Trump Preparing for Nuclear War

It is not Iran trying to wipe the US out. It is all you!

It is the US trying to destroy Iran both economically and militarily.

My point is that just with Iraq, the cost in innocent civilian lives and money in starting yet another of your endless wars of regime change is not fully being accounted for. Nor is Iran's ability to defend itself in it's own backyard and with it's allies around the Middle East. Think about all the trouble you had putting down the insurrection in Iraq and how that invasion released forces like ISIS adn allowed Shia forces to grow in Iraq.

Then realize that Iran is about 100 times more powerful than Iraq and has not been weakened by previous wars in the last 20 years or so and take into account the sophisticated missile defences, submarines and air support it has.

You can't just bomb everyone into submission. Think about the cost in money and lives in starting this war and all the unknowns and unintended consequenses of taking such action.

Trump is trying to starve Iran out to force them to capitulate. Maybe it will work. But Iran would be utterly dooming itself to surrender completely on US terms.

That is the position you have forced them into. Do you think they will not defend themselves to the end if attacked? What happened when Iraq attacked them?

 

We all know the US can kick ass. Vietnam and Iraq proved that.

But can it handle the sh*tsrm if the countries it is threatening and sanctioning start to fight back and what will be the cost in money and lives. Are the American people ready for yet another war of regime change in the Middle East and are they ready to see American bodies coming home in bags again for no good reason?

And Iran is a well-armed well defended nation of 80 million people. What if it does not realize you only want to bomb and kill a few people from a distance to force regime change and decide to fight back with everything they have in an all out war to the death?

Are you ready for that.

Maybe they will just capitulate and surrender to American terms with a gun to their head and your current strategy seems to be.

How likely from one to ten does that seem to you?

 

What are they going to do? They can't attack the United States. They have little ability to attack U.S. warships in the Indian Ocean.

By the way, the U.S. had thousands of its people come "home in body bags" from Iraq and Afghanistan and there was little whining about it.

 

What allies does Iran have that you keep prattling about? Some insurgents in Syria? Some rebels in Yemen?

You must be joking.

 

Oh they can attack you. I am not saying they can win but I am saying they can fight asymetrically and cause a lot of grief. It will not be easy to subdue the whole country and Shia forces in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen at the same time.

They have S300 anti-air weapons and lots of mobile missile defence capability. Hezbollah has something like 200,000 sophisticated missiles if I remember correctly and fought the IDF to a draw in 2006 when they invaded Lebanon.

They could sink lots of shipping and even bring down a carrier with a swarming attack from missile boats and submarines.

Don't kid yourself. If they choose to fight back to the death you are going to have your hands full in a conventional war.

 

There will be no nuclear war, Russia is not going to allow it.

 

Nope. Hezbollah is a powerful force. Shia militias in Iraq defeated ISIS in that country and are fully armed and experienced. Syria's army has taken control of that country and might want to repay Iran for all it's help especially considering regime change is still on the menu for Syria from the US especially in Iran is weakened.

With all the money in the world and all the sophisticated US weapons money can buy Saudi Arabia has been unable to subdue the Houthis in the poorest nation in the world.

And all of Saudi Arabia's oil fields are in the Shia predominant part of that country. If I was Iran and was attacked, the first thing I would do would be to try to cause an uprising in SA and bring down the house of Saud.

And that is not taking into account all the possible unintended consequenses.

And by the end of the Iraq war, the American people were very tired of all the war and death and body bags.

Don't kid yourelf, you are already in an economic war and not just with Iran either. You have sanctions on half the world and tarrifs on the other half.

If it comes down to a shooting war in Iran it's going to be messy and very dangerous.

 

What makes you think the U.S. has any interest in fighting a conventional war with Iran? Why can't you understand that? For that matter what makes you think the U.S. is the least bit interested in "subduing" forces in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen?

And its easier to "bring down a carrier" on a discussion board than it is in reality.

Most shipping in the Persian Gulf travels to Europe, Japan, India and China. So I guess it is in your interests to help out there. But the U.S. doesn't need Persian Gulf oil.

 

Nobody seems to understand the capabilities of Iran's technologically. They can take down any US drone they want. Their cyber capabilities are very advanced and they could make a big mess using cyber-warfare alone. If there is going to be a conflict in the Middle East it's not going to be fought by airplanes, tanks and boots on the ground. It's going to be fought with cyber-warfare and terrorism. There's all sorts of militias that have tentacles throughout the entire region, in Syria, Turkey, Iraq, and Pakistan who share Iran's border and who happens to have nuclear weapons. The terrorism would spread very quickly to Saudi Arabia and Israel. This would not be a classic war.

Trump believes that additional sanctions are punishing Iran's economy and that it's only a matter of time before they acquiesce and come to the negotiating table. This is the wrong strategy to use with a country like Iran. Additional sanctions on Iran are only going to escalate things. Their economy has already shrunk by 10% since last year. This is not going to force Iranians to come to the table. It will only lead to the Iranians doing more things like shooting down drones or attacking tankers. Then Trump will put more sanctions on them as he did today. Then Iran will respond and one day will go too far and the US will feel compelled to respond militarily. If Trump just turns up the pressure on the Iranians without a pathway for a serious diplomatic process, then we're going to be seeing military conflict, and it will be widespread, not only in Iran.

Iran needs some incentive to come to the table and they're not going to come to the table if we just pressure them. The world economy depends on, among other things, Middle Eastern oil and the US economy is linked to the global economy. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Israel depend on the US to be there in the Strait of Hormuz, we're keeping their economies alive and well. If the US pulls out of this part of the world more countries will think about getting their own nuclear weapons.

Trump needs to make it clear what the goals of the US are, not regime change, it's policy change. The US wants an extended nuclear deal, the one like the US negotiated in 2015, the one that Trump got the US out of. If Iran signed onto that, then the US must be prepared to ease some of the sanctions.

 

What I'm saying is that if you attack thinking you can make your point with just limited air attacks and they decide all out war because you were the ones holding gun to their head and the ones that attack, you may not have a choice. They might just bring a conventional war to you wether you lime it or not. Do you think the bumbling nitwits in the Trump WH are ready for that? What if they then unleah all their proxies in the ME including an attack to overthrow the house of Saud?

What if the rest of the world's oil supply is threatened by an unecessary war you started? How do you think that's going to sit with Russia and China or even India?

Unintended consequenses.

The lack of strategic thinking is simply boggling.

You really think eveyone in the world is just going to surrender to your will under threat of obliteration and the rest of the world is just going to be business as usual once you open that box?

 

Because we would have fired the missiles from them. That's what you do when you see hundreds of IBCM's and SLBM's coming your direction from Russia.

And good thing too .. this is why putting ABM's on Russian border is stupid. All this does is destabilizes nuclear detente which forces Russia to take counter measures - such as nukes in space. Instead of having a 30 minutes to decide - you have 30 seconds. Talk about being a hair trigger away from apocalypse.

Regardless - as time passes - and more confirmation that the nukes coming at us are real - we will launch.

Now you are watching too many movies.

I have never said anything of the sort - and nor is this true. You must be thinking of some dingbat making up nonsense.

 

If he really wants to negotiate honestly he should take the boot of Iran's neck and treat them as a partner in negotiation.

This is not about negotiation. It is about regime change and the PNAC nutjobs like Bolton are not going to stop until they get a war that will allow Israel and Saudi Arabia hegemony in the ME. Boltons's been itching for a war with Iran since the PNAC was first thought of in addled neo-con minds.

That is what this is about.

 

1) To the former, no but I can do basic math. Give it a try sometime.
2) To the latter, quite possible. You guys are all the same to me.

 

Iran is probably more than 100 times more powerful than Iraq. Iraq had most of its stuff destroyed in the first war (desert storm) and had been under an arms embargo ever since. It was fighting back with what was left of dilapidated 1960's technology and an army that was either non existent or did not want to fight.

Missile technology has had major advances over the last 30 years and Iran has some very good stuff. We had 3 planes taken out in the late 90's (two were stealth bombers) during the war in Yugoslavia - by Serbia - using 1970's Russian missile technology. Iran is way way more advanced and has a way bigger military.

Obviously we can win but, at what cost ? Iraq cost us Trillions of dollars. We can't afford another Iraq - never mind a war against a far superior opponent. Our deficit is projected to be near 1 Trillion this year and even higher going forward - adding Trillions more to that total due to war spending will hurt. We are in a far worse financial position now than during the Bush years - and it was the previous war/military spending that is largely responsible for that worse financial position.

There have been more than a few empires that have suffered major decline due to trying to maintain their ability to project power in a world where the cost of projecting power is increasing with time. This Historical precedent is just as true - if not more so - than in the past.

 

The U.S. lost a single stealth F-117A against the Serbians.

And the F-117A is also 1970s technology.

 

For example?

 

What's wrong with destroying the regime in Iran? We should've done it years ago.

 

How is this ANYTHING to do with Trump?

 

As usual, the left have made a fantasy that has never happened, and will never happen, a reality

The left need to live in the present, what's actual and stop creating nonsense.

 

How about Russia?

 

Now you are fantasizing about nukes in space?

 

Try what sometime - what basic math are you referring to ? Why is it that when your arguments get refuted you start making up nonsense and drifting into name calling ?

Anyone who tells you that we can survive a full on nuclear war with Russia - at least at this point in time - is either not knowledgeable on the topic or lying.

 

Says a guy who fantasizes about 20 megaton Russian bombs and space nukes.

 

Iran could be dealt with in a very fast and fairly bloodless way (for the US). Problem is, the US will not want to look like a savage and under international pressure we will probably get into never-ending nation building quagmire.
I wouldn’t mind a nice, quick, clean regime change, but I’m afraid our own liberals won’t let us do it properly.

 

What US terma are you referring to?