[RD] Mass protests in Iran

[Bonyduck Campersang]

The US doesn't want to 'win' wars. It just wants to run a business for the MIC and specifically in this case to plunge Iran into a devastating civil war to neuter its threat to the Only Democracy in the Middle East. This is what every Iranian idiot clamouring for foreign intervention doesn't want to realise. The US-Israeli axis doesn't want to see a free and prosperous Iran, they want a dysfunctional wasteland like Libya and Iraq

 

[amadeus]

If we wanted Iran to be a backwards, dysfunctional state we’d send aid to the decrepit Ayatollah.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

LoL, the worst 'analyst' ever attacks again.

Descending on planet earth, for now, USA has already massed enough forces to bomb the Iranian regime to the stone age, not problem there, Iranian air defenses are not only crappy but non existent after the terrible beating they got from the Israeli AF last summer. Trump must protect UAE and such from possible irani ballistic missiles represalies though, so now they must be busy transferring Patriots and THAADs to UAE before Trump gets the green light from his Arab pals.

 

[amadeus]

The U.S. and allies can keep running these campaigns and the only reaction we get is an extended version of “I didn’t hear no bell!”

America, out of munitions? America?

 

[r16]

is it impossible ? The basic reason given for moving all production to China in the 1990s that it cost too much in the West , afterall . Do the Chinese export cruise missiles to America ? All the tough words about lack of SAMs to donate to Ukraine because they were fired in defence of Israel ? And expenditures become kinda higher if your enemy starts bombing your ammunition stocks instead of manly dying for good CNN coverage .

 

[amadeus]

Do the Chinese export cruise missiles to America ?

No, ours are filled with gasoline.

 

[r16]

trump is really the result of American understanding that they no longer have the ability to do things in the way they used to do in the past . As soon as somebody decides to fight for it , you might feel horrible things against people who do not manly die for good CNN coverage .

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

If we wanted Iran to be a backwards, dysfunctional state we’d send aid to the decrepit Ayatollah.

as it happens, even under the decrepit Ayatollahs Iran is functional and capable enough to pose a threat to the dog and the master and the master and the dog. something neither of the two—or one—wants to see

 

[danjuno]

2) wrecking Iran, without local collaborators (whom, i repeat, were few and were crushed), would require a far larger campaig of terrorist bombing from outside than the US has ever run, even compared no the Korean War or Vietnam. The US military does not have the ammo necessary to even degrade Iran's military. It can hit civilian targers and cause great hardship and humanitarian disasters, but cannot sustain that for long. Regarding missiles: the US standard attack missile is the obsolete tomahawk, which is being produced in tiny numbers, and most of the new ones are actually refurbished. Syria, with old air defense systems, shot down a lot of those sent their way. Iran has more aid defense, and vasly more targets, than the US has missiles. Regarding artillery: the US cannot even get close to Iran to use it, and anyway failed to produce enough shells for its anti-russian crusade in Ukraine and can't even produce enough explosives to expand its shell production, so no role for artillery. Or indeed any large scale ground war: the US army cannot invade Iran not just because the US is casualty averse but because it lacks the ammunition to figh a war with a sesioulsy armed opponent. Regarding aviation: the US does have a large stock of bombs and planes, but where can they lauch from? Aircraft carriers can easily be spotted by the iraning missile forces and targeted. The range of the ballistic missiles exceeds the range of the planes the carriers carry and some of those missiles are manouverable: is the US navy itching to lose its first carried since WW II? Closer to shore and barely putting the iranian coast (not the interior) in range of the planes, ships are sure to be sunk by hypersonic anti-ship missiles. There are land bases but all nearby countries have denied their use. Saudi Arabia doesn't want its oil fields on fire. The UAE doesn't want its skyscrappers with missile ornaments sticking out. Longer range air attacks? Possble with refueling but where are those planes going to work from? Some are being moved to Jordan - well within range of both missiles and drones from Iran. Conclusion: Iran can defent itself and the US cannot bomb it apart. Even if it had the ammunition (which is doubtful) to seriousoy make an impact, it can't get close enough to use it in quantity: counter-strikes would destroy its lauch platforms. I doubt it can even send in enough missiles to deplete the iranian aid fefense and allow planes to safely enter its airspace.

 

[r16]

it is covered in politics and stuff but ... Very much since the 70s the US is upfront basically because the rest of the world has chosen it to be so . Even in the Desert Storm , even in the meltdown of the Soviet Union . The US for starters operates on others paying for the expense with Treasury bonds stuff . When anyone chooses to oppose , it will be , yeah , horrendously bloody but things will come apart . Look at the thugs of ICE . That's how America looks to the rest of the world where the Soft Power of Hollywood has not addled the brains to a sufficient degree . Check for the glorious coverage of Ukraine if need be . Like the threads are getting 20 posts daily , with pathetic Russians blown apart for comical effect these days ? Do you feel the thugs of ICE will be out of sight when faced with equal power and intent ? Yes , like first attack that put drones on the map was conducted against a Saudi refinery thing ...

 

[Lexicus]

View attachment 756971

I think inno is overstating the case but he's certainly closer to correct than the people presuming that a "conventional" war with Iran would be a walkover.

Here is a source discussing the depletion of US missile interceptors during the "12 day war" last year.

U.S. Interceptors Are Depleted, Making Iran Decision Difficult - JINSA

As the Trump administration weighs strikes on Iran following the regime’s brutal killing of protestors, it must reckon with a hard lesson from last June: in just 12 days of Israel–Iran fighting, U.S. and Israeli munitions fell to dangerously low levels. The Pentagon’s move to boost Patriot PAC-3...

jinsa.org

One of the areas I think inno is discounting is that the US/Israel have improved their electronic warfare capabilities significantly, which in turn limits the effectiveness of Iranian air defenses. But fundamentally the idea that a war against Iran can be "won" in the air is nonsense anyway and a ground invasion of Iran would be a total disaster for the US regardless of whether we "won" or not. I find it very unlikely that Trump will want to invade and occupy Iran as that isn't his style, but with his brain visibly liquefying day by day and many insane/axe crazy Zionists in his immediate orbit, anything is possible really.

 

[Akka]

It's not about a "war", it's about a "bombing". People have repeatedly pointed that the USA isn't about to invade, occupy or even actually force a change in regime. It's about striking Iran safely, doing damage, and claiming victory.
And THAT, yeah, the USA can easily do, and Iran has shown previously to be totally unable to counter.

 

[danjuno]

I think inno is overstating the case but he's certainly closer to correct than the people presuming that a "conventional" war with Iran would be a walkover.

Here is a source discussing the depletion of US missile interceptors during the "12 day war" last year.

U.S. Interceptors Are Depleted, Making Iran Decision Difficult - JINSA

As the Trump administration weighs strikes on Iran following the regime’s brutal killing of protestors, it must reckon with a hard lesson from last June: in just 12 days of Israel–Iran fighting, U.S. and Israeli munitions fell to dangerously low levels. The Pentagon’s move to boost Patriot PAC-3...

jinsa.org

One of the areas I think inno is discounting is that the US/Israel have improved their electronic warfare capabilities significantly, which in turn limits the effectiveness of Iranian air defenses. But fundamentally the idea that a war against Iran can be "won" in the air is nonsense anyway and a ground invasion of Iran would be a total disaster for the US regardless of whether we "won" or not. I find it very unlikely that Trump will want to invade and occupy Iran as that isn't his style, but with his brain visibly liquefying day by day and many insane/axe crazy Zionists in his immediate orbit, anything is possible really.

Perfectly reasonable. My point is that the ultimate downfall of any US regime change war is the guerilla phase. The conventional military of North Vietnam did alright given the circumstances, but it was ultimately the Viet Cong that defeated the US.

 

[r16]

hence the promise to attack and kill people instead of letting Americans do stuff . An Iranian drone thing was shot down 500 miles off the Iranian coast because it could fly over the US carrier sent out to bomb Iran . If bombing Iran is victory , Iran daring to bomb back is most definitely not victory .

all American written histories no doubt say the Viet Cong , the Southern Communists and whatnot were practically anhilated in the Tet Offensive of '68 which paradoxically caused the American loss by proving the gap between what the US media was parroting from US Military press briefings and actual situation in Vietnam . The 1972 offensive was a full blooded armoured invasion which was defeated by US reinforcements rushed back to Vietnam , before the USAF got its cherished goal of sending B-52s to Hanoi . Which is supposedly to have won the peace . Though like North Vietnam just wanted a breather to re-organize and that re-organized conventional army that crushed the South when the promised US intervention didn't show up . Dien Bien Phu was guerillas winning , though it was basically WW I , Khe San was where the US showed it had much more firepower for that to happen again and the result is that the US would not even chance a defeat in a conventional clash . It will be awful for the ratings .

 

[Farm Boy]

Echoes of Gaddafi.

 

[r16]

who was doing rather nicely until tricked out by personal promises by Hillary Clinton for safe conduct . Like a future role for his sons and stuff . This will go down in history as the first US defeat or whatever as Esad wouldn't fall the same sort of promises and Biden eventually did the obvious and like decide to remove the head of evil in the world or something , some guy named Putin . Who has actually responded very little to US provocations .

 

[Farm Boy]

?

Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, son of ex-Libyan leader, killed: Probe launched by prosecutors

The 53-year-old, once widely seen as the second most powerful person in Libya, was killed by "our unknown gunmen".

www.bbc.com

 

[r16]

not my doing . Obviously . Even if it was him who pressed his father to accept Clinton's word . Yeah , nobody wants people talking about old times if they provide anectodal evidence that things have gone wrong in the past , as if underlining a possibility that they might do so again . Most improbable in this most incredible age of smartest ever people .

 

[Lexicus]

Perfectly reasonable. My point is that the ultimate downfall of any US regime change war is the guerilla phase. The conventional military of North Vietnam did alright given the circumstances, but it was ultimately the Viet Cong that defeated the US.

I mean, it was both.

 

[Arwon]

I think inno is overstating the case but he's certainly closer to correct than the people presuming that a "conventional" war with Iran would be a walkover.

Here is a source discussing the depletion of US missile interceptors during the "12 day war" last year.

U.S. Interceptors Are Depleted, Making Iran Decision Difficult - JINSA

As the Trump administration weighs strikes on Iran following the regime’s brutal killing of protestors, it must reckon with a hard lesson from last June: in just 12 days of Israel–Iran fighting, U.S. and Israeli munitions fell to dangerously low levels. The Pentagon’s move to boost Patriot PAC-3...

jinsa.org

One of the areas I think inno is discounting is that the US/Israel have improved their electronic warfare capabilities significantly, which in turn limits the effectiveness of Iranian air defenses. But fundamentally the idea that a war against Iran can be "won" in the air is nonsense anyway and a ground invasion of Iran would be a total disaster for the US regardless of whether we "won" or not. I find it very unlikely that Trump will want to invade and occupy Iran as that isn't his style, but with his brain visibly liquefying day by day and many insane/axe crazy Zionists in his immediate orbit, anything is possible really.

The question of course is how many Americans they need to kill and how much oil trade they need to disrupt to force Trump to back out.

They probably only need to be able to have some terrestrial missiles and drones wreck some navy ships. And I can't imagine they'd survive without losses in the confines of the Gulf for any stretch of time with a fully hot, hostile Iran targeting them there.