The Iran War

[93henfan]

Well, the word is Iran can cause a real quagmire situation for us with all its proxies and such. Kind of surprised they'd be that up front but on the other hand, as far as I can tell, they've historically been willing to take a lot of punishment.

I was one that argued that we could've won Vietnam if we'd been ruthless enough. I guess my theory might be about to be put to the test. Might about to be a whole lot of guerrilla warfare going on.

So...I guess there are differences people like Cid can talk about. But I wonder about us getting into something like this when we haven't been able to subdue the Taliban. I mean, I don't know, but my gut feeling is that this is going to be a lot tougher than the Taliban.

We're not going to fight a conventional war in Iran. The American public doesn't have the stomach for that.

Read the rest of the thread, starting from page one. We've covered this.

[JohnStOnge]

Trump is a weak man.....he will never strike back.

It really depends on casualties. If Americans died tonight, he will strike back.

If not, the Iranians look really dumb. How could you fire over a dozen ballistic missiles and not kill an American?

We'll know more when we know more. Right now it's hard to speculate how Trump will respond.

He's done everything right so far.

It'll be interesting to see if what happened today is all there is prior to our response. We could see other attacks using other modalities. The word is they've got assassins all over the place in the Middle East.

[93henfan]

It really depends on casualties. If Americans died tonight, he will strike back.

If not, the Iranians look really dumb. How could you fire over a dozen ballistic missiles and not kill an American?

We'll know more when we know more. Right now it's hard to speculate how Trump will respond.

He's done everything right so far.

It'll be interesting to see if what happened today is all there is prior to our response. We could see other attacks using other modalities. The word is they've got assassins all over the place in the Middle East.

Psst. So do we. Don't tell anyone.

[JohnStOnge]

Well, the word is Iran can cause a real quagmire situation for us with all its proxies and such. Kind of surprised they'd be that up front but on the other hand, as far as I can tell, they've historically been willing to take a lot of punishment.

I was one that argued that we could've won Vietnam if we'd been ruthless enough. I guess my theory might be about to be put to the test. Might about to be a whole lot of guerrilla warfare going on.

So...I guess there are differences people like Cid can talk about. But I wonder about us getting into something like this when we haven't been able to subdue the Taliban. I mean, I don't know, but my gut feeling is that this is going to be a lot tougher than the Taliban.

We're not going to fight a conventional war in Iran. The American public doesn't have the stomach for that.

Read the rest of the thread, starting from page one. We've covered this.

I didn't say it's going to be a conventional war. But, since you've discussed it, I would not put it past Trump to put us into a position where that's what happens. One thing leads to another.

[CID1990]

What does Iran gain by launching an impotent response?

De-escalation while remaining credible at home

Let’s see what they targeted first. If it was infrastructure and there were no casualties then this may have been a shrewd move by Iran

If there were casualties then all bets are off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

That’s a good point.

I’m going to referee this match.

93?

Seriously? You're going to defend Iran too?

Wow.

I answered already, by the way. Keep up.

I’m not defending Iran.

Consider me more of a local parks and rec youth soccer ref. If you don’t show more respect I’m going ask you to leave the playground.

[kalm]

What does Iran gain by launching an impotent response?

De-escalation while remaining credible at home

Let’s see what they targeted first. If it was infrastructure and there were no casualties then this may have been a shrewd move by Iran

If there were casualties then all bets are off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Makes sense. Thx!

[JohnStOnge]

It'll be interesting to see if what happened today is all there is prior to our response. We could see other attacks using other modalities. The word is they've got assassins all over the place in the Middle East.

Psst. So do we. Don't tell anyone.

No. I don't think we have what they have in that regard. We have lots of advantages. But I don't think we have what they have in terms of "organic" support among people mixed in with the populations that will engage in guerrilla warfare on our behalf.

[JohnStOnge]

What does Iran gain by launching an impotent response?

De-escalation while remaining credible at home

Let’s see what they targeted first. If it was infrastructure and there were no casualties then this may have been a shrewd move by Iran

If there were casualties then all bets are off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you think about the fact that they are claiming there are casualties? If it turns our there aren't any casualties, will they feel like they have to do something else?

[93henfan]

De-escalation while remaining credible at home

Let’s see what they targeted first. If it was infrastructure and there were no casualties then this may have been a shrewd move by Iran

If there were casualties then all bets are off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Makes sense. Thx!

I covered that earlier on this page. Speaking of a lack of respect...

[93henfan]

White House meeting has broken up and everyone is going to bed.

Well that was a big nothing burger. Happy if no American lives were lost.

Exactly. I'm guessing Iran didn't kill any Americans. Too scared.

They know not to poke us too hard. I don't think they really want to sign their own death warrants, like Soleimani did.

[93henfan]

Markets and gas should stay fairly steady if Iran bombed barbed wire. That's good for everyone.

[CID1990]

De-escalation while remaining credible at home

Let’s see what they targeted first. If it was infrastructure and there were no casualties then this may have been a shrewd move by Iran

If there were casualties then all bets are off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What do you think about the fact that they are claiming there are casualties? If it turns our there aren't any casualties, will they feel like they have to do something else?

The Iranians claim lots of things.

If they targeted infrastructure only we’ll know it. And if that’s what happened and there are no casualties then they may have achieved their goal - look strong at home but deescalate the immediate crisis.

I find it odd how someone who considers Trump to be a madman also lends the benefit of the doubt to Iranian theocrats though -

you might want to get that checked


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnStOnge]

What do you think about the fact that they are claiming there are casualties? If it turns our there aren't any casualties, will they feel like they have to do something else?

The Iranians claim lots of things.

If they targeted infrastructure only we’ll know it. And if that’s what happened and there are no casualties then they may have achieved their goal - look strong at home but deescalate the immediate crisis.

I find it odd how someone who considers Trump to be a madman also lends the benefit of the doubt to Iranian theocrats though -

you might want to get that checked


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. I am just asking you about the fact that they seem to think it's important to say there were casualties. I saw a report on that tonight. If they are claiming there are casualties then it turns out that there are no casualties does that compromise their effort to look strong?

I'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt at all. I'm just saying that the idea of being able to say they inflicted casualties appears to be important to them.

[CID1990]

The Iranians claim lots of things.

If they targeted infrastructure only we’ll know it. And if that’s what happened and there are no casualties then they may have achieved their goal - look strong at home but deescalate the immediate crisis.

I find it odd how someone who considers Trump to be a madman also lends the benefit of the doubt to Iranian theocrats though -

you might want to get that checked


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No. I am just asking you about the fact that they seem to think it's important to say there were casualties. I saw a report on that tonight. If they are claiming there are casualties then it turns out that there are no casualties does that compromise their effort to look strong?

I'm not giving them the benefit of the doubt at all. I'm just saying that the idea of being able to say they inflicted casualties appears to be important to them.

No it does not compromise that effort. They have closed, controlled media in Iran. All they need is to launch the missiles and let their media do the rest.

Let’s see what casualties there were, if any. Until then this is just an academic exercise.

If we allow them their “retaliation” while convincing our side it was a pulled punch by Iran, then we may have ourselves a good ol fashioned 1960s style detente


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[93henfan]

I'm flipping back and forth between CNN and FoxNews.

This is not exactly breaking news, but dear lord is Sean Hannity a putz. Sometimes I forget and have to check in to remind myself.

If there's one thing I can't stand, it's a chickenhawk.

[UNI88]

And yet people want to blame Trump.

Hmmm - no missiles were being fired until Trump did. Should any country not be able to defend themselves?

What was the point of the killing? No, not mourning him, but when you take this extra-ordinary step, there has to be a plan and an endgame.

That's an interesting question. Why don't members of the Squat and their followers consider it when defending Hamas and demonizing Israel?

[BDKJMU]

I bet within hours its going to be:

phpBB [video]

[CID1990]

I'm flipping back and forth between CNN and FoxNews.

This is not exactly breaking news, but dear lord is Sean Hannity a putz. Sometimes I forget and have to check in to remind myself.

If there's one thing I can't stand, it's a chickenhawk.

Dude I couldn’t get out of the country fast enough a few weeks ago

US tv media is complete garbage


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[93henfan]

I bet within hours its going to be:

phpBB [video]

And that would be a huge mistake if no Americans died tonight.

[kalm]

Makes sense. Thx!

I covered that earlier on this page. Speaking of a lack of respect...

Well then I apologize. I’m now gonna retire from my referring gig. The pay sucked anyways.

[93henfan]

I'm flipping back and forth between CNN and FoxNews.

This is not exactly breaking news, but dear lord is Sean Hannity a putz. Sometimes I forget and have to check in to remind myself.

If there's one thing I can't stand, it's a chickenhawk.

Dude I couldn’t get out of the country fast enough a few weeks ago

US tv media is complete garbage


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You may not believe me, but I rarely if ever watch FoxNews, and only very occasionally watch CNN.

I did used to enjoy watching the first five minutes of O'Reilly (his talking points or whatever they were called), but that was about it.

I want to just fucking punch Sean Hannity. He's such a bitch.

[kalm]

Hmmm - no missiles were being fired until Trump did. Should any country not be able to defend themselves?

What was the point of the killing? No, not mourning him, but when you take this extra-ordinary step, there has to be a plan and an endgame.

That's an interesting question. Why don't members of the Squat and their followers consider it when defending Hamas and demonizing Israel?

Honest question: have they really defended Hamas?

[CID1990]

Dude I couldn’t get out of the country fast enough a few weeks ago

US tv media is complete garbage


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You may not believe me, but I rarely if ever watch FoxNews, and only very occasionally watch CNN.

I did used to enjoy watching the first five minutes of O'Reilly (his talking points or whatever they were called), but that was about it.

I want to just fucking punch Sean Hannity. He's such a bitch.

Of course I believe you. The last time I lived in the US I had largely shut down FOX and CNN

This past Thanksgiving the only reason I got a heavy dose of MSNBC is because it is the only thing my dementia plagued father will watch. It’s all news to him since he has a 2 minute memory


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[93henfan]

You may not believe me, but I rarely if ever watch FoxNews, and only very occasionally watch CNN.

I did used to enjoy watching the first five minutes of O'Reilly (his talking points or whatever they were called), but that was about it.

I want to just fucking punch Sean Hannity. He's such a bitch.

Of course I believe you. The last time I lived in the US I had largely shut down FOX and CNN

This past Thanksgiving the only reason I got a heavy dose of MSNBC is because it is the only thing my dementia plagued father will watch. It’s all news to him since he has a 2 minute memory


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Does he call Maddow, "that sharp young man"?