a lot of manpower. the war would be in their backyard, so they have the will to win and many allies. the USA’s equipment has been totally crapified for MIC stockholder value. the us army is already spread thin around the whole world. I mean besides us air superiority, what would stop the Iranian army from just rolling into Baghdad rn and leveling the green zone?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
atelier morgan posted:Of course the US can bomb Iran. I said it was impossible to invade, and bombing would be limited to cruise missiles and possibly B-1/B-2 strikes. Sitting the Harry Truman closeby off coast and launching hundreds of sorties a day like Iraq is not happening. Okay fair. Invasion would for sure be unimaginably stupid and costly in terms of both lives and resources we're not willing to spend. I'd hope there would be massive riots back home before we got to anything close to that. the boston bomber posted:I mean besides us air superiority, what would stop the Iranian army from just rolling into Baghdad rn and leveling the green zone? You answered your own question. Dr Kool-AIDS has issued a correction as of 20:13 on Jan 3, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:10
|
|
|
Of course the US can bomb Iran, the question is can America bomb with impunity or is there a real risk to the aircrews? How quickly are we willing to expend cruise missiles? If we throw a $1M cruise missile at an Iranian refinery and the Iranians respond by sending $10k worth of drones to hit a Saudi Refinery, did the US win the engagement?
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 12:02 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/MidEastWitness/status/1213158630893248514?s=20 Greeted as liberators
|
|
#
?
Jan 3, 2020 20:14
|
|
