Support NeoGAF

[Tams]

Was this an unexpected capability on their side?

Not really.

They have had decades of better and more free supply and funding than North Korea who have ICBM nuclear weapons.

 

[Tams]

Here in Italy, we are fucked: 2,5€ per Liter... taxes on Fuel are between 50/70%....we had enough of Trump on his First term, but this time in Insane level like Homelander(Berlusconi is an amateur in comparison on what he did for the country) , we want Joe Biden or another democratic president....

Ah yes, woe betide me.

Teenagers are being executed in Iran for protesting and nurses who've treated protestors being raped to the extent they are dying or begging to be allowed to die.

All from a death cult of a regime that will only stop when either they are exterminated or the whole world is under their specific branch of Islam.

Blame your government for going too hard into globalisation and not securing enough of your own supplies. One of the main jobs of government is to fucking prepare for events like this.

 

[DeafTourette]

Ah yes, woe betide me.

Teenagers are being executed in Iran for protesting and nurses who've treated protestors being raped to the extent they are dying or begging to be allowed to die.

All from a death cult of a regime that will only stop when either they are exterminated or the whole world is unded their specific branch of Islam.

Blame your government for going too hard into globalisation and not securing enough of your supplies. One of the .ain jobs of government is to fucking prepare for events like this.

You and I rarely agree but ALL of this I agree with.

 

[Meicyn]

We've said as much afaik, but Iran was claiming otherwise and the Iran-aligned western voices were citing their claims as reason why we didn't need to be attacking them. So it's good that there's evidence now.

For all the good it'll do. We had an Iranian government official flat out say they were always after nuclear weapons and that it was the whole point of the uranium enrichment program on a state-controlled broadcast, and yet we still have a large concentration of folks that believe the Iranian propaganda about peaceful power generation instead.

 

[TheAtomicPile]

As countries hosting bases involved in attacking Iran, they would be fully in their rights to attack those bases.
America may pretend otherwise but without the bases in Europe for ships and planes no large scale attack on Iran would be possible. The carriers have not enough firepower to do it on their own.

If Russian bombers flying from Cuba bombed the US you'd consider Cuba to also be the attacker and not an innocent bystander.

It would be more difficult for sure but let's not pretend that Europe doesn't desperately need those US bases.

In any event, we all might soon get to find how how far Europe is willing to ride the "not our problem" line.

Trump considers "winding down" Iran war without opening Hormuz Strait

 

[Ipsi]

 

[Zephyranthes]

I do believe that war can be necessary at times, but I also believe that war should have clear goals. Trump and friends have so far not been very lucid in articulating what those goals are. We'll see how things play out, but so far this business in Iran feels like a "tactical victories leading to strategic defeats" sort of conflict.

Yes, Khamenei is dead along with a bunch of high ranking Iranian officials.
Yes, the US and Israel have asserted their military dominance.
Yes, undoubtedly there has been significant damage done to Iranian military infrastructure and war-making potential.

But here's my question: for what, exactly? What lasting strategic objective has been or will be accomplished by these actions, however impressive they may be?

If the objective here was regime change, there seems to be little sign of that occurring. If the overall posture of the Iranian government towards its people or the world at large is not changed, then it doesn't really matter how many of their leaders are removed. Killing a hundred or even a thousand of them doesn't ultimately accomplish anything.

If the objective was to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon, then why have Tulsi Gabbard, Joe Kent and other Pentagon officials - who presumably would be well informed on the subject - repeatedly gone on record in saying that there was no credible evidence that Iran was actively pursuing one? Furthermore, if Iran truly was dead-set on having nukes, what's going to stop them from pursuing them again once the war is over? Will we be right back to this same conversation in another 5-10 years?

Now let's consider the real impacts of this war on the US. So far we have:

• 13 dead US soldiers who won't be going home to their families, along with hundreds injured. Yes, I'm sure they understood the risks when they enlisted, but I imagine soldiers would still rather not die fighting a fruitless war.
• Soaring gas prices which are negatively impacting millions of middle class Americans who were already struggling with high prices on goods, many of whom will likely make their displeasure with the GOP known at the polls in November.
• Tens of billions of taxpayer dollars spent, which could have been spent on something worthwhile (or better yet, not been taken from taxpayers in the first place).

There can sometimes be good reasons to go to war. I am failing to see the good reasons for this one.

 

[Bojji]

It would be more difficult for sure but let's not pretend that Europe doesn't desperately need those US bases.

In any event, we all might soon get to find how how far Europe is willing to ride the "not our problem" line.

Trump considers "winding down" Iran war without opening Hormuz Strait

If USA attack on Greenland happened, US bases would became a threat.

They were very much needed during the cold war, but now they only serve USA when it wants to attack insert ME country here. We have no idea how USA under current administration would react to Russian attack on NATO.

 

[longrainwater]

This going viral shows how lack of reading comprehension ability and critical thinking skills can cause many people to fundamentally misunderstand the world.

 

[TheAtomicPile]

If USA attack on Greenland happened, US bases would became a threat.

They were very much needed during the cold war, but now they only serve USA when it wants to attack insert ME country here. We have no idea how USA under current administration would react to Russian attack on NATO.

Maybe you can help me with this; is anyone of any significance in Europe looking at Ukraine and thinking, "Hmm that American base down the road is a real eye sore, we should shut it down. What's the worst that could happen?"

Because to us it looks like American weapons, troops, logistics, etc on the ground in Europe is an irreplaceable (at least for the foreseeable future) deterrent against Russia & co. from going any further than they already have. And it seems like most European leaders know this, which is why the bases are still there and probably aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Maybe we're missing something though.

 

[DeepEnigma]

If USA attack on Greenland happened, US bases would became a threat.

They were very much needed during the cold war, but now they only serve USA when it wants to attack insert ME country here. We have no idea how USA under current administration would react to Russian attack on NATO.

The Cold War never ended. The Soviet collapse was a mere pause and globalist traitors helped enrich China and other rogue states while selling all of us out in the process.

 

[Sonik]

This motherfucker is just trolling the American people now, right? No way he's not realizing the irony, he's not that dumb

 

[Wildebeest]

This motherfucker is just trolling the American people now, right? No way he's not realizing the irony, he's not that dumb

Its true though. I can't imaging a needier fucker than Elon Musk and he gets a lot.

 

[Sonik]

Its true though. I can't imaging a needier fucker than Elon Musk and he gets a lot.

I think you might have quoted the wrong post

 

[Bojji]

Maybe you can help me with this; is anyone of any significance in Europe looking at Ukraine and thinking, "Hmm that American base down the road is a real eye sore, we should shut it down. What's the worst that could happen?"

Because to us it looks like American weapons, troops, logistics, etc on the ground in Europe is an irreplaceable (at least for the foreseeable future) deterrent against Russia & co. from going any further than they already have. And it seems like most European leaders know this, which is why the bases are still there and probably aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Maybe we're missing something though.

Yes. But with Trump in power no one can be 100% that USA armies would help in any way if Russia attacks Baltic countries, Poland or Finland (or any other NATO country). USA was super stable ally for Europe since WW2 but right now anything is possible.

For example, I'm glad that there are USA bases in Poland but what happens if Russia attacks and Trump orders his troops to just watch what's happening (of board a plane and go home)?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I would rather they just send Gundams

No one can control Godzilla, he would smash everything in the Strait no matter whose side they were on

 

[DeepEnigma]

This motherfucker is just trolling the American people now, right? No way he's not realizing the irony, he's not that dumb

What irony?

 

[MisterFalcon]

For example, I'm glad that there are USA bases in Poland but what happens if Russia attacks and Trump orders his troops to just watch what's happening (of board a plane and go home)?

Or the Rubio-Lavrov pact kicks in and Trump takes half of Poland and the Baltics.

 

[Trilobit]

They would have to be retarded to think this, so maybe.

The Danes were preparing for real blodshed if the US would have attacked Greenland.

 

[Ipsi]

The Danes were preparing for real blodshed if the US would have attacked Greenland.

Did you quote the wrong person? Didn't say this

 

[Ipsi]

ADs missing some....

 

[StabbyStabStabStabStab]

Did you quote the wrong person? Didn't say this

She would no way do that.

Not with elbows that large.

 

[calico]

Not allowing Iran the time to upgrade its Obama-funded missile program into a nuclear missile system is looking like a better decision by the day.

If Europe has any sense of self-preservation left at all (questionable), we should see a rapid adjustment of attitude toward this action.

 

[DrFigs]

This going viral shows how lack of reading comprehension ability and critical thinking skills can cause many people to fundamentally misunderstand the world.

It is just a tasteless comment to make about Jesus, which is fine if you don't believe in him. But some Christians will take exception to it. Whoever originally said it was also trying to be provocative clearly.

 

[Trilobit]

Did you quote the wrong person? Didn't say this

That's weird. I'm sure I only pressed the reply button. Fixed it!

 

[Ipsi]

ADs missing some....

100 injured



7 dead

 

[Ozriel]

Not allowing Iran the time to upgrade its Obama-funded missile program into a nuclear missile system is looking like a better decision by the day.

If Europe has any sense of self-preservation left at all (questionable), we should see a rapid adjustment of attitude toward this action.

Iran has been selling oil to China and other customers for a while. Millions of barrels daily. They're making billions from selling oil. The Obama stuff is a drop in the ocean compared to that.

not everything has to devolve into propaganda.

 

[longrainwater]

It is just a tasteless comment to make about Jesus, which is fine if you don't believe in him. But some Christians will take exception to it. Whoever originally said it was also trying to be provocative clearly.

It's a quote from Will Durant, who was trained in a Catholic seminary. It posits Jesus as the purest example of morality and Genghis Khan as immorality, arguing that morality without strength will be defeated by immorality.

Knowing this requires context, context which is removed by propagandists seeking to manipulate people.

 

[Dithadder]

As everyone begs trump to declare victory and gtfo, bibi advises trump:

 

[calico]

Iran has been selling oil to China and other customers for a while. Millions of barrels daily. They're making billions from selling oil. The Obama stuff is a drop in the ocean compared to that.

not everything has to devolve into propaganda.

True they were making billions selling oil in large part due to the sanctions being lifted by Barack Hussein Obama, on top of the $100-$150bn they gained access to thanks to the same. This is many years worth of military spending for Iran.

No individual did more to allow Iran to fund its (status quo ante) military capability than Obama. No individual has done more than President Trump to destroy that capability. This is simply the reality of the situation.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Not allowing Iran the time to upgrade its Obama-funded missile program into a nuclear missile system is looking like a better decision by the day.

If Europe has any sense of self-preservation left at all (questionable), we should see a rapid adjustment of attitude toward this action.

And do what? Europe has nothing really military equipment wise. For this specific conflict, whole Europe is basically early day WW2 France.

 

[calico]

And do what? Europe has nothing really military equipment wise. For this specific conflict, whole Europe is basically early day WW2 France.

True, they can contribute little militarily, but the failure point of this operation will be political rather than any lack of military capability, and in that regard their instinctive desire to oppose and undermine President Trump no matter the situation does matter.

In this instance, they would be much better served by setting their TDS aside for the time being and doing whatever they can to aid President Trump, rather than to keep trying to build pressure on him to withdraw. They might get a short thrill out of successfully helping to 'defeat' President Trump or whatever, but they cannot be so blinded that they don't see that his failing here would be catastrophic for Europe.

 

[Bojji]

Blocked strait of Hormuz is not catastrophic to Europe. It's catastrophic to US Allies: Japan and S. Korea (and of course other Asian countries):

Biggest problems for Europe are caused by Iran fucking up everything around them (fossil fuels center of the world, including LNG)...

 

[TheAtomicPile]

Yes. But with Trump in power no one can be 100% that USA armies would help in any way if Russia attacks Baltic countries, Poland or Finland (or any other NATO country). USA was super stable ally for Europe since WW2 but right now anything is possible.

For example, I'm glad that there are USA bases in Poland but what happens if Russia attacks and Trump orders his troops to just watch what's happening (of board a plane and go home)?

Some more stability and consistency at the top would be nice, I get that. Still, we may never have to find out the answer to your Poland question, purely due to the fact that the troops are there.

Blocked strait of Hormuz is not catastrophic to Europe. It's catastrophic to US Allies: Japan and S. Korea (and of course other Asian countries):

Biggest problems for Europe are caused by Iran fucking up everything around them (fossil fuels center of the world, including LNG)...

Two countries who have explicitly refused to help the US with Hormuz. Also two countries that wouldn't exist as they do today without the US.

Again, if Trump declares victory in Iran and starts exiting with Hormuz more or less unchanged from its current state, we'll see how long all of these allies continue to say it's not their problem.

 

[calico]

Blocked strait of Hormuz is not catastrophic to Europe. It's catastrophic to US Allies: Japan and S. Korea (and of course other Asian countries):

Biggest problems for Europe are caused by Iran fucking up everything around them (fossil fuels center of the world, including LNG)...

I wasn't referring to the strait being blocked, but to an Islamic terrorist regime acquiring the ability to deliver a nuke to any city in Europe.

 

[Bojji]

I wasn't referring to the strait being blocked, but to an Islamic terrorist regime acquiring the ability to deliver a nuke to any city in Europe.

Their first target would be Israel (so I get why Israel was so desperate to destroy Iran).

And even with minds destroyed by religion, I still think they would have used nuclear weapon as deterrence like all other countries (even N. Korea). With nukes they probably wouldn't be attacked right now...

India and Pakistan have nukes and hate each other, but they don't use them on themselves (and Pakistan is a very Islamic country).

 

[devutos]

Some more stability and consistency at the top would be nice, I get that. Still, we may never have to find out the answer to your Poland question, purely due to the fact that the troops are there.



Two countries who have explicitly refused to help the US with Hormuz. Also two countries that wouldn't exist as they do today without the US.

Again, if Trump declares victory in Iran and starts exiting with Hormuz more or less unchanged from its current state, we'll see how long all of these allies continue to say it's not their problem.

Erm you really think Asian and European countries would be content with staying with no oil and collapse, or send their navies on an impossible mission, all for the sake of fickle 'ally' that just insults them and damages them continuously?
They will just make deals with Iran to let their stuff through, and possibly that will mean those deals will be settled in currencies other than USD, which Iran will be ecstatic about. And good luck maintaining your standards of life once America loses their hegemony, it would be the end of days in the US.
Which is why the US will try to open Hormuz, 1000 times cheaper than the alternative. Although Trump's instinct is clearly that of leaving his mess for someone else to solve.

 

[TheAtomicPile]

Erm you really think Asian and European countries would be content with staying with no oil and collapse, or send their navies on an impossible mission, all for the sake of fickle 'ally' that just insults them and damages them continuously?
They will just make deals with Iran to let their stuff through, and possibly that will mean those deals will be settled in currencies other than USD, which Iran will be ecstatic about. And good luck maintaining your standards of life once America loses their hegemony, it would be the end of days in the US.
Which is why the US will try to open Hormuz, 1000 times cheaper than the alternative. Although Trump's instinct is clearly that of leaving his mess for someone else to solve.

Oh yeah and the US would definitely just let that happen with no financial repercussions. Surely the world's largest economy would have no leverage in such a scenario.

 

[devutos]

Oh yeah and the US would definitely just let that happen with no financial repercussions. Surely the world's largest economy would have no leverage in such a scenario.

At that point it's a choice between two bad situations, not clear which one would prevail. Gulf countries of course would also have to choose between upsetting their 'protector' which, in this scenario, would have caused their total economic collapse and left them with nothing and clearly proven to be unable or unwilling to actually protect them, or enter a different world (a 'multipolar' one as we hear a lot about).

All a complete mess, which is why everyone competent in the US government knows that reopening Hormuz is a necessity. Not Trump possibly.

This of course could only happen after a prolonged closure of the strait and failure to reopen it by other means. It's possible Iran would just be happy charging a fee after US attacks have ceased and that would be that.

 

[NT80]

I do believe that war can be necessary at times, but I also believe that war should have clear goals. Trump and friends have so far not been very lucid in articulating what those goals are. We'll see how things play out, but so far this business in Iran feels like a "tactical victories leading to strategic defeats" sort of conflict.

Yes, Khamenei is dead along with a bunch of high ranking Iranian officials.
Yes, the US and Israel have asserted their military dominance.
Yes, undoubtedly there has been significant damage done to Iranian military infrastructure and war-making potential.

But here's my question: for what, exactly? What lasting strategic objective has been or will be accomplished by these actions, however impressive they may be?

If the objective here was regime change, there seems to be little sign of that occurring. If the overall posture of the Iranian government towards its people or the world at large is not changed, then it doesn't really matter how many of their leaders are removed. Killing a hundred or even a thousand of them doesn't ultimately accomplish anything.

If the objective was to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon, then why have Tulsi Gabbard, Joe Kent and other Pentagon officials - who presumably would be well informed on the subject - repeatedly gone on record in saying that there was no credible evidence that Iran was actively pursuing one? Furthermore, if Iran truly was dead-set on having nukes, what's going to stop them from pursuing them again once the war is over? Will we be right back to this same conversation in another 5-10 years?

Now let's consider the real impacts of this war on the US. So far we have:

• 13 dead US soldiers who won't be going home to their families, along with hundreds injured. Yes, I'm sure they understood the risks when they enlisted, but I imagine soldiers would still rather not die fighting a fruitless war.
• Soaring gas prices which are negatively impacting millions of middle class Americans who were already struggling with high prices on goods, many of whom will likely make their displeasure with the GOP known at the polls in November.
• Tens of billions of taxpayer dollars spent, which could have been spent on something worthwhile (or better yet, not been taken from taxpayers in the first place).

There can sometimes be good reasons to go to war. I am failing to see the good reasons for this one.

I've been wondering the same thing. Is an even more hard line regime going to be left in power to rebuild and having learned a thing or two from this experience? That old hawk John Bolton was voicing this exact concern yesterday. They might very well be back in the same position 5 or so years from now.

 

[DrFigs]

It's a quote from Will Durant, who was trained in a Catholic seminary. It posits Jesus as the purest example of morality and Genghis Khan as immorality, arguing that morality without strength will be defeated by immorality.

Knowing this requires context, context which is removed by propagandists seeking to manipulate people.

idk if that contradicts what i said, but yes, it is a provocative and tasteless comment. I do appreciate the context though.

edit: i guess i am not sure what his religious beliefs are. but if he was a christian, then i'd re-examine what he might have meant. but according to wikipedia, he was either an atheist or agnostic or something like that. so idk if that changes anything for me.

 

[adamsapple]

Their first target would be Israel (so I get why Israel was so desperate to destroy Iran).

And even with minds destroyed by religion, I still think they would have used nuclear weapon as deterrence like all other countries (even N. Korea). With nukes they probably wouldn't be attacked right now...

India and Pakistan have nukes and hate each other, but they don't use them on themselves (and Pakistan is a very Islamic).

Every nuclear powered country respects Mutually Assured Destruction, so far at least.

 

[Kenpachii]

I think trump goal is to force a new way of thinking into iran not necessarily regime change.

Maybe he's waiting for a new leader to stand up and start to negotiate with him. While in the meanwhile he just cripples everything military as much as possible.

 

[Ipsi]

Whoops

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Next couple of days will be interesting

 

[Ipsi]

 

[Sybrix]

Meaning?

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Meaning?

Iranian power plants go kaboom

 

[adamsapple]

Meaning?

Your gas is about to get more expensive.

 

[EviLore]

Iranian guy filming is having the time of his life watching the regime assets get taken out