That makes no sense. If Iran hit again then he can hit back with far greater force. It certainly looks to me that Iran fear and escalation and are trying to compromise here. It depends on if there are any US casualties but Iran losing their top military guy vs the US losing some equipment, who is the winner in that exchange?
Iran v US confrontation
- Thread starter 4bars
- Start date
That makes no sense. If Iran hit again then he can hit back with far greater force. It certainly looks to me that Iran fear and escalation and are trying to compromise here. It depends on if there are any US casualties but Iran losing their top military guy vs the US losing some equipment, who is the winner in that exchange?
According to MSNBC they think Iran deliberately missed their intended target. At the moment this seems like brinkmanship.
I could see Iran playing this trick on a country with a weaker military like one of the gulf states but it's much harder to see the benefits if they apply this to the US as 1) the US military can strike within 24 hours on multiple key sites inside Iran with unmatched precision and power with minimal risk of loss of life, 2) it would take Iran a lot longer to put enough pain on the US to counter such strikes, and 3) an absolutely insane narcissist controls the buttons to the US strike force. Iran knows that Trump is crazy enough to start another Middle East war if doing the opposite makes him look weak and/or hurts his ego and/or hurts his re-election chances.
One has to say that Iran is playing this very smartly if they decide to drawback after the missile attack. They haven't caused a loss of life (unlike Trump) while being able to save face to their power base and look like the more responsible party in the eyes of the global community in deciding not to escalate even more. Furthermore, they retain their full gamut of tactical options to wreak havoc on the US in the ME if needed.
An engine fire shouldn't be a problem.
Point being that Trump lets Iran retaliate with last nights hit because it was minimum impact to US and naturally he can’t help but mouth off in the press how he’s in charge of the situation now and he had Iran’s word on a truce of sorts.
Then Iran targets another US base, takes out more US equipment, maybe a few more casualties. Trump now in the position of desperate to prove that he was in control of the situation and that he didn’t get played on the international stage once again, if he retaliated he’s escalating and proven that he was never in control of the situation, if he lets it go he’s seen as weak.
why ? An engine fire is major problem, nobody has a clue what happened yet, Concorde , Manchester Disaster both engine fires.
I don't think Iran are going to hit them again though, could be wrong but any rational person can see that its a game they cannot win especially with a loose cannon like Trump in charge. The US just killed one of their top guys, the hierarchy in Iran will have twitchy arses right now.
I don't think that is the Iranian regime's main motivation (in other words, I don't think they are scared). I think Iran knows they have an opportunity to swing world opinion against the Trump administration and American involvement in the ME and that by not escalating further, their case becomes stronger on the diplomatic front.
Can't help but feel like this is basically true. Much like when Trump fired a few missles at that Russian airfield in Syria after a spat, which was conveniently evactuacted just before and back in operation the next day.
Iran had to respond to the assassination of its general & from the looks of it, they don’t want it to go any further. You’d like to think the grown ups on both sides (if there are any) will urge de-escalation & this doesn’t lead to all out war.
This is the one time I’m hoping Putin is actually interfering in US affairs & telling Donald (and Iran) playtime is over.
This is the one time I’m hoping Putin is actually interfering in US affairs & telling Donald (and Iran) playtime is over.
Engines do tend to fail after a missile strike to be fair...
The online flight trackers apparently showed it climbing to 7,300ft then nothing.
The online flight trackers apparently showed it climbing to 7,300ft then nothing.
Hopefully they're not as childish and don't see it as a 'game' to 'win'. It's that kind of egotistical boys with toys approach that causes escalation.
Iran don't want war, their aim will be to avoid a war whilst getting rid of US influence in the region which seems to be likely going forward. The US have done themselves no favours here, Trump may have in his election campaign though.
Think this is just the beginning of Iran’s response.
This is absolutely a game. And it's going to end in deescalation, a sit down and talk. Ultimately, the U.S. would have sacrificed its' strategic positioning in the ME (for various reasons including ISIS) for assassination of the General responsible for organising Iran's numerous forces and militias.
Was it worth it?
Was it worth it?
I think so too, I think Trump wants this "war", military contracts need to be fulfilled and it all starts with a new oil field found in Iran. This "War" wont last long but I do fear that we will see an uprising in groups such as ISIS, these are perfect recruitment opportunities for it.
I dotn quite get how people think this is all staged, Soleimani was a massive figure in Iran and probably more popular than Khamenei.
Iran have said they won't hand over the black box to Boeing.
Not suspicious at all.
Not suspicious at all.
Weapons contracts and the discovery of a massive new oil field, hell yeah its worth it, Trump followers lap up this "Hooo Haaaa" shit, he is also thinking of re election. Do you really think America's allies in the ME give a shit about Iraq or Iran when there is the possibility they will get richer?
How would shooting down a Ukrainian Passenger plane hit back at the US though?
America's whole economy depends on the petro-dollar, and that requires their presence and involvement in the region, under whatever guise.
If by discovery of new oil you mean the U.S going in and controlling Iranian fields, I highly doubt that kind of adventurism is what's on the cards.
It wouldnt but it would be highly damaging to them in their own country. Having said that from what I understand the missiles were being fired miles away from this aircraft so it's highly unlikely to have been anything related. Could be wrong though.
No not the US but their allies, especially Saudi Arabia would happily take control. Trump targeted the second most power full man in Iran for a reason, for a reaction. I am sure you are aware of the hostile relationship between Iran and Saudi.
Iran has played this well. If there are US casulties, the Iranians will say it's quid pro quo (their media is claiming 80 Americans dead). If there aren't US casulties and American forces leave Iraq they can claim they drove them away. If US forces stay in Iraq they can attack them using shia militias and claim it as local resistance unrelated to Iran, especially after the Iraqi parliament ordered the US to leave.
In these sorts of events it's about perceiving to win, rather than winning. Neither side wants a fullscale war, Iranian conventional military plus their infrastructure would be decimated, whereas the USA would never be able to to invade/hold Iran. Look back at the 2005 Hizbollah/Israel war where even on the last day of the conflict Hizbollah was still firing Rockets at Israel, the Israeli's with their overwhelming military might were unable to stop them.
Iran is 4 times the land mass of Iran, it's pretty homogenous in terms of it's ethnicity and religion (I accept that it does have ethnic differences but it's not the same social schisms Iraq had), opposition to the government has been successfully put down for over 40 years, so a lot of the population are loyal to the regime. It''s also largely surrounded by mountains. Pakistan has refused access to it's territory for any war, The south of Afghanistan is Taliban territory other than Herat where the government has long been loyal to Iran. Iraq has already asked the US to leave and I doubt Erdogan is about to let Turkey become a launching platform for a US invasion.
You can't bomb Iran into submission, they have this martyr complex, you can't really invade, other than via the sea which would be a disaster. Even if you did invade you definitely can't hold it, Iran has been successfully fighting unconventional wars in Yemen, Syria and Iraq, it also fought for a decade against Saddam literally throwing bodies under his military machine. What's Trump going to do? Nuke it?!
It's best for both sides to de-escalate right now. If America starts another war it can't win, it'll lose a lot more than Iran will. How long do you think the petrol pump states will put up with being targets of Iranian unconventional forces before they decide it doesn't make business sense to have a US military presence on their soil?
In these sorts of events it's about perceiving to win, rather than winning. Neither side wants a fullscale war, Iranian conventional military plus their infrastructure would be decimated, whereas the USA would never be able to to invade/hold Iran. Look back at the 2005 Hizbollah/Israel war where even on the last day of the conflict Hizbollah was still firing Rockets at Israel, the Israeli's with their overwhelming military might were unable to stop them.
Iran is 4 times the land mass of Iran, it's pretty homogenous in terms of it's ethnicity and religion (I accept that it does have ethnic differences but it's not the same social schisms Iraq had), opposition to the government has been successfully put down for over 40 years, so a lot of the population are loyal to the regime. It''s also largely surrounded by mountains. Pakistan has refused access to it's territory for any war, The south of Afghanistan is Taliban territory other than Herat where the government has long been loyal to Iran. Iraq has already asked the US to leave and I doubt Erdogan is about to let Turkey become a launching platform for a US invasion.
You can't bomb Iran into submission, they have this martyr complex, you can't really invade, other than via the sea which would be a disaster. Even if you did invade you definitely can't hold it, Iran has been successfully fighting unconventional wars in Yemen, Syria and Iraq, it also fought for a decade against Saddam literally throwing bodies under his military machine. What's Trump going to do? Nuke it?!
It's best for both sides to de-escalate right now. If America starts another war it can't win, it'll lose a lot more than Iran will. How long do you think the petrol pump states will put up with being targets of Iranian unconventional forces before they decide it doesn't make business sense to have a US military presence on their soil?
I don't think so either, these ballistic missiles are based on old soviet scud missiles, the ones from the previous Gulf war. They are surface to surface missiles and by all means Iran has done very well to develop them to go over 1,000KM even if there accuracy can be some what questionable. The chances of on of these hitting a plane is incredibly small, it would be a complete one off as these missiles take off vertically.
Unless the U.S goes and does it herself, it's just not possible as Saudi just doesn't have that capability.
It's difficult to be for certain why Trump took the decision that he did, but there are several possibilities, and for sure the reason is a geo-political one. Not just to simply cause a war.
It will be drones that Trump will deploy, hard to detect, incredibly effective and accurate. If they can take out the second most powerful man in Iran over an airport they can take out pretty much anyone day or night. It also gives his friends at the weapon manufactures the contracts they crave. Warfare has changed massively sine the last Gulf war.
Not a chance. Lets look at some facts.
1. KSA don't have the manpower to win a war in Yemen, against Iranian backed rebels.
2. KSA asked America to defend it against Iran.
3. KSA remained silent against a recent drone based bombing of oil fields, although it blamed Iran.
4. KSA has a significant shia population. There will be enough amongst them, loyal to Iran due to religious afilliations to create an insurgency in Saudi if they sided with Iran.
Iran has a huge landmass. Take a look at this;
That's 4 times the land mass of Iraq. Imagine the force required to keep a hold of that territory. Also it's mostly mountains, think to how difficult moving in Afghanistan is for NATO forces.
I think we will see how this pans out, I don't have as much faith that Trump would go to all this bother just to deescalate 2 weeks later, makes absolute no sense. Like every other war in the middle east it is about oil and military contracts and now the tech gap between the 2 militaries is bigger than ever.
I'm not denying the US capability to have total air dominance over Iran, that'll happen within a few weeks of war starting at most. I'm questioning it's overall effectiveness. Mullah Omar died of ill health reportedly in a hospital in Quetta, Pakistan - 11 or 12 years after the US started hunting him. He organised the resistance against them for a decade. Did taking out Saddam or other top baathists stop the resistance in Iraq? Do you think taking out an Ayatollah or ten is going to stop Iran?
Not a chance. Lets look at some facts.
1. KSA don't have the manpower to win a war in Yemen, against Iranian backed rebels.
2. KSA asked America to defend it against Iran.
3. KSA remained silent against a recent drone based bombing of oil fields, although it blamed Iran.
4. KSA has a significant shia population. There will be enough amongst them, loyal to Iran due to religious afilliations to create an insurgency in Saudi if they sided with Iran.
Iran has a huge landmass. Take a look at this;
That's 4 times the land mass of Iraq. Imagine the force required to keep a hold of that territory. Also it's mostly mountains, think to how difficult moving in Afghanistan is for NATO forces.
I am aware, but then why would Trump did what he did? His reasoning of taking out Soleimani? People are talking like this man was a nobody. The next few weeks will see how it pans out but you can say what you like about Trump but her usually does do what he says he is going to do.
Last edited:
Of course not, but does anything throughout recent history suggest that the warmongers in the American government think like you or I. We know these wars do nothing but recruit the radical fundamentalist groups, I'm sure they are already using the "murder" of Soleimani as propaganda. The 2 wars in Iraq and the 1 in Afghanistan really done very little to change much I agree but I honestly don't think that's of any concern or would stop another dick swinging war, I'm not suggesting this will be a "World War 3 scenario".
Not a chance. Lets look at some facts.
1. KSA don't have the manpower to win a war in Yemen, against Iranian backed rebels.
2. KSA asked America to defend it against Iran.
3. KSA remained silent against a recent drone based bombing of oil fields, although it blamed Iran.
4. KSA has a significant shia population. There will be enough amongst them, loyal to Iran due to religious afilliations to create an insurgency in Saudi if they sided with Iran.
Iran has a huge landmass. Take a look at this;
That's 4 times the land mass of Iraq. Imagine the force required to keep a hold of that territory. Also it's mostly mountains, think to how difficult moving in Afghanistan is for NATO forces.
Add the fact that Iran Geography would make it a nightmare for infantry operations. No one will be crazy enough to invade a country where parents are proud if their sons or daughters become martyrs.
Because he's been impeached and he's terrified that it's going to cost him the 2020 election. When America is at war, people vote for the incumbent President. More and more evidence is coming to light and it's likely that more impeachment articles are going to follow too. In that case, we're going to learn more and more about his corruption with new evidence backing it up. The Republican's will continue to protect him as best they can but eventually more and more swing voters who might have voted for him will be sick of the circus and either vote Democrat or stay at home. This is all a huge distraction from that.
This is a remarkably naive take on the situation. I’d like to know what ‘new oil field’ merited such a disruption in global politics.
There are planes landing and taking off at Teheran airport as we "speak" and most of the passengers were Iranians. Terrible coincidence and timing, but it's a dream come true for conspiracy theorists.
Oh I totally agree, but your agreeing with me that he wants a war?
Looks like a tempered response from Iran not to lose face, while at the same time not really risking open war with the US. Let’s hope that’s enough posturing at this time.
The same as any other war the US carried out in the ME, are you seriously saying none of them are about oil? Global politics isn't quite as complicated as its made out to be.