ChuckeRearmed
Member
Last edited:
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Monitoring the situation in Iran
- Thread starter EviLore
- Start date
Israel had much better control of media in Gaza plus they would also tend to drone anyone with a camera.
ChuckeRearmed
Member
Last edited:
Unknown Soldier
Member
Fair enough. I never thought at that saying much before but it has merit
I guess my statement was more that for the military people who are doing the fighting, all they care about is the military objectives. I wasn't trying to imply that Trump doesn't have more to think about beyond blowing the IRGC up but I'm also interested in seeing what he wants to do with Iran after the bombs stop falling
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
They state the goal isn't regime change when it obviously is. They want a change in leadership, and they want this political goal without inserting Americans on the ground in Iran. I'm not sure how feasible it is to blow everything up and then merely hope that the right people take over. Trump and Hegseth are either lying about not putting boots on the ground, or are going to slowly ease the narrative into that direction. I can't imagine that they actually believe that hoping their political goals will be achieved without boots on the ground is remotely possible. But maybe I'm wrong and it actually is.
ReBurn
Gold Member
FTFY. Buildings can be rebuilt.
Last edited:
Brazen
Member
Trump/Rubio has said multiple times in press interviews the goal is to eradicate Iran's missile and nuclear capabilities. This includes destroying the manufacturing of missiles/drones/etc during the opportunity while we currently have complete air/intelligence superiority. Trump has said this will take several weeks but are ahead of schedule on those objectives. Regime change is up to the Iranians and while the US would prefer it happens now during this time and under their terms, they may have to settle for the IRGC being more compliant after weeks of infrastructure/leadership massacres.
Tajaz2426
Psychology PhD from Wikipedia University
Their family members are summarily executed, their wives, daughters, stoned to death for speaking out, showing their bodies, made to marry men they do not want to, etc.
So much more, brother. It's hard to imagine living as a slave to older men who can use you and abuse you at will. Your life is somewhat meaningless. My first dets to the Middle East and once you get out of places like Baghdad and Ramadi, or Mazar and Kandahar in Afghan, everything is remote, with mostly no running water, electricity, no bathrooms, showers, schools, hospitals, police, there is absolutely nothing but them folks and the wild around them.
The women constantly asked to be taken from those places along with the children, their faces that they know there future is nonexistent. It is a very hard existence or those folks and life can be short lived, depending on the wind shifts, what tribes are warring. Looking in their eyes everyday was pure hurt for them.
This is a world you have probably never seen up close and they see no living for the future, they only see living in the moment for survival.
They hope, they pray, the beg for someone to come and help them make freedom more than a whisper between children in a classroom.
Millions of good folks over there, that are trapped every second in of their lives in fear of being beaten to death, or executed or TV as an example to others.
My apologies, so long. There is much more to say, but I'm sure you get the point. One of the greatest honors and privileges of my life was living with these folks in remote villages and helping them see their children the next day.
Often terrorist would go through the villages out there and any men that wouldn't fight with them, they would behead them in front of their families, nice and slow, then cut the breasts off of women that had newborns so they couldn't feed their newborns and they would often starve.
Again, sorry for the rambling. Some people would just give anything to fill your lungs with free air, just once.
Last edited:
Romulus
Member
I'm so glad Middle Eastern military types are incredible arrogant and delusional. Makes the job way easier.
Same story from the gulf war. "The gulf will flow with rivers of American blood." lmao, they didn't last hours, a million man army wiped the fuck out begging to surrender.
Begging.
Same story from the gulf war. "The gulf will flow with rivers of American blood." lmao, they didn't last hours, a million man army wiped the fuck out begging to surrender.
Begging.
calico
Member
The missile output is ofc dropping as they lose the means to fire them, but there may also be an element of them deciding its a better option now to keep what they have left until the current conflict is over, rather than keep deploying them only to get immediately destroyed from the air with very little benefit.
The conflict not necessarily being existential for the regime allows for this. This could be good in one sense if it reduces the volume of missile fire having to be faced now, but bad in the sense that it will make achieving the stated objective of destroying their missiles harder.
Regime change so far seems to be considered a 'nice to have' rather than a critical objective of the mission. If the regime is overthrown, great, and this seems to be the preferred outcome. If the regime remains in power but with a devastated leadership class and ruling over a pile of rubble, it seems that will be considered an acceptable outcome too.
The conflict not necessarily being existential for the regime allows for this. This could be good in one sense if it reduces the volume of missile fire having to be faced now, but bad in the sense that it will make achieving the stated objective of destroying their missiles harder.
Regime change so far seems to be considered a 'nice to have' rather than a critical objective of the mission. If the regime is overthrown, great, and this seems to be the preferred outcome. If the regime remains in power but with a devastated leadership class and ruling over a pile of rubble, it seems that will be considered an acceptable outcome too.
Mozza
Member
Denial is a powerful drug for you, these things are rarely as simple as some would have us believe.
Unknown Soldier
Member
We basically black bagged Maduro and left his entire government in place, so it's not like there isn't precedent for this. Now we have his former Vice President doing exactly what we say and there are elections planned for later this year to fully transition to a new government there
But Iran won't be quite as easy, we will most likely need to take out most of the upper ranks of the IRGC before it will be possible to form a new government there and the possibility of a civil war is very high. We don't want another Syria, that is the absolute worst case scenario here
Husky Blue
Neo Member
Is this a "two-weeks-to-slow-the-curve" few weeks, or is it a literal few weeks? I hope it's the latter because I don't want it to be another Operation Iraqi Freedom that lasts for years and years.
vodka-bull
Member
No you're on a liberation mission with the Iranian people.
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
Unknown Soldier
Member
Can't wait for when we're stunting on them with B-17 (WWII era) bombers just because we can
Unknown Soldier
Member
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Imagine if we instead spent that on child care assistance for working families. Or job training for our out of work and undereducated citizens. Or financial assistance for our farmers and manufacturers who are on the verge of bankruptcy. Or another James Webb Space Telescope. Or treatment and health care for our wounded and PTSD-stricken veterans from our previous silly wars.
0neAnd0nly
Member
Or none of that, because a terrorist nation nuked us into oblivion because everybody just thought they were bluffing, even when they told us during negotiations they could produce 11 nuclear bombs and we have proof they were enriching uranium to bomb levels all the while chanting about destroying the USA.
Just saying.
How much is it worth to protect the homeland from an Iranian ballistic missile carrying a nuclear warhead? Its too late to do anything about little rocket man at the source but wasnt too late to take care of Iranian threat. For rocket man we need ballistic missile defense and the odds of success are like 50:50 or something like that.
Last edited:
PlayofSparta
Member
It is ironic that a gigantic country in that region was the result of so much culture and study, especially in the Middle Ages with the Caliphs and Moors (theology, technology, history, etc.). I think they stopped in time and those are the consequences... Personally, I don't support this war, but I won't be the judge either.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Or that perhaps your leaders scared you for the last 30 years about a boogeyman of their own creation in order to line their own pockets. If they've been gaslightning you this entire time, why do they have any credibility left? We've already been through this scenario multiple times in recent history, but fear and money always wins.
LyricalShrike
Member
Not much tbh.
Gp1
Member
So much for his theory.
This is probably one of the most studied middle east war scenarios (Iran closing the Hormuz...). I'm pretty sure the Navy (or even the Europeans) can handle that.
Last edited:
![L*][*N*K](/data/avatars/m/842/842515.jpg?1756724107){kind=avatar}
FullMetalx117
Member
It'd be cool to see 2nd coming
LyricalShrike
Member
Time didn't stop. Oil was discovered under the feet of the most barbaric and conservative tribes in the region. Saudi oil revenues allow them to export their extreme conservative Islam. Muslims either shape up or don't get to make Hajj since Islam functions on a king of the hill system for rule. Progressive/chill Muslims as far away as Malaysia and Indonesia are gradually being arab-ized through Saudi influence.
PlayofSparta
Member
I don't really agree. Sufism gave us a great idea surrounding the "ego death", that is understood as Fana—the annihilation of the selfish ego and individual will before "god". It represents a spiritual state of self-effacement, where one surrenders personal desires to align completely with divine will, often described as "dying before you die". The ideas of Ibn 'Arabi on the Middle Ages were miles ahead from Christentum, for example.
Last edited:
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
Wait. The administration has no plan to get Americans out of the region?
LyricalShrike
Member
The conservative Wahhabism sect became the main Islamic movement of the Arabian peninsula between 500 and 600 years after the works you cited. The previous major powers in Islam (Turks, Iranians) were far more reform oriented. Their offshoots (mughals, etc) followed Persian tradition of pluralism even going so far as to remove jizya and allow scholars from other faiths to participate in society. Wahabbism came about as a direct counter to those movements.
Things were going pretty well until oil boosted Saudi influence and made them the predominant influencer of global Muslim culture; both Turkyie and Iran had even started discouraging/restricting headscarves as early as the 1920s, 1930s.
Unknown Soldier
Member
I haven't seen you complain about the $19 billion in known Minnesota fraud caused by the Somali immigrants
Cyberpunkd
Member
Wow, so I come into this thread and either people are arguing over semantics with Islam, or somehow Somali fraud with Sofia security in the IS is relevant to the war (sorry - special military operation) with Iran.
I think it is really difficult for people to understand you have elected a sociopath that exposed how little democratic locks and controls mean if you plan to dismantle them that just plunged a country into a second conflict in two months because…he wants to. And nobody in your quasi-monarchy system can or wants to stop him.
I think it is really difficult for people to understand you have elected a sociopath that exposed how little democratic locks and controls mean if you plan to dismantle them that just plunged a country into a second conflict in two months because…he wants to. And nobody in your quasi-monarchy system can or wants to stop him.
HoodWinked
Member
0neAnd0nly
Member
What did your, foreign non-US citizen, self say about the Lybia war (sorry-special military operation) under former President Obama?
I anxiously await your answer. Thanks.
Last edited:
0neAnd0nly
Member
I am aware of you stance from our past conversation. I just want to add that the risk of being wrong, in your scenario, comes with grave consequences for the free world.
I prefer to air on the side of caution with terrorist, personally.
Dirk Benedict
Gold Member
One of the biggest signs is supposed to be the rebuilding of The Temple.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
So Batman logic?
I just want to add that the risk of being wrong, in your scenario, also comes with grave consequences for the free world, as we've seen in the last 50 years of doing the same shit and seeing the same shit result.
This is relevant to the conversation about starting more unnecessary wars because...?
Critical Hit
Member
In the video, they are shooting at the sky, not at the houses — most likely an anti-aircraft gun placed among residential buildings.
Last edited:
PlayofSparta
Member
Hmm. Fair enough. So they stagnated way before I thought.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
Tucker has been caught red handed blatantly lying about Israel. I wouldn't rely on his analysis on this matter.
Iran has been moving forward with their nuclear program for many years, and part of the reason it took them this long was because of multiple military operations to set them back over that time.
What is your response to the video from earlier this week where Iranian officials admit that their intentions are to develop weapons?
Are you going to say the weapons aren't a threat because of the 1953 British/CIA coup? Two wrongs don't make a right.
Would you have been arguing against toppling Hitler during WW2 because of the humiliation Germany suffered in the Versailles Treaty?
Last edited:
P:axMagellanic
Member
Gas going up by 95 percent. Luckily we have a price cap til July, but fuck me
Go_Ly_Dow
Member
Felt like Iranian missile attacks were reducing and they were losing their ability to hit targets, but just now they landed a hit on the US base in Qatar (no casualities reported).
Need to really see them lose their remaining missile and attack capabilities over the next few days.
I hope this is now the focus.
As well as their nuclear facilities.
Need to really see them lose their remaining missile and attack capabilities over the next few days.
I hope this is now the focus.
As well as their nuclear facilities.
Last edited:
calico
Member
Presumably because you made it a conversation about financing additional child care etc. If you are looking for additional funding for those things, the 'gifts for foreigners' expenditure may be a better place to start rather than cutting military spending.
RJMacready73
Simps for Amouranth
Spend on the American people?? Lol the old white dudes that run your government, corporations and the military industrial complex have to replace their aging 2024 super yachts and buy bigger Hollywood hills mansions... The peasants don't need universal healthcare
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Would you trust Matt Walsh?
So every single time they were on the "brink" of a functional nuclear weapon, they got shut down militarily? Every single time going back 30 years?
Netanyahu's recent remarks about the conflict line up perfectly with that clip montage of him.
Netanyahu risks American support for Israel with war against Iran
By enlisting the U.S. in Israel’s battle against Iran, Netanyahu is taking a gamble that risks testing Israel’s already fraying ties with the American public.
www.pbs.org
I'm not sure what video you're referencing, but of course they're trying to develop nuclear weapons. That's the only thing that keeps North Korea and Russia safe, so why wouldn't they want some of their own when they're getting constantly messed with and threatened? They say "Death to America" and we threaten to destroy them. We say "Death to Iran (i.e. regime change)" and they threated to destroy us. This stupid cycle of violence doesn't help any of either countries' citizens, and only serves to line the wallets of the military-industrial complex.
No.
No.
Whattaboutism aside, a lot of our military spending is also 'gifts for foreigners' that doesn't actually make us safer.
calico
Member
It is not whataboutism to state that your desire to fund additional child care etc. does not have to come from military spending. In fact it is necessary to expose it as a false dichotomy. All expenditure is related by nature of how budgeting works and we do not have to choose between only those two things.
If we concluded that additional child care is more important than maintaining military spending, it would be reasonable to then consider if there is expenditure less important than either which could be cut instead in order to allow the funding of both of the more important things.
I'm not sure that's the case here. Given you acknowledge the weapons as a threat, is there not a national benefit in removing that threat? Or is your position that the military action has increased the overall threat?
LimanimaPT
Member
At the end of the day, humanity is just sad and a cancer on this planet.
Similar threads
- Locked