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

Monitoring the situation in Iran

Status
Not open for further replies.
Submarines were an example. They could build self powered bunkers for defence too.

Iran hasn't really ever been an aggressor in its history.

You should read a book. They're not aggressors in the old sense. They've been conducting proxy wars on their neighbors for 25 years using gray zone warfare that fall below the threshold of what you consider war and that's the point.

Saddam with the US invaded Iran after the US lost the oil control over Iran, yet iran lived with saddam as a neighbour for decades without war.

:messenger_tears_of_joy: You need to read some history. Saddam attacked Iran because Iraq was a major power in the region and wanted to become the primary power and because Khomeini said

April 1, 1979

We are fighting against international communism to the same degree that we are fighting against the Western world -- devourers led by America, Israel and Zionism

We should try hard to export our revolution to the world, and should set aside the thought that we do not export our revolution, because Islam does not regard various Islamic countries differently and is the supporter of all the oppressed people of the world.

Iraq was a majority Shi'a country ruled by the minority Sunni (Saddam's Baathist Party). Saddam's fear of Iraqi Shi'a population rising up and dispose of him and a perception of Iran being internally weak from the revolution and that was his window to become the dominant regional power was his prime motivation.

The Soviets was his primary backer. Iran was isolated cept Israel's secretly selling spare parts for Iran's American weaponry. They didn't want Iraq to become the sole power in the region. It's all well documented. Geopolitics gets complex.

But i guess "it was oil" is easier to swallow. The human brain is good at taking shortcuts to reduce cognitive load.

Then the US decided to invade Iraq. Ironically that was its enemy and not the country it invaded.

Nice of you to gloss over the part where Saddam invaded Kuwait and it was authorized by UNSC Resolution 678.

They weren't even designated terrorists before when they had their embassy in other countries bombed, had state sponsored US-israel cyber attacks against civilian infrastructure in 2010, had a general killed on a visit to a neighbouring country, had scientists killed in car bomb terrorist attacks on the streets of their cities, had civilian ifrastructure attacked in 2020, 2025 and now 2026. Imagine this was US scientists, imagine this was US infrastructure and some other state trying to enforce these things. There would be hell to pay. But hatred breeds hatred.

Now we have an ordeal with the strait. In WW we (the UK) had a maritime blockade of Germany, laid sea mines to block all boats including food, that was to combat the aggressor/invader Germany in that conflict and justified. 700k people died of starvation in Germany due to it. At least humanitarian ships are let through the strait today. They weren't in Gaza mind.

Civilian infrastructure... in harden bunkers. Ok, buddy. :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Yeah, the world needs to bow down to Islam because "nobody expects shit from them".

And you guys have the audacity to call Trump retard.

Iran is a Shia Islam. My understanding is that GCC (sunni Islam) really want the war to keep going. Israel has its own goals, Judaism influence plausible. Top commanders, evangelical Christians, ready to bring on the Armageddon…and are more or less backing the Sunnis.

Is the world not bowing down to abrahamic religions?
 
The absolute state of some people here. You'd think here was turning into the purple place.

Is how the US is going about this with an utterly egotistical leader ideal? No.

But Iran has been an issue for decades and has become an increasing threat.
  • Supporting extremist Islam in the region.
  • Supporting Russia in its invasion of Ukraine.
  • Receiving support from Russia and China.
  • Mutual support with North Korea.
  • Killing their own citizens over the most trivial of 'transgressions'.
  • Many sleeper cells in the West.
  • General oppression of their populace.
Diplomacy has achieved fuck all to prevent any of this.

They are evil and if you are an apologist for them, so are you.

Great post Tams. Iran's attacks on the West have been numerous. I posted this back when attempting to educate someone on why the USA should care. Sadly the poster devolved into antisemitic tropes before being banned, so some people just don't want to learn it seems.

IRANIAN AND IRANIAN-BACKED ATTACKS AGAINST AMERICANS (1979-PRESENT)



Here's few select examples from the list showing what the Iranian regime done to American citizens:

April 1983: A suicide car bombing kills 63 people, including 17 Americans, at the U.S. Embassy in Beirut. The Iran-backed terrorist group Islamic Jihad, a precursor and early branch of Hezbollah (not to be confused with Palestinian Islamic Jihad), claims responsibility.

October 1983: Operatives of the Iran-backed Hezbollah drive a truck bomb at a Marine compound in Beirut, killing 220 U.S. Marines and 21 other service personnel.

March 1984: Terrorists kidnap CIA station chief William Buckley in Beirut, subsequently torturing and ultimately killing him in 1985. Islamic Jihad claims responsibility.

July 1989: Hezbollah operatives kill U.S. Marine Corps Col. William Higgins after kidnapping him the previous year while on a United Nations peacekeeping mission in southern Lebanon.

June 1996: A truck carrying 5,000 pounds of explosives blows up the Khobar Towers, a U.S. Air Force housing complex in the Saudi Arabian town of Khobar. Nineteen Americans die and some 500 people are injured. The Iran-backed Hezbollah Al Hijaz, a terrorist group in Saudi Arabia, is deemed responsible.

August 1998: With the assistance of Hezbollah, al Qaeda suicide bombers almost simultaneously blow up the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people, including 12 Americans, and wounding thousands.

September 11, 2001: While the 9/11 Commission Report concludes that Iran had no foreknowledge of al Qaeda's attacks on the World Trade Center, the report indicates that Tehran facilitated the travel of some of the terrorists. "In sum," the report notes, "there is strong evidence that Iran facilitated the transit of al Qaeda members into and out of Afghanistan before 9/11, and that some of these were future 9/11 hijackers."

2003-2011: Iranian-backed militias kill at least 603 U.S. troops in Iraq, according to the Pentagon. Iranian training and material support for Iraqi militias during the surge greatly increased the difficulty of U.S. forces to combat the insurgency and included some of the deadliest weapons used against American troops, including explosively formed penetrators (EFPs) and improvised explosive devices (IEDs).

January 2007: Twelve men affiliated with the Quds Force of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) disguised themselves as U.S. soldiers, entered the Provincial Joint Coordination Center in the Iraqi city of Karbala, killed five U.S. soldiers, and wounded another three

November 2022: A captain in Iran's IRGC orchestrates the killing of an American citizen living in Baghdad who worked at an English language institute.

October 7, 2023: Hamas kills at least 48 Americans and kidnaps at least 12 Americans in a massacre of 1,200 people in southern Israel.
 
Last edited:
The absolute state of some people here. You'd think here was turning into the purple place.

Is how the US is going about this with an utterly egotistical leader ideal? No.

But Iran has been an issue for decades and has become an increasing threat.
  • Supporting extremist Islam in the region.
  • Supporting Russia in its invasion of Ukraine.
  • Receiving support from Russia and China.
  • Mutual support with North Korea.
  • Killing their own citizens over the most trivial of 'transgressions'.
  • Many sleeper cells in the West.
  • General oppression of their populace.
Diplomacy has achieved fuck all to prevent any of this.

They are evil and if you are an apologist for them, so are you.
How you achieve a goal is equally as important as achieving it itself.

giphy.gif


For how many years and decades all this shit will continue to happen? These bloodsuckin' and genocidal motherfuckers killing their own people in dozens of thousands during protests, hanging them on the streets etc. It needs to fuckin' end once and for all and there's no other way but using force, a lot of it. I hope it won't come to the US using nukes though - never again!
The US has a history of failed regime changes in the ME. Look no further than Afghanistan.
 
Is it ok to agree IRGC is really fucking bad and needs to go, BUT also agree that the president of the united states of America shouldn't be implying that the US might drop nukes. That shit is wild! What's the world coming to if someone can say, you should just ignore that guy.....

That's the fucking president. It's insane, man. I can't believe it.

If any other country said that about any other country....imagine if one of these eastern countries said that about the US?

Crazy, someone needs to step in and remove that man child. Wtf.
 
If there is complete and total regime change, why is the war continuing?

Facts are there isnt any regime change.

How does Trump get regime change? The only way is a ground invasion. Is that going to happen? No.

So what happens now?

Bombs. Lots of it. Carpet bombing the whole area.

The US has shown incredible restraints by not targeting civilian structures. Iran will soon find out the difference once the gloves comes off.
 
Last edited:
It is hard to get a clear picture on what is going on. But from what I am reading, it seems like the US cannot find all of the hidden missile sites to stop Iran from launching, although this has been significantly degraded. And their drone capability is preventing a ground assault on Kharg.

So imo instead of going on a tantrum, Trump should just destroy Kharg and declare the end of military operations. The strait will be closed, but this is not really a problem for the US. And it will only be closed temporarily, there will be MASSIVE economic incentive to create the necessary anti-drone and anti-missile tech. Once that is in place Iran wil have nothing to threaten anyone with.
 
Last edited:
Is it ok to agree IRGC is really fucking bad and needs to go, BUT also agree that the president of the united states of America shouldn't be implying that the US might drop nukes. That shit is wild! What's the world coming to if someone can say, you should just ignore that guy.....

That's the fucking president. It's insane, man. I can't believe it.

If any other country said that about any other country....imagine if one of these eastern countries said that about the US?

Crazy, someone needs to step in and remove that man child. Wtf.

Completly agree.

Wiping the IRGC off the face of the earth is only a good thing.

But how Trump is going about this is crazy, just imagine if this was Biden acting like this, Trump would be going ape shit and calling him insane.
 
I suppose we can agree to disagree here.

But to me your way of thinking sounds fatalistic.
All I'm arguing is that, the west interrupted a nation in the middle of changing for the better, because of their own geopolitical interests in the region with regards to oil. That action, had some consequences.

Every action has consequences, so we should think deeply about what we're doing before we do it.
I just think we make excuses.Turkey lived under Ottoman rule, suffered millions of casualties in WW1 and then was invaded by several European countries like Greece and Bulgaria in the 1920s to seize territory but it became a democracy and a relatively secular one, because that's what the people chose. However, Turkey was always relatively secular to some degree. It never was hardline. The theocracy could never had taken hold in Iran unless millions already had those views. It wasn't California in waiting. Similar to anti semitism being rife in Germany before the Nazis. You can't take somebody progressive and turn them into an Islamist overnight. The ones who were progressive fled when the Shah fell. That's literally what happened.
 
Heh. The standards of the Nobel Committee are already so low, what difference would debasing the prize any more make?

"Doing diddly squat" is not as bad as "threatening to wipe out a civilization".

I wonder if FIFA will rescind Trumps peace prize after this? His recent behaviour really sullies the historic reputation of the award.
 
Last edited:
What in 1953 under Mossadegh?
That entire debacle was about Oil, and nothing else. Iran wanted to nationalise their oil - which they should have had every right to do. Obviously the British didn't want that.

Mossadegh tried to usurp power from the Shah and he got counter-coup. Only pinkos think he was "democratically elected".

Why did he hate the Shah so much? Because he was a descendant of the Qajar dynasty through his mother and married a Qajar princess. His mother was Princess Malek Taj Najm-es-Saltaneh of the Qajar dynasty. His wife was Princess Zia al-Saltaneh.

Hey may have framed his opposition in constitutional terms but his animosity toward Reza Shah was deeply rooted in class, lineage, and personal humiliation.
 
Nobel Peace Prize is given to people who have not done nothing usually. Instead of the action, the committee prefers strongly worded letters.

By action you mean starting wars and acts of violence? I doubt you will get peace Nobel prize doing that.

That said, when Obama got it I remember laughing out loud... Why?!

whatever-shrug.gif
 
The irony of Vance being a puppet for Donny and standing up and backing his public comments of genocide is he's doing it to further his political career, but it'll probably destroy it. The way things are going, the Trump faction of the GOP is going to be insanely unpopular come 2028. So much so, I don't even think Vance could be in consideration for the nomination. Anyone connected to MAGA will be too toxic.
 
Nothing says your enemy is Satan like using human shields because you believe your enemy is too morally righteous to deliberately hurt civilians.
 
:messenger_tears_of_joy: You need to read some history. Saddam attacked Iran because Iraq was a major power in the region and wanted to become the primary power and because Khomeini said
You can read all the books you like and pretend I haven't but I've read them and even know people involved in that conflict directly in the armed forces during the time. Iraq sought to exploit Iranian political instability (due to the very recent revolution), and seize oil-rich territory. And the US backed Iraq. You didn't even get the date of the speech right and claiming its the reason and you're telling me to read a book. Your'e claiming it's from 1979 when it was 1980 and the war started in September 1980.
It wasn't driven by some speech it was mainly because of the 1975 Algiers Agreement that Iraq tried to tear up and claim the Shatt al-Arab. Israel was on Irans side in that war and the US on Iraqs.
You're talking about "cognitive load" and reducing the reason for war to a speech.

Iraq was a majority Shi'a country ruled by the minority Sunni (Saddam's Baathist Party). Saddam's fear of Iraqi Shi'a population rising up and dispose of him and a perception of Iran being internally weak from the revolution and that was his window to become the dominant regional power was his prime motivation.

The Soviets was his primary backer. Iran was isolated cept Israel's secretly selling spare parts for Iran's American weaponry. They didn't want Iraq to become the sole power in the region. It's all well documented. Geopolitics gets complex.
Iran was backed by Syria, Libya, and North Korea, with aid also from Israel and Kurdish factions. The USSR supplied most of Iraqs arms but the US provided most of the economic aid to prolong that war. Kuwait and other arab states backed Iraq too.

Nice of you to gloss over the part where Saddam invaded Kuwait and it was authorized by UNSC Resolution 678.
Nobody glossed over that. The 1990 invasion of Kuwait by Iraq wasn't the reason he was toppled in 2003, 13years later, otherwise they would have just toppled him then and there as the aggressor. It was because of claimed WMDs, and why do you think the US backed Kuwait in 1990? Their regional interest in an oil rich territory. It's not because they didn't like the invasion on principle otherwise they would have had a greater problem with the chemical gas attacks of Kurds in the 1980s when those chemicals were being provided by the US.
Civilian infrastructure... in harden bunkers. Ok, buddy. :messenger_tears_of_joy:
There were no hardened bunkers bombed in 2020. None of them were hardened bunkers so you're comical. In fact I think that is why they built hardened bunkers and Israel had to more directly involve the US due to their bunker buster ability 5 years later. Those 2020 attacks on power plants, medical clinics and petrochemical plants were not hardened bunkers at all. So yes civilian infrastructure.
 
Last edited:
Maybe the situation changed in the intervening 10-15 years? Especially with how much Barack Hussein Obama funded the Iranian military and nuclear program in the interim.
 
Iran has nothing left and continues to challenge those who are bigger than them, always doubling down. The same thing happened in Gaza, until Hamas felt the wrath and total destruction. The same will happen in Iran, and you should know it.
 
It is hard to get a clear picture on what is going on. But from what I am reading, it seems like the US cannot find all of the hidden missile sites to stop Iran from launching, although this has been significantly degraded. And their drone capability is preventing a ground assault on Kharg.

So imo instead of going on a tantrum, Trump should just destroy Kharg and declare the end of military operations. The strait will be closed, but this is not really a problem for the US. And it will only be closed temporarily, there will be MASSIVE economic incentive to create the necessary anti-drone and anti-missile tech. Once that is in place Iran wil have nothing to threaten anyone with.

Trump backed himself into a corner, unfortunately. Instead of saying "no new wars" he should have said "no unnecessary wars" because you can justify the latter by framing it as necessary. Instead his critics frame it as a broken promise. The fact is outside of Russia's nuclear weapons, no other country is going to be an imminent threat to the US in our lifetime. And therein lies the problem. We're looking for 20th century "imminent threats" while not seeing 21st century threats. People are imagining a red line with a foreign army massing at our border in the age of ballistic missiles and gray zone warfare where they use non-kinetic methods and proxies for kinetics combined with deniability.

By action you mean starting wars and acts of violence? I doubt you will get peace Nobel prize doing that.

That said, when Obama got it I remember laughing out loud... Why?!

whatever-shrug.gif

Peace proceeds war. I guess we're so use to peace after WW2 that we think war doesn't exist anymore. The Euroweenies thought that war was obsolete until Russia didn't give a fuck and invaded the Ukraine :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
The irony of Vance being a puppet for Donny and standing up and backing his public comments of genocide is he's doing it to further his political career, but it'll probably destroy it. The way things are going, the Trump faction of the GOP is going to be insanely unpopular come 2028. So much so, I don't even think Vance could be in consideration for the nomination. Anyone connected to MAGA will be too toxic.

No one likes Vance except Peter thiel, who is the reason he got this gig.

He'll end up just like trumps last VP when all is said and done. Disavowed and discarded.
 
Peace proceeds war. I guess we're so use to peace after WW2 that we think war doesn't exist anymore. The Euroweenies thought that war was obsolete until Russia didn't give a fuck and invaded the Ukraine :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Americans treat war like reality show, it always happens thousands of miles away. I think it's super convenient to wage wars so far from your homeland - to never see the real destruction where you live (only soldiers experience death and trauma).

Europeans know war very well, that's why everyone hoped this shit will never happen again here, but as you said - Putin never gave a shit
 
Americans treat war like reality show, it always happens thousands of miles away. I think it's super convenient to wage wars so far from your homeland - to never see the real destruction where you live (only soldiers experience death and trauma).

Europeans know war very well, that's why everyone hoped this shit will never happen again here, but as you said - Putin never gave a shit
Its very worrying if you know about world war one. Its all a joke, over in a month and impossible, until you are up to your neck in corpses.
 
Peace proceeds war. I guess we're so use to peace after WW2 that we think war doesn't exist anymore. The Euroweenies thought that war was obsolete until Russia didn't give a fuck and invaded the Ukraine :messenger_tears_of_joy:
It is kinda obselete though. Russia's invasion of Ukraine was a massive derp move - they should have forged closer economic ties, bought up infrastructure - and they would have basically owned Ukraine without ever sending a single soldier.
Taking territory is generally pointless nowadays, and taking it by force is even worse. Economics is the new warfare.
 
Trump's rhetoric is inexcusable but where's the outrage over Iran blowing up civilian ships?

It's comical listening people act like Iran is winning the war because they're terrorizing tankers and bombing neighboring nations.

They don't get to have nukes.
 
Iran has nothing left and continues to challenge those who are bigger than them, always doubling down. The same thing happened in Gaza, until Hamas felt the wrath and total destruction. The same will happen in Iran, and you should know it.
The issue is that the current war allows IRGC to maintain the power as it redirects them from the internal conflicts of legitimacy (considering that the ayatollah is a vegetable). So it is in iranian (well IRGC) interest to continue the war. If war stops - the iranian elites will start fighting each other. The idea right now is to destroy as much as possible so that elites would decide to cut of IRGC altogether. But it seems like IRGC is still too strong within Iran.


Trump really should do something big at this point. Otherwise it would be too lame.
 
Thank goodness Europe's unique insight into war meant it had no more after WW1.

Being united against common enemy (USSR) and discovering that trade is better than war is the reason why peace lasted this long after WW2 in Europe.

Ohh, and countries were also crippled after the biggest fucking war ever. WW1 was horrible but it also was very local in the western front.
 
Last edited:
I guess this war wasn't about liberating the persians after all, they about to be fodder if Trump goes through with plans. When will Reza Pahvali step foot in iran lol
 
Last edited:
It was always about diminishing Iran's nuclear capabilities. That was stated repeatedly. Iran bragged about how far their nuclear program had advanced.

A regime change would have been an awesome outcome as well considering all the people they've killed.

hPuQo5we6Jt7S5La.png



2025...
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom