ChuckeRearmed
Member
Don't forget to add that they are going to introduce draft too
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Monitoring the situation in Iran
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
winjer
Member
The usual anti American propaganda, to try to protect some dictatorial regime.
Always point to some problem the USA is currently having, as a reason for it's military not to intervene.
Probably a Russian talking point, considering that if the US now attacks the Khomeini regime, Russia will lose another of it's allies. The second in little over a month.
nkarafo
Member
ChuckeRearmed
Member
It would be beautiful if the attack happened today as it would 47 years since ayatollah's arrival to Iran. But oh well.
Also I really don't believe they should negotiate any kind of deal at this point. They are just not in a same position and the Gulf monarchies are not acting in a good faith anymore as the current Iran will perpetually require american presence, which benefits a lot for Gulf monarchies who can then behave like EU using american umbrella while conducting their own foreign policy. If Iran is finished off, then it will become safe for USA just to leave the region - aside some control over Iran as it has too beneficial location - but overall they will be able to pull out.
MisterFalcon
Member
The problem with being the biggest military in the world is there is always more stuff to fly in. If 20 Patriot batteries can do the job with 98% certainty why not get another 20 to get it up to 99%?
Braag
Member
This is me when playing C&C.
Imagine making a deal after hauling all that stuff there only to haul it all back. I would be incredibly surprised if they allowed the current regime to keep ruling. A deal with them will only be a temporary solution, until they go back to their old shenanigans in the region (funding Houthis, Hezbollah, Hamas etc..) and "secretly" developing their nuclear program again.
Meicyn
Member
I genuinely hope we ramp up missile defense replenishment stateside. Defense contractors didn't fully replenish what we used last year. I feel like we're about to crack open most of our eggs and still have only a couple of hens generating more like it's still peace time.
Warspite
Member
If you take all the potential threats one at a time current defence contractors may be able to keep things ticking over until stock piles are refilled. Which is what seems to be happening.
I always wondered if defence contractors are still gold plating everything or if economies for building at scale have been made, I don't think the tax payer should be paying peace dividends prices right now for this equipment.
Meicyn
Member
Well, it seems I am two days behind the latest news. Lockheed Martin announced on 29 January that they're quadrupling THAAD production capacity.
Lockheed Martin and U.S. Department of War Sign Framework Agreement to Quadruple THAAD Interceptor Production Capacity
Company also to break ground on new Munitions Acceleration Center in Arkansas CAMDEN, Ark., Jan. 29, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) signed a framework agreement with the...
Good thing too, because the existing 96 interceptors per year wasn't nearly enough. We used 150 of them during last year's 12-day Israel/Iran war. I feel a lot better about the situation now.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
The defense contracts have been engaging into the game of missiles for years. Basically slow walking production in order to ask for more money and prop up their evaluations. Instead of investing into the capacity they have been propping up their stock, inflating the costs of programs etc. USA is not ready to a real war aside lazy bombings of some sand terrorists from time to time.
Last edited:
longrainwater
Member
Iran has a lot of intellectual capital and smart people, and my understanding is that their people are generally more western in mind set than most of their neighbors. I think there are likely multiple countries in the region that might prefer a sanctioned Iran ruled by backwards despots than a modern, forward-thinking leadership that will be the west's best friends in the region, which is a position many countries have been vying for recently.
Last edited:
ChuckeRearmed
Member
The irony is that this intellectual capital is blocked by the religious clerics. Iranians are amazing people. A lot of cultures with centuries and thousands of years are history are their own civilizations with a lot of distinct, unique features.
Anyway, the more pro-western Iran creates very different dynamics in the region. It is kinda easy for gulf monarchies to unite against the common enemy. Plus a lot of countries like Qatar or Oman used to be a "intermediaries" and now those positions will disappear as USA might be able to communicate directly with Iran, meaning countries like Qatar and Oman will lose a lot of influence in the region, becoming more vulnerable (that's why Qatar wanted Article 5 like guarantees for example). A lot of players were content with the current Iran due to the alliances and ties established over the years. Crumbling UAE proxies (due to other players becoming more involved due to weak Iran) and potential alliance between Saudi and Turkey are the preparation for the post-Iran order. Collapse of Assad are all new factors caused in a lot of changes due to the end of iranian "Shia Crescent" project. With pro-western Iran it also means that USA won't become a crucial player for the region anymore - basically would not make sense for them anymore to be directly involved into the mess happening across Syria and between Gulf monarchies. Essentially the end of 50 year old Great Game, the closing chapter.
It is also the reason of Indian bigger involvement with the region going forward, especially post official reveal of Pakistani-Saudi alliance. The dynamics are changing. There is a lot to gain if USA will be able to gain some foothold in Iran - one way or anoter. As it is real entrance to the Central Asia and the Caspian Sea. Which also adds additional factor - the rising ISIS branch there, that it is going to be a problem sooner or later.
Last edited:
Kenneth Haight
Gold Member
The "accidents" keep happening
Signalis
Member
This guy is very very delusional, or he is smoking some very good hashish. Probably a combination of both.
Braag
Member
Reminds me of an interview they had with some war analyst who specializes on Middle East, he said it's a region where leaders always have to present their country as tough, confident, and never show any weakness, so anything that Iran says publicly can be instantly disregarded. It's what they're talking behind the scenes that matters.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
That's the fanatics for you. I would not be surprised if some of them believe into that, while some are just doing that for political purposes locally.
ClanOfNone
Member
It's definitely this. All of this media (propaganda) is being released by the state. They can't very well go on state tv and say things like "we are completely fucked" if they want to keep their head.
They know they're fucked, we know they're fucked, US/Israel will let their militaries do the talking.
Bojji
Gold Member
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Iranian flag marches from the paid protestors and algo-NPCs in 3... 2... 1...
ChuckeRearmed
Member
Loyalty issue will be a huge problem in the western world sooner or later too. Just too many people who belong to various groups - ethnic, religious and do not support the state at all. It is like that somalian situation in MN where you already had two tribes of somalians hating each other.
China has similar issues to arab countries too.
Last edited:
calico
Member
In a fight to the last man Iran would be fucked, but realistically those are not the parameters here. From the Iranian regime's perspective, 'we will inflict casualties' is the 'correct' messaging, because it would likely take very few US casualties to turn the lukewarm support for action against Iran into almost no support for action against Iran and a backlash against President Trump. President Trump is well aware of this reality.
Now, sometimes a President might be obliged to take military action even when he knows it will be unpopular, but there would need to be a compelling US interest in doing so. If one exists here, it has yet to be clearly articulated. 'I just wanted to stop people in Islamic countries killing each other' is not going to get it done if Americans start dying. You may as well say you wanted to stop the tide coming in.
Now, sometimes a President might be obliged to take military action even when he knows it will be unpopular, but there would need to be a compelling US interest in doing so. If one exists here, it has yet to be clearly articulated. 'I just wanted to stop people in Islamic countries killing each other' is not going to get it done if Americans start dying. You may as well say you wanted to stop the tide coming in.
Last edited:
P:axMagellanic
Member
Germany has been cucked beyond belief and SK is the cyberpunk dystopic half of the fucked up peninsula. It's also had more coups than hot dinners.
Apparently they also changed their ask for the Friday negotiations. If we get there...
Warspite
Member
ChuckeRearmed
Member
People have to understand that Trump treats Russia that way because he needs certain things from Russia. Iran has no such purpose.Putin might be able to test Donnies patience, I suspect Iran cannot.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Not something you need for negotiating.
If you want to show them a full detailed map of knowing where everything and every one of them are with the ability to strike at any moment before they can react, it is.
"See this map, we have the capability of striking everything on this map at the exact same time. You see these dots here? That's your entire lineage about to disappear."
Negotiations fall through, then,
Ellis
Member
Literally my answer to my mother when she asked me why I was going to NYC for a few days from the UK.She walked there so she can swat down any incoming missiles!
Ghostbusters 2, mum. Ghostbusters 2.
No regrets!
Gp1
Member
Insane Metal
Member
Just seen a video on X of 'police' cars in Iran running over protesters. FFS.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
Let's see what is going to happen. The transition is the main issue if the regime collapses. If.
Big-G
Member
wtf, this should have been announced a long time ago. I'm surprised any American would still stay after everything that's going on unless they were stationed there by the federal government.
Dirk Benedict
Gold Member
Too big to handle? This is growing way out of the ordinary. So fascinating to see unfold.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
Iran is literally Iraq + Afghanistan on steroids. 2x times of Iraqi population + mountaneous area (making ground invasion extremely hard). So basically invasion is impossible and bombings won't lead to nowhere with so many ethnic groups and organizations in the region. Iran has borders with a lot of relatively unstable countries like Afghanistan (that has their own conflict), Pakistan, Turkmenistan, Syria, Iraq, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Turkey - and all without protection of a desert unlike Iraq and Saudi Arabia. That's the main challenge - how to prevent its disintegration so that multiple countries around will not fall apart either.
The worst case scenario is - though I don't think the refugee crisis there will happen that much simply due to the size and the landscape - is fragmentation that will trigger a set of insurgencies across the borders of all the countries, with some of them fleeing into Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan and form various additional terrorist group. The whole ISIS was formed by the former Iraqi commanders. Now imagine how many of commanders Iran has.
Last edited:
nkarafo
Member
Maybe they have a bunch of Tom Cruises who can use WW1 biplanes to beat 5th gen aircraft.
It's probably a viable strategy to just burn out the 5th gen fighters on maintenance requirements and soak up their missile supply in "cheap stuff", then make your play. Costly in pilots, I suppose, but these days if you can field 5 planes to the enemies one, day after day, who wins then? I'm not sure the F-22 ever got a real work-out in Afghanistan or Syria like they would in Iran..
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Oh goodness. A flight sim nerd in his mother's basement with a remote drone fighter could take down that geriatric platform.
Gp1
Member
That's what drones are for.
And Blue will (probably) operate like that in this kind of scenario.
Growlers providing jamming.
F-35 would carry SEAD/DEAD.
A flight of 2 F-22/F35 spoting and maybe engaging HVT really close to the enemy line while the missile trucks behind (S. Hornets, F-15, F-16) will just lobby AMRAAMs from afar on anything that's flying besides the drones...
Avid Reading Horse
Member
I'm thinking of a rebrand. I personally like the sound of Gulf of America 2
BlackTron
Member
You know their capability is like ours because their planes are also equipped with corny music.Trained by the best of the best of the best, no doubt!
Similar threads
- Locked