- Credits
- 149,851
TACO man child, head of the Board of Peace has once more started another war as a leader of another nation has been killed by USA actions.
We're in danger folks.
We're in danger folks.
US-Israeli strikes on Iran Situation
-
Thread started by Demon_Skeith
- Credits
- 149,851
Honestly since we're really into this don't give a shit situation, wouldn't mind seeing NK get some love.
But seriously, there are rules, Trump broke the rules, and now we're fucked for years to come.
But seriously, there are rules, Trump broke the rules, and now we're fucked for years to come.
- Credits
- 18,345
Yep this orange stain will be in the history books and not for good reasons lol. Well that's only if the whole system doesn't crumble and the world doesn't end, also depends on who'll be in office in the future.
A Kuwaiti Air Force F/A-18C Hornet shot down 3 US F-15E strike eagles with close range Sidewinder Aim 9 analysis video by former F-14 Rio:
Incompetence from the Kuwaiti pilot there though wonder why didn't the eagle pilots execute defensive maneuvers immediately after the lock and flared the Aim 9x, also they could have hailed the Kuwaiti pilot via the radio to stop the attack.
Incompetence from the Kuwaiti pilot there though wonder why didn't the eagle pilots execute defensive maneuvers immediately after the lock and flared the Aim 9x, also they could have hailed the Kuwaiti pilot via the radio to stop the attack.
- Credits
- 52,843
Hopefully, the Iran war ends soon, so not as many people will get injured and killed because of this war.
That would be for the best. But I doubt it. Trump wants this war and he is "enjoying" it. and congress is powerless to stop him. Trump sent 2 US aircraft carriers there, even one is more than enough to force Iran into submission. And the CIA is busy arming the Kurdish forces to execute an uprising within Iran, more chaos. F/A - 18 hornet pilots onboard the carriers are super busy flying. 140+ US Fighter Jets and 200 Idf fighter jets.
Last edited:
Read from CNN:
That figure is a low-end estimate and does not include the build-up costs of moving assets into place ahead of the operation's start on Feb. 28.
The estimate was first reported by The New York Times.
Sen. Chris Coons, the top Democrat on the Senate subcommittee that handles defense appropriations, told reporters Wednesday: "I expect that the total operating number is significantly above that."
He said it would be a "fair guess" that the war's daily cost exceeds $1.5 billion, though it varies day-to-day depending on military operations. The cost of replacing the munitions that have been used in the war is probably "already well beyond $10 billion," he said.
The Delaware senator said he expects the Pentagon to ask lawmakers to pass a supplemental funding package for the Iran war. He did not specify how much money he expects the administration to request.
"Before I would even begin considering something like that, they owe us an accounting of how much has been expended," said Coons. "We did have some lengthy exchanges about that yesterday. I am not satisfied with the information I've got so far."
First week of Iran war cost U.S. about $11.3 billion, Pentagon tells lawmakers
Military officials told members of Congress in a briefing this week that the U.S.'s war with Iran cost around $11.3 billion in roughly its first week, according to sources familiar with the meeting.That figure is a low-end estimate and does not include the build-up costs of moving assets into place ahead of the operation's start on Feb. 28.
The estimate was first reported by The New York Times.
Sen. Chris Coons, the top Democrat on the Senate subcommittee that handles defense appropriations, told reporters Wednesday: "I expect that the total operating number is significantly above that."
He said it would be a "fair guess" that the war's daily cost exceeds $1.5 billion, though it varies day-to-day depending on military operations. The cost of replacing the munitions that have been used in the war is probably "already well beyond $10 billion," he said.
The Delaware senator said he expects the Pentagon to ask lawmakers to pass a supplemental funding package for the Iran war. He did not specify how much money he expects the administration to request.
"Before I would even begin considering something like that, they owe us an accounting of how much has been expended," said Coons. "We did have some lengthy exchanges about that yesterday. I am not satisfied with the information I've got so far."
- Credits
- 149,851
We're fucked, all we had to do was not mess with them, leave them be in their sand box and everything be peachy.
But nope, big daddy orange taco who doesn't know what day of the week it is, had to go attack based on the words of non-military people and now a crucial oil shipping passage is blocked and I'm seeing gas hit $4 in my area.
Seriously, how much more BS must happen before Trump is dragged from the White House? What freaking hold does this dementia man hold on everyone that they don't arrest him? What is spiked in our water source that people still look at Trump's actions and find it to be as good as sliced bread?
I cannot fathom anything going on in our government right now, am I too sensible?
But nope, big daddy orange taco who doesn't know what day of the week it is, had to go attack based on the words of non-military people and now a crucial oil shipping passage is blocked and I'm seeing gas hit $4 in my area.
Seriously, how much more BS must happen before Trump is dragged from the White House? What freaking hold does this dementia man hold on everyone that they don't arrest him? What is spiked in our water source that people still look at Trump's actions and find it to be as good as sliced bread?
I cannot fathom anything going on in our government right now, am I too sensible?
- Credits
- 149,851
Read another article on the war, from the guardian:
In its current phase, the Israeli-US war against Iran and its proxies has become a proving ground for two competing concepts of military escalation, each of which threatens to become a trap.
On one side, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu have failed thus far in their ill-defined and shifting strategic aims. Despite killing Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, and other key leaders in the opening salvo of the campaign, the clerical regime remains and Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium is unsecured. Airstrikes are intensifying and hitting a greater number of targets.
Tehran’s counter is a “horizontal escalation”, one long prepared by the regime, that is intended to widen the conflict geographically, with strikes on the Gulf states, and also in terms of the costs to Washington and the global economy, not least in energy supplies.
Experts point in particular to the risks of an escalation trap – whereby the attacker is drawn into an ever more complex, protracted and costly conflict than envisaged at the outset – from a widening disparity in the US-Israeli campaign between the tactical and strategic level. Put simply, the tactical level involves specific military tasks – such as airstrikes hitting their intended targets – where the campaign has been successful. The strategic level defines whether the political and national security aims of the war are being achieved and at what cost.
“The are several stages to the escalation trap,” said Robert Pape, a US historian who has studied the limitation of air power and has advised a number of US administrations.
“What we saw with the initial attack was tactically almost 100% success,” he said. “The problem is that when that doesn’t lead to strategic success … you get to second stage of the trap.
“The attacker still has escalation dominance, so there is a doubling down, which then moves up the escalation ladder and that still does not lead to strategic success. Then you reach stage three, which is the real crisis, where you are contemplating far riskier options. I would say we are stage two, and on on the cusp of stage three.”
He said the Trump administration had become mesmerised by the initial attack and had an “illusion of control” based on the accuracy of its weapons. All of this has pushed Tehran towards its own model of escalation, one with a far wider global economic and political impact, Pape and other critics say.
By targeting the Gulf states and shipping in the strait of Hormuz, Iran has demonstrated it can escalate the costs of the war for Washington far beyond its military capabilities to meaningfully counter the US-Israeli attack directly.
Iran’s strikes “are designed to create wedges between the US and the Gulf states by in turn creating wedges between the Gulf states and their societies,” Pape said.
“They are forcing the publics in the Gulf to ask: ‘Why are we paying the price of a war that appears driven by expansionist Israeli policies?’”
“A some point, I assume there will be an exit ramp, but I could imagine the escalation reaching levels we really wouldn’t have contemplated even a month ago … troops on the ground, going after basic infrastructure, taking over parts of Iran, working with Kurdish or other ethnic groups. All of that is escalatory in a different way.
“But that could trigger reactions on the Iranian side, and then who knows what happens. I wouldn’t be shocked if we saw terrorist attacks against soft targets, soft, quote-unquote, American targets. If that were to happen, whether it was directed by Iran or not, who knows how the president then reacts?
“But at this point, what we should fear is that the escalatory ladder is the one that Trump is most comfortable on, because I don’t think the Iranians are going make life any easier for him. I don’t think they’re going to offer him the victory on a platter that he wants and say: ‘Okay, we stop shooting.’”
“And the risks of escalation spiral from there. The war in Vietnam took years to evolve into a middle-sized war … The situation in Iran might follow a similar trajectory.”
The escalation trap: how the Iran war could become more costly and complex
In its current phase, the Israeli-US war against Iran and its proxies has become a proving ground for two competing concepts of military escalation, each of which threatens to become a trap.
On one side, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu have failed thus far in their ill-defined and shifting strategic aims. Despite killing Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, and other key leaders in the opening salvo of the campaign, the clerical regime remains and Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium is unsecured. Airstrikes are intensifying and hitting a greater number of targets.
Tehran’s counter is a “horizontal escalation”, one long prepared by the regime, that is intended to widen the conflict geographically, with strikes on the Gulf states, and also in terms of the costs to Washington and the global economy, not least in energy supplies.
Experts point in particular to the risks of an escalation trap – whereby the attacker is drawn into an ever more complex, protracted and costly conflict than envisaged at the outset – from a widening disparity in the US-Israeli campaign between the tactical and strategic level. Put simply, the tactical level involves specific military tasks – such as airstrikes hitting their intended targets – where the campaign has been successful. The strategic level defines whether the political and national security aims of the war are being achieved and at what cost.
“The are several stages to the escalation trap,” said Robert Pape, a US historian who has studied the limitation of air power and has advised a number of US administrations.
“What we saw with the initial attack was tactically almost 100% success,” he said. “The problem is that when that doesn’t lead to strategic success … you get to second stage of the trap.
“The attacker still has escalation dominance, so there is a doubling down, which then moves up the escalation ladder and that still does not lead to strategic success. Then you reach stage three, which is the real crisis, where you are contemplating far riskier options. I would say we are stage two, and on on the cusp of stage three.”
He said the Trump administration had become mesmerised by the initial attack and had an “illusion of control” based on the accuracy of its weapons. All of this has pushed Tehran towards its own model of escalation, one with a far wider global economic and political impact, Pape and other critics say.
By targeting the Gulf states and shipping in the strait of Hormuz, Iran has demonstrated it can escalate the costs of the war for Washington far beyond its military capabilities to meaningfully counter the US-Israeli attack directly.
Iran’s strikes “are designed to create wedges between the US and the Gulf states by in turn creating wedges between the Gulf states and their societies,” Pape said.
“They are forcing the publics in the Gulf to ask: ‘Why are we paying the price of a war that appears driven by expansionist Israeli policies?’”
“A some point, I assume there will be an exit ramp, but I could imagine the escalation reaching levels we really wouldn’t have contemplated even a month ago … troops on the ground, going after basic infrastructure, taking over parts of Iran, working with Kurdish or other ethnic groups. All of that is escalatory in a different way.
“But that could trigger reactions on the Iranian side, and then who knows what happens. I wouldn’t be shocked if we saw terrorist attacks against soft targets, soft, quote-unquote, American targets. If that were to happen, whether it was directed by Iran or not, who knows how the president then reacts?
“But at this point, what we should fear is that the escalatory ladder is the one that Trump is most comfortable on, because I don’t think the Iranians are going make life any easier for him. I don’t think they’re going to offer him the victory on a platter that he wants and say: ‘Okay, we stop shooting.’”
“And the risks of escalation spiral from there. The war in Vietnam took years to evolve into a middle-sized war … The situation in Iran might follow a similar trajectory.”