I am literally in the Army....
I mean yes. Welcome to being in the military.
Destroy the 4 refineries and tell them if they wanna play around and fuck around, they will find out
Middle East Running Iranian threat news and discussion thread
- Thread starter GoldRanger
- Start date
@Spartan303 looks like your heart to heart with hin didn't stick. This guy is still a warhawk just so he can feel fucking important.
Zachowon. I'm gonna be honest with you. Wanting war just so you, personally, can feel fucking important is disgusting, abhorrent, and pathetic. I have no respect left for you as a human being.
I really liked the last time Douglas MacGregor was on Tucker.
Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)
Numbers are important. But they have to be used properly to matter. Again, the whole thing is numbers alone do not win...
www.the-sietch.com
Armchair General's DonbAss Derailed Discussion Thread (Topics Include History, Traps, and the Ongoing Slavic Civil War plus much much more)
Don't worry. The highly professional and loyal Armed Forces of Belarus and their widely popular Chief Executive Potato will ensure their safety.
www.the-sietch.com
He's built up a lot of credibility with me I must say and I want to thank everyone on this forum whose shared his insight with me on this forum. It really helped guide me in figuring out trustworthy sources and commentary over these past couple years.
Eh, Zach isn't the one who is trying to support Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthi's against Israel, nor is Zach responsible for the Ayatollah and IRGC being fucking islamist cunts who are helping multiple of our enemies. The Ayatollah and IRGC are direct enemies of the US and have been for a long time, despite Obama wanting to try to appease them with the nuke deal.
And dealing with Iran wouldn't be a war/ground invasion, it would just be sinking their navy and blowing apart their very limited refining capacity.
Maybe even blowing their main reactor complex, to limit their nuclear abilities, but that may be something we leave to Israel instead of US forces.
The only rub is that Iran may already have functional nukes and did the testing in North Korea to hide their own bomb as one of Kim's tests.
It isn't solely to feel important.
That was me being a little uppity and stuff about it.
Yes are there times u may feel that way?
Sure.
But that isn't the sole reason why I want war.
I want war because it is the fundamental thing that will always exist in the world.
I want war because war is inevitable, and that if we strive to push ourselves away we just make it more likely to come around and hit us hard like it has in the past.
War is fundamental to the being of the US and the world
LMAO. This is in fact the official line of the Kremlin, both now and 50 years ago. They sure would be wars in this "peace", but east simping western malcontents would no longer care nor be told to care, so for them the war may as well not exist.
The "peace" would in fact resemble the post-soviet situation in Caucasus.
How many western peaceniks protested about these specific wars that no western power took part in?
My point exactly. For them, this may as well be peace, because even if there are actual major wars with tanks and shit, they aren't being emotionally squeezed to care about them, being the bloody NPCs that they are.
Peacenik bullshit is not for everyone, it's for gullible westerners and free countries that allow such bullshit to be spread in the name of higher ideals.
There is merit to the debate over whether we should be involved in a war with Iran.
That's a fair discussion with good points on each side.
Zach, on the other hand, has outright said that he wants war because it'll make him feel important, because he spends his time sitting at a base.
That is a position for which I hold absolutely zero respect.
Zach is an example of someone who understands humanity will never be without war, and that the US doesn't get to opt out of geopolitics, just because some Libertarian types want to stick their heads in the sand. However, he's also an example of why there is such a disconnect between military and civilian reasoning on many foreign policy vs domestic policy arguments.
It's a flaw of the military recruiting PR and indoc that it so drastically shifts the mindset of the person that few of them seem to understand the world from the civilian point of view anymore.
There is an argument to be had about war being inevitable, and then there is wanting to have an unnecessary ground war because the Army is still hurting for pride and experience compared to the Navy and Air Force.
And that 'Army first, other service second, US public third' mindset is a real problem with that branch, which is still upset the Air Force is a separate branch and get the good PR and job conditions compared to grunts and their assistants. Don't even mention the Navy or Marine PR around the Army either, it's their biggest sore spot.
However, the fact is the only reasons the conflicts are going as they are now is because the outside world has seen what happened to the US after Hillary's shitfit after 2016 essentially burned the social and economic house down to get at Trump, including the Wu Flu shit.
The illegit gov in DC that stole the 2020 election has rendered a lot of loyalty to the system as loyalty to a 'lesser evil' of internal corruption over foreign adversaries. We are a banana republic that exports Hollywood and Raytheon, but some still want to cling to the pride of the US military as a holdout while all but SCOTUS on the civie side is effectively FUBAR.
That doesn't change that the old blood feuds, old wounds, and poor decisions by people who drew the maps of the ME after WW1 or who broke agreements made after the Berlin Wall fell. So we have a duality of culture in the US now; we are a banana republic, but we are also still the least worst option globally, and the military is increasingly torn between worlds because they serve an illegit gov domestically, but our old enemies are still out there and are pushing to see how far they can go.
I also think Zach is betting on a war that requires direct US troops into a protracted fight, and that forces wartime conditions on the homefront in the unspoken reasoning that goes with that line of logic, to unite people regardless of the corruption in DC, and not caring who wins in 2024 in the US because not even Trump could change the course things are on if it reaches that point.
I think Zach would be better off just getting more open source intel bits to back up his arguments, and to stop pretending the civie political side doesn't matter, just because of the stupid illusion the DoD has of being non-political actors.
I'm personally mostly ok with war now because the CCP poacher fleets, fuckheads like the Ayatollah+friends, Kim's Nork feifdom, and Russian servile/mafiaoso mentality are combined the biggest threat to the Earth's biosphere with their environmental destruction and desire for old empires/glorious martyrdom, never mind US political insterests.
It may come a time we need to have it all out and deal with our enemies in a direct, kenetic fashion; but it needs to be on our terms as a nation and civilization, not because the US Army is jealous of the other service's PR.
One of many reasons.
Interbranch rivalry.
In the end we will fight and die next to Sailor, Airman, Marine all the same.
You are somewhat right bout why I want war.
Because it is inevitable, but because it also allows us to have the best trained and prepared military in thr world
Peacetime armies are when the US has always been at its weakest.
Pre ww2, pre ww1....post Vietnam until Reagan.
What is going on currently.
Dems seem to think you downsize the military during peace allows for more domestic programs, but fails to realize a massive military is needed in this day and age.
And the Army has a role to play. Mainly a logistics one. It and the AF are the biggest logistics trains on land, with the Mavy the biggest ay sea.
A war will help keep America as the Hegmon.
Of we let our adversaries do what thay want, you sign away any good will our allies may have for us.
We should be able to remain hegemon without needing a war to accomplish it/retain the title, if our deterrents are intact.
And your reasoning effectively wants the US to always be at war, so there is never a peace-times spindown.
There is a difference between wanting to maintain a strong military in peace time as a deterrent, and wanting perpetual large scale conflict because you view peace as a threat to military strength.
Because you talk a lot about how the US 'needs a war' to regain/maintain our strength, but not at all about what the peace after that looks like.
This is why the US military keeps 'winning the war, but losing the peace'; the mentality of many in the DoD like you seem to view peace as a bad thing, and 'peace-time military' as bad word.
I very much disagree that it's a flaw. Its necessary. We've succeeded in the west by making 'kill them all' an outlandish solution that no one thinks of first. You need a fair bit of indoctrination to get beyond that, and it has costs. This is then tempered in the front lines by them quickly realizing that war is hell. But for non-frontline soldiers? Those who haven't seen combat? war remains glorious, and there's no real solution to this. So I'd call it bad, but not a flaw. Flaws can be fixed, this can't be.
Also, I have the same opinion I did of war with Iran that I did in 2020: they clearly want war with us, so we are at war, call it an actual war or not. I don't want to invade. I just think that fucking their shit up is warranted. I don't think that doing so here is a good idea. This not becoming a huge war means the US and Israel win. All we need to do is keep out other interested parties, and Israel will fuck the shit outta Hamas. We just need to run interference for them diplomatically and not start another war nearby, but threaten to a lot.
Interesting point, about how the taboo against 'kill them all' thinking in the west has made those who actually become military personnel much different than the average civies once indoc is finished.
Of course, I'd also point out that the military itself has tried to shift away from bloody minded thinking with the focus on precision guided munitions, drones, and the counter-insurgency vs near-peer/peer fights needed different mindsets.
Maybe a willing to be bloody minded again, and willing to escalate before our enemies do, may be the only deterrent we have left, if DC was actually willing to use it.
Iran does think it is at war with the US, and I'm not sure kicking the can down the road again, instead of just doing a Preying Mantis 2.0 and wrecking Iran's Navy and oil infrastructure, is viable anymore.
I think we are reaching a point where it's about choosing war on our terms, instead of our enemies, instead of attempting to avoid direct confrontations with Iran and it's backers.
Honestly, if we kick the can down the road a year, that's good enough. Right now, we want Israel alone in the thunderdome with Hamas. That's a won battle.
Also, we just hit them with such a huge hit, they would have preferred we destroy a city, when Trump killed Sulemani.
All drones and the like are solutions to requiring less indoc, but that has the issue with people thinking that "war is fun" or other such bullshit.
I find myself somewhat with @Abhorsen on this one.
I somewhat like the Ukraine style approach on this one. Let Israel fuck shit up, keep them supplied and funded. Make loud and credible threats to Iran.
Personally I don't think eventual war with Iran is avoidable, but I'm also for taking our time to prepare properly and let Israel do their thing for now.
For now. If Iran goes too far we'll have to go to all out war. And as Ab points out, even if I don't want war (I very much do not want war,) it's not always our choice. As far as Iran is concerned, we're going to be having a war.
But also, we need our people to get behind it and support it too, and for many of them, that's not going to happen until Iran does something like try to invade Israel directly or murders a bunch of civilians.
It's just a matter of time until we're in a full blown boots on ground war with Iran, I think.
Just like you have peace in Iraq and Afganistan?
yes,you could win war but you would lost peace. Do not worth your efforts,becouse you woul get another islamic hellhole.
I don't think we'll see conventional ground forces moved into Iran; it'd be counter-productive actually to the end goal of removing the IRGC and Ayatollah if we give them US troops attempting to occupy parts of the nation.
We can blow the ever loving shit out of the IRGC's forces and political arm without needing to put anything other than maybe special forces raids and SAR for downed pilots. The secular Iranian populace can sort it's own affairs out if we give them an opening, and that nation is one of the oldest cultures in the world. Not arrogant enough to think the US can achieve anything positive by trying to occupy any real part of the Iranian mainland, rather than letting the culture handle it's own affairs without the IRGC and Ayatollah getting in the way.
At most I could see the US taking control of Kharg Island to keep the refineries intact to avoid an environmental catastrophe, if limited strikes don't put it out of action.
I honestly don't think a full on war with Iran is inevitable. It's on a weird timetable with Khamenei dying of old age (he's 84, so it's quite possible). If he dies? And the next mullah doesn't hate the US first (quite possible, remember there have to quite a lot of high level people who like the US for Khamenei to need to get in their way and shut it down), we could end up with someone reasonable we can deal with.
Honestly, if I had a choice, I would ally with Iran a 1000 times over the Saudis. Iran is basically a normal country that just happens to have it's leadership hate us. It has the closest thing to an actual democracy in the Middle East outside of Israel. The people there are not in a death cult, outside of the top leadership.
The issue is going to be Iran's relationship with Israel. At best, you can get 2 out of the 3 regional Middle East powers, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Iran. But you don't always get 2.
You're probably right, the boots on the ground would likely be special forces gathering intelligence and providing targets.
Let's put it this way.
War in general is inevitable.
China will go for Taiwan.
Russia will go after more if Ukraine does fall, and potentially even if it doesn't.
Iran will get greedy, and the possibility of a large scale invasion from Nirth Korea is always possible.
The only way to avoid a war is for the US to no longer be Hegemon.
That is when our major adversaries, who will still hate us, would begin to back off thier pressure and use it as a step forward to furthering thier hold on things.
War in general is inevitable.
China will go for Taiwan.
Russia will go after more if Ukraine does fall, and potentially even if it doesn't.
Iran will get greedy, and the possibility of a large scale invasion from Nirth Korea is always possible.
The only way to avoid a war is for the US to no longer be Hegemon.
That is when our major adversaries, who will still hate us, would begin to back off thier pressure and use it as a step forward to furthering thier hold on things.
The whole point of existence of IRGC with all its money and separate armed forces is to prevent such normalization. But we're talking civil war here, one resulting in total loss by IRGC and aligned forces. Its foreign adventures are only a side gig for them, their main job is to be, as the name implies the revolutionary guard, as in guarding the revolution.
Israel actually had great relations with Iran before the revolution. As soon as Iran stops being interested in islamic empire building by asserting to the Sunnis that they are better at it than the Sunni powers (plz convert), the old framework where secular Iran has plenty of need for allies against the backwards barbarian Sunni hordes encircling them would reassert itself.