Iran Catch-All | IRAN WAR

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 4K
  • Views: 120K
  • Politics 
ZenMode said:
I agree the odds aren't good that all of the best case scenarios work out. Even if the next Iranian regime decides to not be the epicenter of terrorism in the region and around the world, that would be a win.
Click to expand...
The unfortunate reality is that Iran agreed to everything on the negotiation table and then some, and *still* got their religious leader and their entire top brass blown up- along with an elementary school full of children to boot!- so the likelihood of *less* anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiment coming out of the Middle East moving forward is probably about the same as winning the lottery while getting struck twice by lightning in the same place.
 
heelslegup said:
Def Secy comments this am inply ground troops are going to Iran IMO
Click to expand...
Agree. “Gritty” is not a term you use for using a joystick and pushing a button. Could be a descriptor of gnarly air missions but usually “gritty” is used when discussing on the ground hardships.
 
heelslegup said:
Def Secy comments this am inply ground troops are going to Iran IMO
Click to expand...
"Meanwhile, the IDF said Israel has called up approximately 110,000 reservists."

www.nbcnews.com

Live updates: Iran war will not be 'endless,' Hegseth says as Middle East conflict expands

Follow NBC News' live coverage as the U.S. and Israel attack Iran, Tehran hits back across the Gulf and Hezbollah strikes from Lebanon while Iran chooses a new supreme leader after the killing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com
 
Calheel said:
Yes, pretty much any statement about future human behavior is a guess. But I think the odds are well over 50%, likely over 90%, that a nuclear weapon will be deployed in the next 100 years. And I'd think the odds are 99.9% if we go out 500 years. Of course, as you point out, there are several potentially greater human extinction events if we are willing to extend the time horizon to 500 years.

The whole point of anti-proliferation is to keep that percentage as low as possible for as long as possible. If there were no risk of nuclear weapons being used as anything other than a deterrent, then there would be no need for anti-proliferation foreign policy.
Click to expand...
Well, you should know me well enough to know I wouldn't say there was "no risk." But I think the risk is quite small and pales in comparison to other threats. I very much doubt the human race will be recognizable in 500 years, if it even still exists.
 
CFordUNC said:
I hope I’m wrong, but from everything I’m reading, it sounds like we and Israel are getting our asses handed to us by an enemy we completely underestimated, had no respect for, did not plan for, and have no means of de-escalation
Click to expand...

If what you are reading is internet chatter that we are getting our asses handed to us then I would be careful concerning the real point. The best Iran can do is bomb its neighbors, indirectly close the Strait, and perhaps get off the lucky hit on Israel or the U.S.

How we really get our asses handed to us, is if Iran is able to play the long game. Drive oil prices up and really make life for its neighbors hell. I would argue directly attacking the United States and Israel is an unproductive use of Iran's limited resources.
 
superrific said:
I very much doubt the human race will be recognizable in 500 years, if it even still exists.
Click to expand...
Just curious - how and why do you think this will come to pass? That we will use technology to alter ourselves biologically?

Or do you mean more along the lines of human civilization in 500 years will be unrecognizable to us today?
 
BlueSmoke said:
If what you are reading is internet chatter that we are getting our asses handed to us then I would be careful concerning the real point. The best Iran can do is bomb its neighbors, indirectly close the Strait, and perhaps get off the lucky hit on Israel or the U.S.

How we really get our asses handed to us, is if Iran is able to play the long game. Drive oil prices up and really make life for its neighbors hell. I would argue directly attacking the United States and Israel is an unproductive use of Iran's limited resources.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, no, I totally agree with you. I think you're spot-on. Most of what I've been reading has been saying that we are strategically getting our asses handed to us as opposed to tactically, in the sense that we've initiated an attack on an enemy whom we don't respect, don't fully understand, underestimated their resolve, and overlooked their capacity and desire to retaliate proportionately.
 
ZenMode said:
IDF said Israel has called up approximately 110,000 reservists.
Click to expand...
They have no plan as it expands to a regional war. No rationale. There are no objectives, except to attempt to cripple Iran's war making ability. The administration still believes the Venezuela went so well, even though there really is no regime change and no chance at extracting their oil without a huge costs that Big Oil won't bear.

But puppetmasters Bibi, Putin, and Xi are delighted...and isn't that what really matters?

JFC

I should add, and I'm serious here, the freak portion of fake Christians who believe that Trump is going to lead to the Rapture. Some 7th Day Adventists came by the house yesterday and a host of southern Baptists types believe this sh*t.

So...the lawless unconstitutional war continues...now the time frame allegedly is like 6 weeks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top