• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Monitoring the situation in Iran

Just imagine if Putin. Xi Jinping or Kim Jong Un, all leaders of nuclear armed countries, would hold speeches saying the exact same thing as Trump... We'd all believe they're completely out of their mind and that the whole world is doomed with absolute mad men having the power to blow up the world. But with Trump this has all been normalized somehow ... It's just astonishing. This is really not the way the president of the USA should speak and write ....

Paving the way for further retardation.

Same braindead seals clapping
 
Last edited:
MsQd64DeYhbe5gFt.jpeg
 
RIP to all on board that refuelling tanker however

The circumstances of the incident are under investigation. However, the loss of the aircraft was not due to hostile fire or friendly fire.

Do people believe this? I mean would US Central Command admit if if it had been shot down / hit by a drone? Trump wants to make it seem the US military are untouchable?
 
Last edited:
RIP to all on board that refuelling tanker however



Do people believe this? I mean would US Central Command admit if if it had been shot down / hit by a drone? Trump wants to make it seem the US military are untouchable?
I think Iran would try and take credit if they did it. Besides, an in air collision between two friendlies is likely more embarrassing than being shot down.
 
I think Iran would try and take credit if they did it. Besides, an in air collision between two friendlies is likely more embarrassing than being shot down.
Okay, sorry - was it a collision? Did a fighter jet also crash? There's not much about it you see which makes it suspicious (to me)
 
I think Iran would try and take credit if they did it. Besides, an in air collision between two friendlies is likely more embarrassing than being shot down.
According to CNN (on air), an Iranian proxy group claimed responsibilty.

But the implication is that the bird that crashed was trying to refuel it's own tank from the one that safely landed with a piece of it's tail missing.
 
After seeing the tail section of the plane, yes.

Looks like they touched.


Geez. I thought it meant a collision with a fighter jet. They are big bastard things it is amazing they both didnt crash.

Sorry for the edits - three things at once going on and not reading properly. My bad.
 
Last edited:
They let this one fly? Or attempt to take off?

Sorry, the media is really sketchy about this (or I'm just not seeing it)
The tanker in the photo with the tail damage was (most likely) refueling another tanker. They clipped during refueling, damaging the one in the photo (which landed safely) and causing the other tanker (the one being refueled) to crash.
 
Looks like various countries are now individually reaching out to Iran for safe passage for their ships.




March 13 (Reuters) - France and ‌Italy have ‌opened talks with Iran seeking to negotiate a deal ‌to ⁠guarantee safe passage for ⁠their ships through the Strait of Hormuz, ‌the Financial Times reported on Friday, citing people ‌briefed on the efforts.



bafkreigdzjxw7rslnnjumixavbzhagv2e6gp7vstlo27nmngozvp4d4lz4



bafkreigpytgdgjvgeirc5vnsigeolpbqkzjl75sdbeqzbnq3ea3bsr4t44
 
Could be France surrendering to terrorism already (likely), or it could be so when Iran maintains a position of 'no we will attack your civilian vessels if they try to use the strait', France has cause to join the attacks.
 
But if you have a tanker that can refuel it couldn't you just use that one to refuel what it was going to refuel? Maybe it's fuel types or because then you can have two tankers refueling instead of one.

I've posted an entire article explaining what does the Kc-135rt does.
Over simplificating, their squad is the equivalent of the 160th Night Stalkers for refueling.

Edit. Just in

 
Last edited:
It's one thing to plan for the idea of Iran closing the straight "for decades" it's another thing to expect it out of this most recent attack on them.

"We planned to cripple the world economy during a time where the economy is already kind of fucked" is some real big brained propaganda though.

You have to be a fucking retard to actually believe any Republican.
 
Last edited:
Think he's just pointing out that it's 'closed' due to Iran's terroristic position that it will attack any unapproved civilian vessel, not due to the US, which is true. It's not closed because 'it's a warzone and you might accidentally get caught in the crossfire' or something like that; it's closed because Iran will deliberately target civilian vessels of neutral countries. The blame rests solely with Iran.

It matters because the question people should be asking is: why is the rest of the world allowing Iran to attack or threaten to attack their shipping without consequence?
 
They've been attacking first for over 50 years.

And yes, they were attacking neutral civilian ships like the terrorists they are.

Bulbs aren't too bright this morning. But keep going hard in the paint for them tho.
Stop with the lies. Trump started this.
They are attacking the ships as a strategy of war not as terrorism. And it's working.
 
Last edited:
I know a lot of this started in academia, but it must go far deeper than that for it to propagate across the entirety of the left. The people on Era haven't even made a thread about the terrorist in Michigan yesterday, and they usually can't help but jump over each other to make a post about a shooting. Didn't see much about the Texas bar shooting, either. Disgusting.

It's been eye opening seeing the thread there, especially one prominent poster/leaker. His history on here goes back over a decade with pro-Iran, pro-Palestine. anti-Israel rhetoric but while on here it was challenged, there is completely unhinged and unchecked, even bolstered with positive comments. You'd think Iran was winning because a few drones landed and USA had hundreds of unreported military deaths being covered up.
 
In the case of civilian vessels of neutral nations, yes it is Iran attacking (or threatening to attack) first.

Being attacked does not give a nation a free pass to attack civilian shipping of every nation in the world, obviously.
Who's going to stop them though? They have an iron grip around the strait and according to reports, nation states are negotiating with them instead of going against them. So they are still being recognized as having legitimate power and influence.

We don't have a world police, if we did they may consider that along with what we are doing off the coast of Venezuela as war crimes or against international norms.
 
This administration has poorly planned this out from the onset and at this point, the US should figure out a way to make this end quickly. Then again, you're relying on this administration to be educated on the region and actually competent.

As a ex-pat, it doesn't appear they have a serious plan at the moment. The US is fantastic at hitting hard and fast and making the dominos fall. Right now, we've seen that. The Iran navy, Air Force and missile forces are in shambles.

What you aren't seeing is the collapse of the regime just yet. Maybe in a few months or years, but certainly not soon. The Trump administration thought this was going to be like Venezuela and that is the most telling thing of it all. Iran isn't going to cut any deals and it's insanely stupid to think they would.

If they put boots on the ground in Iran, that would turn ugly in a hurry.
 
Last edited:
In the case of civilian vessels of neutral nations, yes it is Iran attacking (or threatening to attack) first.

Being attacked does not give a nation a free pass to attack civilian shipping of every nation in the world, obviously.
It's almost like they are fighting back in a way they can, and not in a way they can't…
 
Check how much money you are spending to support said country, report back.

Your trolling is lame, mate. If you seriously don't think Iran is the impetus behind most of the violence and terrorism in the Middle East and they needed to be deprived of nuclear weapons, that's unfortunate but I'll leave you to it.
 
Your trolling is lame, mate. If you seriously don't think Iran is the impetus behind most of the violence and terrorism in the Middle East and they needed to be deprived of nuclear weapons, that's unfortunate but I'll leave you to it.
Why does America care? You are routinely dealing with regimes like China and Russia. Trump promised not to drag you into any new conflict, wasn't it supposed to be "America first"?
Iran has been Iran for decades, they are far more consistent than Trump.
 
Who's going to stop them though?
Who's going to, or who should?

Every nation now subject to Iran's terroristic threat to attack their civilian shipping should do something about it, in order to defend both their specific right to navigate the strait and their broader right to freedom of navigation. Surrendering to it sets a terrible precedent.

Will they do anything to stop them? Probably not, because it's easier to let the US carry the burden of such things for them.

It's almost like they are fighting back in a way they can, and not in a way they can't…
In a terroristic way against neutral civilian vessels, yes, which is what is being pointed out.

The nations affected should be treating it for what it is: an unprovoked attack against them.
 
One question that I have is, Iran said they had enough material to make 11 bombs. Where is that material now?

Has it been said or is it assumed to be blown up?
 
Top Bottom