General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat will the world do when the US and Israel nuke Iran?
Asking for a planet.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
ForgedCrank
(3,104 posts)going to nuke anyone as long as Iran doesn't have such a weapon.
Walleye
(44,898 posts)
JHB
(38,232 posts)...and I wouldn't rule out open mutiny, either.
Everything he's done so far has been below a certain threshold. Remember all the generals and admirals seething at Kegsbreath's scold-session?
malaise
(296,275 posts)Ban them for everyone
hlthe2b
(114,015 posts)Yet, not a comment about N. Korea having nukes. At all.
Still, the deterrence factor is something we tend to ignore. Had Ukraine not been forced to give theirs up by very foolish American and some European forces who promised to protect them in exchange, they might not be in a now 4-year plus war with Russia.
malaise
(296,275 posts)Ban all nukes
ForgedCrank
(3,104 posts)you suggest we ban them? Make a law or treaty?
I guess the entire planet would all agree and then actually abide by it?
gab13by13
(32,360 posts)When Israel blows up a nuclear power plant it will have the same consequence of using a nuke.
I am positive that Iran has made plans to respond in kind if Israel blows up one of its nuclear plants.
By the bye, anything that Israel does in this war we own it.
Krasnov has zero say when this war will end, Israel has troops in southern Lebanon looking to expand its territory, we own that.
Isreal will not stop until it owns Gaza, the West bank and a part of Lebanon.
You may have missed it, yesterday Krasnov said the invasion was about taking Iran's oil, not about keeping it from getting a nuke.
malaise
(296,275 posts)Rec
moonscape
(5,732 posts)‘… a part of Lebanon’ - I think they want it all.
They are using Hezbollah as an excuse to bomb civilians, order the displacement of 20% of it’s population. It’s akin to a foreign country telling 70 million Americans to leave their homes because the bombing will begin. Sometimes it’s with barely enough time to run out the door.
But it’s worse. Lebanon is a small, more densely populated country. Where are they all supposed to go? They are in tents, shelters, on the streets, in cars, at friends/relatives, while their homes are destroyed.
How the hell is the world allowing this? They are openly saying they intend to take part of the country, flatten it, an area proportionately the size of CA/AZ/NM to the United States. Then they’ll continue in Beirut where they’ve been bombing,
All this land grab by, and enabled by, super powers is outrageous!
T has his own shopping list.
Scrivener7
(59,540 posts)
OC375
(967 posts)Same as anyone in any horrific situation. You don’t know til it’s tested.
AnnaLee
(1,395 posts)He stopped just a hair short of nuking Minnesota.
BeyondGeography
(41,111 posts)But to me it feels if we get through four years of Trump without a nuke it’s a win.
malaise
(296,275 posts)
sop
(18,682 posts)"Tactical nuclear weapons are low-yield, short-range nuclear devices intended for use on the battlefield to destroy specific targets, such as troops or installations, rather than whole cities."
purpose would we use nuclear weapons against a nation that is all but effectively neutered at this point?
What you should be actually worried about is the deployment of ground troops and the level of ecological terror that Iranians may unleash, similar to what Iraq did to the oil wells a couple of decades ago. They are already actively engaged in such behavior by lashing out at global energy stability. When we deploy ground troop, and yes it will happen sooner or later, it'll be the same old war via sabotage and hit-n-run warfare by pockets of resistance who are bent on doing as much of any kind of damage that they can.
Deployment of ground troops, regardless of what anyone will say publicly, is almost always required in order to actually secure objectives. In this case, it will be hunting for enriched materials for nuclear weapons, and remaining stockpiles of missiles and drone weapons that Iran will continue to use to terrorize the region as long as they have them.
Being disgusted with Trump is one thing that we may all share, but let's not forget who the Iranians really are and what they do.
Wednesdays
(22,641 posts)
ForgedCrank
(3,104 posts)been 6 thousand sorties flown and what they called a navy no longer exists, yet you want to believe Chinese and other media gossip offerings and the predictions of CNN talking heads? Preposterous. And much of the info in those DU posts has already been proven false.
They have shot down 2, 50 year-old aircraft in 5 weeks, the best of which is operating a 20 year-old radar system and legacy EPAWSS. In the end, we'll lose more troops and equipment to accidents than we will at the hands of what's left if the Iranian military.
So yes, effectively neutered. No one is under any illusions (well most of us anyway) that fighting a war can be done without casualty, regardless of the opponent. But to suggest that they are a serious threat to the operational goals is outright laughable at this point. Oh wait, they must be waiting for just the right moment to stop all of the destruction? Please. The only thing the Iranians are capable of at this point is the same thing they started with, and that is scattered terrorism, which further supports the idea that what is happening needed to happen a very long time ago. This was a Democratic party foundational position until very recently for some reason.
I am sorry that it bothers you, but we aren't losing. An occasional lucky shot does not a viable enemy make.
We can all equally despise Trump, but it makes no sense whatsoever to take a position that defies reality.
EX500rider
(12,598 posts)ForgedCrank
(3,104 posts)been keeping close tabs on ops, but that number doesn't surprise me in the least and only further reinforces my point. I appreciate the updated info.
I understand the outrage over war and I share everyone's disgust with the raw realities of it, but the position some are taking is starting to wear me thin is all. Hell, we have people here posting garbage from Iranian state media and obvious AI fakes etc. It's almost as if many are rooting for the terrorists just out of spite and I find that just as distasteful as the war itself. Sometimes it's enough to make me question my associations and I feel like I am losing my party. Geez man, there's plenty of real reasons to be disgusted by Trump, we don't need to be making crap up and spreading false propaganda and gossip. When I say something, I prefer that people to actually believe me rather than quietly thinking "is this more bullshit he read on some kook twitter post again?".
Bottom line is that Iran is certainly dangerous in it's own way, but not a serious threat to operational goals. They are most certainly not a contender that can face the might of the American military. If you give enough people a box or rocks and a sligshot and put them in the right spot, eventually one of them will hit a helo rotor just right and bring it down. That doesn't make them a formidable military threat.
Ferryboat
(1,265 posts)Every war game ends the same about 10 days after first strike. That shit never stays in the neighborhood.
Baitball Blogger
(52,394 posts)will not sanction this war. Which means Trump has a month to finish what he started.
If he nukes Iran without Congress' approval, there is not better reason to 25th him.
Ponietz
(4,343 posts)They’re hand-in-hand with China in leading diplomatic efforts. But an undeclared war already exists with the Taliban, and the ceasefire with India is tenuous at best. Armed conflict on 3 borders is extremely destabilizing. Pakistan lurches from one domestic emergency to another and doesn’t have the resources to care for its own people. Iran would love to have a Pakistani nuke and, sooner or later, Sunnis and Shiites will ally against the larger threat. It’s difficult to imagine a future where Pakistan’s nukes aren’t in play.
gab13by13
(32,360 posts)Only 1 of the 9 has ever used a nuke, so my bet is on the one who used it before.
walkingman
(10,891 posts)Kid Berwyn
(24,439 posts)
malaise
(296,275 posts)Words can tell a story, but it’s pictures that will make you believe in it. Such is the power of a photograph; the ability to strip away illusions, to illuminate something hidden, and sometimes force us to accept unpalatable truths. When it comes to scandal, seeing is believing – occasionally even to the point that a picture changes the course of history.
How might life have been different for Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor had he not been photographed clutching the midriff of the 17-year-old girl he would later claim he had never met? Without this haunting triptych of the former prince, the late Virginia Giuffre and Jeffrey Epstein’s fixer, Ghislaine Maxwell, hovering in the background, there would have been nothing physical to connect the then prince with a trafficking victim. Though for years Andrew’s friends insisted that the photograph must have been doctored, buried within the Epstein files recently released by the US Department of Justice is a note from Maxwell that appears to confirm it is real.
——-
Bestie Jeffrey is not going away
cynical_idealist
(545 posts)
thought crime
(1,592 posts)And it's off to the races.
Initech
(108,815 posts)And sent to meet Satan. Along with their minions, helpers and enablers. 
bucolic_frolic
(55,217 posts)
Bayard
(29,763 posts)trump is the guy that wanted to nuke a hurricane.
JI7
(93,648 posts)would see it as making it difficult to get the oil which he thinks belongs to him.
BeneteauBum
(525 posts)Let’s hope not. It would be opening Pandora’s box. In addition, it would either be the immediate end of the Trump regime or the permanent demise of our democracy.
Peace ☮️