IRAN Was No Match Against U.S. Firepower in 1988. The Same Applies Today.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
of Iran is no match for us, or any country in the ME, why are we killing them non stop for 40years...

If they are no match then they are not a threat so we don't have to go war. Oh wait, war is the only answer.

a reply to: dfnj2015


yea, Trump's doesn't want conflict by killing a foreign general along with Iraqis involved.

what about those dead Iraqis who got killed from our bombs?

more pertinent question, Iran is an enemy yet Iraq welcomed him and we're actively working alongside them.

originally posted by: odzeandennz
a reply to: dfnj2015


yea, Trump's doesn't want conflict by killing a foreign general along with Iraqis involved.

what about those dead Iraqis who got killed from our bombs?

more pertinent question, Iran is an enemy yet Iraq welcomed him and we're actively working alongside them.

Wait , what ?

Ok...wth was that???? Lol! Sadaam was a CIA asset...until he wasnt. We have been making a right mess of the ME for a looooong time.


a reply to: odzeandennz

originally posted by: frenchfries
a reply to: carewemust

nothing , he already has my approval his poster above my bed and a Q tatooed on my chest ( ). But I don't like war. WWIII even less. But look at some history , it's all about keeping the populus busy with war. People need to stand up understand that democrats , reps all the same sauce. Although i think reps are in many ways the better choice for enslavement.

Tired of the warmongering too, but in reality , has there really been peace in the middle east at any point in the last 2000 years?

I dont think there is one patch of dirt or sand on this planet that hasn't had bloodshed over it.

Sad reality

A cake walk?
A piece of cake... A walk in the park?
War is neither of those things.

a reply to: carewemust

Neither Iraq or Afghanistan were a match for the technological might of the US military but look what happened there , Iran has the capability to give you a bloody nose and cause you problems for decades to come plus unite even more people against the mighty usa.

And we're not going to invade Iran and engage in hand-to-hand combat.

Are you Donald Rumsfeld ?
His predictions were inadequate too.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: daskakik
I'll change it from "conventional" to "military".

But if the terrorists don't engage in a "military" war then what difference does it make if the US has the more powerful military?

The US will now play the part the british did with them, calling the other side cowards for not fighting by the rules.

IRAN Was No Match Against U.S. Firepower in 1988.

Correct, their commercial airliners are no match for our missiles.

Iran Air flight 655

Iran Air flight 655, flight of an Iranian airliner that was shot down by the missile cruiser USS Vincennes on July 3, 1988, over the Strait of Hormuz, killing all 290 people on board. The passenger plane, which was in Iranian airspace, had been incorrectly identified as a fighter jet.

Oops.

I guess neither are their cultural sites.

a reply to: carewemust

Iran doesn't need "firepower", it practices asymmetric warfare.

I'm more afraid of 10 suicide bombers walking into sports venues across the country than I am of 100 Iranian tanks.

I think we know that Iran is no match for the US military.

However, Iran can afford (and will probably welcome) a trade in death and destruction knowing that its impact is magnified.

After knocking off the General and Iran abandoning the 2015 nuclear deal the prospect of war is much greater. The only question is who and when. It will either be us or the IDF and they will end once and for all the Persian threat. The cost will be measured in the millions of lives lost and damage that may take a century to repair. The outcomes might be an end to WMDs and a more peaceful world just in time to deal with the long term effects of global warming. You may or may not live to see it but it will happen at some point. My best,

Umm, strange America was greater than Vietnam and got whipped and also can't beat the Taliban.


Strange.

originally posted by: Willtell
Umm, strange America was greater than Vietnam and got whipped and also can't beat the Taliban.


Strange.

Not lost militarily, yet decentigrated by US/World politicians. Unpopular as such, the engagement was ended as a win to advertise endeavors against communism.

Most have no idea Vietnam was first concerned bailing out our French allies (similar to many have no clue the Korean war was a UN action).

Equally most have no historical context other than hindsight 40 plus years later using reflection blinded by the use of a thin amount of information.

Yes there were issues, yes it was not popular although multinational and conspiracies, yet view Vietnam today vs. what could have been.

mg

a reply to: carewemust

To the OP.

Abu Musa and the Greater and Lesser Tunbs. IMO, the only ground to be taken.

Such a move, will never let the straight to become under threat of closure again.

mg

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: carewemust

Iran doesn't need "firepower", it practices asymmetric warfare.

I'm more afraid of 10 suicide bombers walking into sports venues across the country than I am of 100 Iranian tanks.

You may be right. That is how cowards are fighting today.

originally posted by: carewemust
That is how cowards are fighting today.

Said the redcoats.

originally posted by: Notoneofyou
Tired of the warmongering too, but in reality , has there really been peace in the middle east at any point in the last 2000 years?

The only question is... how do we extricate ourselves without making things worse.

If you get impaled by a projectile, and find it sticking out of you, sometimes it is better not to just pull it our straight away, but have it surgically removed.

originally posted by: daskakik

originally posted by: carewemust
That is how cowards are fighting today.

Said the redcoats.

No. Interesting thoughts....yet

The thought of such was J. Wolfe or H. Ellis as
summarized "as a want of bravery" in the end, not "cowardly dogs" as Wolfe once proclaimed in error.

mg

a reply to: missed_gear
I've read guerilla tactics were used.

I'm sure some brit thought it was cowardly, even if there isn't a famous person quoted as saying it.