We just killed our own service members

[Patrick Chewing]

How you may ask? Well, with the millions and millions we've given Iran under the Obama and Biden administrations, Iran-backed rebel groups attacked one of our bases in Jordan and killed three of our service members the other day.

https://www.defense.gov/News/News-St...-drone-attack/


The three soldiers killed are Sgt. William Jerome Rivers of Carrollton, Georgia; Spc. Kennedy Ladon Sanders of Waycross, Georgia; and Spc. Breonna Alexsondria Moffett of Savannah, Georgia. All three were assigned to the 718th Engineer Company, 926th Engineer Battalion, 926th Engineer Brigade, Fort Moore, Georgia.

[diamenz]

you mean to tell me that we were just minding our own business in the middle east and something like this happened??? i don't get it!

so back in washington you've already got the warmonger neocons like lindsay graham (senator of defense contractors) and presidential hopeless 'nikki' haley calling for war with iran which would most certainly bring us into a global conflict with russia and more distantly china due to their major loss of strategic resources and food through the suez. all the while the netanyahu government is bullying us (per usual) to do the same for their own interests... lol... i told you all that things would escalate quickly.

is this what america wants? is a war with an iranian state backed by russia and china in our best interests? because it would guarantee hundreds of thousands of troops on the ground as well as not to mention ww3.


wake the fuc* up, people. get our soldiers the fuc* outta the middle east.

[diamenz]

Despite Washington’s Confidence, US War with Iran Would Be Disastrous

Regardless of the goals of the mission — from destroying Iran’s nuclear capabilities to regime change — there are only two real paths for Washington to directly attack Iran: an air and naval campaign designed to impose significant costs on the regime; or a ground invasion dependent on establishing air and naval superiority. Both options, however, are more untenable than policymakers suggest, and reflect a fundamental miscalculation of Iran’s military strength.

A campaign that relies on air and naval power to rapidly beat Iran into submission will meet significant challenges. Iran’s military is designed to prevent such an invasion and impose significant costs on any potential attack by air or sea. They have 600‐​mile range cruise missiles, advanced long‐​range air defense systems, short‐​range air defense systems, anti‐​aircraft missiles, 3,000 ballistic missiles, 6,000 naval mines, and the most capable unmanned aerial vehicles in the region.

In essence, any combined operation involving air and naval war not only faces the traditional limits that make these campaigns rarely successful, but landing individual attacks on Iranian territory will likely come with high costs to expensive U.S. aircraft and ballistic missile defense systems.

Previous analysts have weighed the chances of success for a campaign reliant on U.S. air and naval power. A 2002 war game that required U.S. planners to change the rules mid‐​conflict showed that Iran could easily sink U.S. ships, and in 2012, Pentagon officials estimated that such a strategy would require a minimum of 100,000 troops.

Following escalations with Iran in 2019, Pentagon officials estimated that a version of this strategy that sought to destroy Iranian nuclear weapons facilities would require a minimum of 120,000 troops deployed throughout the Middle East.

In the present (and despite no more recent estimates), even more troops would likely be required, given Iran’s increased military spending. As a result, the U.S. will be unable to engage in a strategy relying on air and naval power to overwhelm Iranian military capacity.

If the intention is to use air and naval power to allow for ground operations, Iran is equally prepared. Such an assault would require absorbing massive costs to gain access into the country. Analysts estimate that any ground invasion would require 1.6 million U.S. troops, almost ten times what the U.S. committed to Iraq at any given time. Upon arrival in Iran, Washington will face the 13th largest fit‐​for‐​service population in the world, the 13th most armored vehicles and self‐​propelled artillery in the world, the 9th most towed artillery in the world, and the 8th most mobile rocket projectors in the world. The human and material costs would be immense.

Iran’s strategy to combat the U.S. would center around making any naval and air assault costly, slow, and predicated on an assumption that eventually Americans will lose their willingness to continue fighting a war. Iran is surrounded by water and will use their anti‐​ship and anti‐​aircraft missiles to cover their 2,400 kilometer southern coastline as well as exploiting the lack of U.S. minesweepers to slow down the pace of a naval assault. By slowing the pace of war, Iran will attack the political will of U.S. policymakers and the American public, while also giving themselves time to make decisions and potentially even blockade the Straits of Hormuz to the Gulf of Oman.

https://www.cato.org/commentary/desp...-be-disastrous

[bladefd]

you mean to tell me that we were just minding our own business in the middle east and something like this happened??? i don't get it!

so back in washington you've already got the warmonger neocons like lindsay graham (senator of defense contractors) and presidential hopeless 'nikki' haley calling for war with iran which would most certainly bring us into a global conflict with russia and more distantly china due to their major loss of strategic resources and food through the suez. all the while the netanyahu government is bullying us (per usual) to do the same for their own interests... lol... i told you all that things would escalate quickly.

is this what america wants? is a war with an iranian state backed by russia and china in our best interests? because it would guarantee hundreds of thousands of troops on the ground as well as not to mention ww3.


wake the fuc* up, people. get our soldiers the fuc* outta the middle east.

Don't want another war, but we also can't let them off the hook without some sort of ramifications. Freeze their international assets as a start.

[Lakers Legend#32]

What does Trump care?

He called service members suckers and losers.

[Patrick Chewing]

Don't want another war, but we also can't let them off the hook without some sort of ramifications. Freeze their international assets as a start.

How about we stop sending them money to kill our soldiers?? How's that for starters?

[bladefd]

How about we stop sending them money to kill our soldiers?? How's that for starters?

We don't send them money. As part of the iran nuclear deal, we unfreezed their own money. And we returned them money from the 70s from a military deal we had killed. Also wasn't our money. Both these things happened under Obama administration almost a decade ago. Nothing recent in almost a decade.

[FultzNationRISE]

Despite Washington’s Confidence, US War with Iran Would Be Disastrous



https://www.cato.org/commentary/desp...-be-disastrous

If they're pursing these programs and technologies you may not have a choice. You cant let them continue toward a position of becoming a legitimate threat/rival. If you dont keep control, you lose control. And then nothing is up to you.

They have a good sized population and a decent amount of technology. If they're going to be antagonistic or uncooperative in any way, you deal with them while youre still the much stronger force, before they become a more closely matched opponent.

If you know what a bear cub will grow into you dont keep it around beyond a certain point. Otherwise youre taking risks with your life.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Pat Tillman was killed by his own service members in a bullsh!t war based on lies.

[SATAN]

If they're pursing these programs and technologies you may not have a choice. You cant let them continue toward a position of becoming a legitimate threat/rival. If you dont keep control, you lose control. And then nothing is up to you.

They have a good sized population and a decent amount of technology. If they're going to be antagonistic or uncooperative in any way, you deal with them while youre still the much stronger force, before they become a more closely matched opponent.

If you know what a bear cub will grow into you dont keep it around beyond a certain point. Otherwise youre taking risks with your life.

diamenz is incapable of understanding such simple concepts.

[diamenz]

If they're pursing these programs and technologies you may not have a choice. You cant let them continue toward a position of becoming a legitimate threat/rival. If you dont keep control, you lose control. And then nothing is up to you.

They have a good sized population and a decent amount of technology. If they're going to be antagonistic or uncooperative in any way, you deal with them while youre still the much stronger force, before they become a more closely matched opponent.

If you know what a bear cub will grow into you dont keep it around beyond a certain point. Otherwise youre taking risks with your life.

i'm honestly surprised to hear this from someone of your intellectual standing and critical thinking skills. you're fully aware of our interventionist history in that region and the destabilization it's caused as well as the potential (as well as already inflicted) economic damage and threat to our national security at home. i'm sure you're also aware of the geopolitical dynamics that would suck other great powers into the conflict and expand it to a global scale as well.

most important of all, how does this serve our interests? why should we pursue this route on behalf of israel who we've already done enough for and whom btw does nothing for us but get us into trouble with the region? this is going to blow up in our faces in the near future and no one in washington is speaking up about it. furthermore, as per usual, the american people haven't been consulted on any of this.

[Jasper]

wake the fuc* up, people. get our soldiers the fuc* outta the middle east.

you are correct we don't need your beautiful oil to run your oil burning cars

[SATAN]

you are correct we don't need your beautiful oil to run your oil burning cars

He wants to weaken Americas position on the global stage...