Iran War | Political & Economic Impacts

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 480
  • Views: 8K
  • Politics 




He’s fucking Otto

kevin kline GIF by FilmStruck

WENDY. My father was in the Secret Service, Mr. Manfredin St. John. I know perfectly well that you don't keep the general public informed when you are debriefing KGB defectors in a safe house.

OTTO. Oh, you don't, huh?

WENDY. Not unless you're congenitally insane or irretrievably stupid.

OTTO. Don't call me stupid.

WENDY. Why on earth not?

OTTO. Oh, you English are so superior, aren't you? Would you like to know where you'd be without the old US Of A, to protect you? The smallest f***ing province in the Russian empire, that's what! So don't call me stupid, lady. Just thank me.

WENDY. Well, thank you for popping in and protecting us.

OTTO. If it wasn't for us, you'd all be speaking German, singing ...
 
Calheel said:
At that point, Iran is inviting a ground war, which may be what the regime wants. The US could occupy the highlands around the Strait of Hormuz and create a 100 mile buffer on the interior to limit the effectiveness of drone attacks. It could also engage in a naval blockade and strangle the Iranian economy. The Strait of Hormuz is essentially MAD. The irony is that the US doesn’t need the oil. It is China and especially Japan and South Korea that is so dependent on that energy. But I also don’t see how Trump can survive $10 a gallon gas here.
Click to expand...
"The US could occupy the highlands around the Strait of Hormuz and create a 100 mile buffer on the interior to limit the effectiveness of drone attacks."

We could but that would be more difficult than the above statement implies. It would invite both conventional army and insurgent attacks against such force. Our backs would be to the sea with our flanks to hostile Iranian territory (if I understand your point correctly) making us dependent on re-supply from (a) Naval vessels vulnerable to airborne drones, cluster munitions, hypersonic missiles and anti-ship missiles as well as unmanned seaborne drones and submersibles and (b) Aircraft still vulnerable to ground to air (SAM), and drone attacks (Iran is already rumored to have shot down US aircraft).

It would be a long term buzzsaw in a poor tactical position in my view. Remember that the Iranians are in their home country and will have inherent advantages with their supply lines. I think that is one reason why no allies want any part of it.
 
This talk about “some countries want to help but I will not announce them at this time” has a very “two weeks” vibe to it. However I did hear a replacement for the ACA will soon be announced. Probably in two weeks.
 
Mundial said:
"The US could occupy the highlands around the Strait of Hormuz and create a 100 mile buffer on the interior to limit the effectiveness of drone attacks."

We could but that would be more difficult than the above statement implies. It would invite both conventional army and insurgent attacks against such force. Our backs would be to the sea with our flanks to hostile Iranian territory (if I understand your point correctly) making us dependent on re-supply from (a) Naval vessels vulnerable to airborne drones, cluster munitions, hypersonic missiles and anti-ship missiles as well as unmanned seaborne drones and submersibles and (b) Aircraft still vulnerable to ground to air (SAM), and drone attacks (Iran is already rumored to have shot down US aircraft).

It would be a long term buzzsaw in a poor tactical position in my view. Remember that the Iranians are in their home country and will have inherent advantages with their supply lines. I think that is one reason why no allies want any part of it.
Click to expand...
It would certainly be a challenge but if Iran is playing WWIII with the Hormuz Strait, then TACO may not be an option. We have experience in Afghanistan and it would involve similar tactics and risks. Plus, my understanding is that part of Iran is fairly lightly populated.
 
Calheel said:
It would certainly be a challenge but if Iran is playing WWIII with the Hormuz Strait, then TACO may not be an option. We have experience in Afghanistan and it would involve similar tactics and risks. Plus, my understanding is that part of Iran is fairly lightly populated.
Click to expand...
How big a butcher's bill do we pay before we stop and ask what we're getting for this? Seems like the big winner is Israel and we end up the chump with the bleeding stump.
 
finesse said:
How big a butcher's bill do we pay before we stop and ask what we're getting for this? Seems like the big winner is Israel and we end up the chump with the bleeding stump.
Click to expand...
If it makes you feel any better, this would sink Trump’s presidency and turn him into Jimmy Carter II.
 
Calheel said:
It would certainly be a challenge but if Iran is playing WWIII with the Hormuz Strait, then TACO may not be an option. We have experience in Afghanistan and it would involve similar tactics and risks. Plus, my understanding is that part of Iran is fairly lightly populated.
Click to expand...
The Soviets er I mean Russians and the Chinese would pour supplies and material into the area in an effort to bog down the US and prolong the conflict. It would almost certainly draw in jihadists from all over the region looking for a chance to kill Americans and possibly Israelis. The risks are incredibly high and we would be going it alone this time (so far anyway).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top