The Coming War with Iran

wannable alpha

Woodpecker
All this talk of Iran-US war seems to be a big nothing burger. Going on for last three years. That being said, if the U.S. military is allowed to operate without one hand tied behind its back it can make minced meat out of the whole country. But in today's PC world that ain't gonna happen. Carpet bombing like in WW2 would quickly destroy ISIS, Iran, NK or any other force standing up to the U.S.
 

Handsome Creepy Eel

Owl
Gold Member
Because carpet bombing worked out so well in Vietnam...

Just accept that there are limits to what the USA (or any other country) can do no matter how genocidal it gets.
 

It_is_my_time

Hummingbird
wannable alpha said:
All this talk of Iran-US war seems to be a big nothing burger. Going on for last three years. That being said, if the U.S. military is allowed to operate without one hand tied behind its back it can make minced meat out of the whole country. But in today's PC world that ain't gonna happen. Carpet bombing like in WW2 would quickly destroy ISIS, Iran, NK or any other force standing up to the U.S.
The USA is trying to put pressure in Iran's leadership to comply with their orders or step down. So far they have been able to thumb their nose at the USA. The USA doesn't want a war with Iran but at the same time the USA wants new leadership in Iran and economic punishment isn't doing the job. Iran just gets around the USA trade embargo by trading with China, Russia and Venezuela. Interesting, the USA tried to overthrow Venezuela's democratically elected leader, calls Russia and Putin "evil" and now is putting all blame on China for coronavirus.

As far as military head to head, the USA would have a lot more trouble with Iran than they did Iraq. Iran is far more advanced and we don't know what weapons they have purchased from Russia or China. It is unlikely we could do much but try to bomb Iran and they likely are well prepared for that, so that would do little to no good. If we try to go in on the ground the body bags would fill up instantly and people in the USA would be rightfully upset that their sons/friends/neighbors are dying in a war no one can explain and would be just in demanding we leave.

As for ISIS, they are not standing up to the USA. ISIS is funded and backed by the USA and used as a proxy military against the Assad regime in Syria. This is well documented and even admitted by our leaders. ISIS and Al Qaeda are USA puppets and do a lot of our dirty work in the Middle East so we don't have to send in our soldiers.
 

wannable alpha

Woodpecker
Handsome Creepy Eel said:
Because carpet bombing worked out so well in Vietnam...

Just accept that there are limits to what the USA (or any other country) can do no matter how genocidal it gets.
Didn't the North Vietnamese come to the negotiating table after the Dec 1972 bombing raids? Even after the war was over, the communist Vietnamese government hid up the casualties in order to present the image of a great victory to their people.

What if the USAF dropped a 1,000 MOABs on Iran? Basically a Dresden over every Iranian city, town and village as well as civilian and defense facilities.

Iran would retaliate with its conventional forces and proxies throughout the world. But American causalities would number in the tens of thousands, at the most a 100,000 while Iran would suffer tens of millions. The American public would be incensed for every American death esp ones that happen due to terrorist activities on American soil. This would give any U.S. prez carte blanche and the international community could be bribed with favors or quid pro quo arrangements to not do anything beyond symbolic opposition.
 

Handsome Creepy Eel

Owl
Gold Member
wannable alpha said:
Handsome Creepy Eel said:
Because carpet bombing worked out so well in Vietnam...

Just accept that there are limits to what the USA (or any other country) can do no matter how genocidal it gets.
Didn't the North Vietnamese come to the negotiating table after the Dec 1972 bombing raids? Even after the war was over, the communist Vietnamese government hid up the casualties in order to present the image of a great victory to their people.
They came to the negotiating table indeed, with the following result:

Wikipedia said:
"The Paris Peace Accords effectively removed the U.S. from the conflict in Vietnam. However, the agreement's provisions were routinely flouted by both the North Vietnamese and the South Vietnamese government, eliciting no response from the United States, and ultimately resulting in the communists enlarging the area under their control by the end of 1973. North Vietnamese military forces gradually built up their military infrastructure in the areas they controlled and two years later were in a position to launch the successful offensive that ended South Vietnam's status as an independent country. Fighting began almost immediately after the agreement was signed, due to a series of mutual retaliations, and by March 1973, full-fledged war had resumed.[3]"
...
Saigon fell to the North Vietnamese army supported by Viet Cong units on April 30, 1975. Schlesinger had announced early in the morning of April 29 the beginning of Operation Frequent Wind, which entailed the evacuation of the last U.S. diplomatic, military and civilian personnel from Saigon via helicopter, which was completed in the early morning hours of April 30."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Peace_Accords#Aftermath
It seems that bombing hostile governments and nations doesn't make them any less hostile, and often doesn't even make them less capable of waging war against you. Hitler found out the same when he bombed Britain for three years with no results whatsoever.

What if the USAF dropped a 1,000 MOABs on Iran? Basically a Dresden over every Iranian city, town and village as well as civilian and defense facilities.

Iran would retaliate with its conventional forces and proxies throughout the world. But American causalities would number in the tens of thousands, at the most a 100,000 while Iran would suffer tens of millions. The American public would be incensed for every American death esp ones that happen due to terrorist activities on American soil. This would give any U.S. prez carte blanche and the international community could be bribed with favors or quid pro quo arrangements to not do anything beyond symbolic opposition.
I don't want to be flippant here, but so what...?
 

AManLikePutin

Kingfisher
wannable alpha said:
Handsome Creepy Eel said:
Because carpet bombing worked out so well in Vietnam...

Just accept that there are limits to what the USA (or any other country) can do no matter how genocidal it gets.
Didn't the North Vietnamese come to the negotiating table after the Dec 1972 bombing raids? Even after the war was over, the communist Vietnamese government hid up the casualties in order to present the image of a great victory to their people.

What if the USAF dropped a 1,000 MOABs on Iran? Basically a Dresden over every Iranian city, town and village as well as civilian and defense facilities.

Iran would retaliate with its conventional forces and proxies throughout the world. But American causalities would number in the tens of thousands, at the most a 100,000 while Iran would suffer tens of millions. The American public would be incensed for every American death esp ones that happen due to terrorist activities on American soil. This would give any U.S. prez carte blanche and the international community could be bribed with favors or quid pro quo arrangements to not do anything beyond symbolic opposition.
Why are you such a genocidal maniac?

Do you get butterflies in your stomach typing that shit out?
 

It_is_my_time

Hummingbird
wannable alpha said:
Handsome Creepy Eel said:
Because carpet bombing worked out so well in Vietnam...

Just accept that there are limits to what the USA (or any other country) can do no matter how genocidal it gets.
Didn't the North Vietnamese come to the negotiating table after the Dec 1972 bombing raids? Even after the war was over, the communist Vietnamese government hid up the casualties in order to present the image of a great victory to their people.

What if the USAF dropped a 1,000 MOABs on Iran? Basically a Dresden over every Iranian city, town and village as well as civilian and defense facilities.

Iran would retaliate with its conventional forces and proxies throughout the world. But American causalities would number in the tens of thousands, at the most a 100,000 while Iran would suffer tens of millions. The American public would be incensed for every American death esp ones that happen due to terrorist activities on American soil. This would give any U.S. prez carte blanche and the international community could be bribed with favors or quid pro quo arrangements to not do anything beyond symbolic opposition.
You are still making the mistake of thinking Iran is another Iraq. Iran is far larger than Iraq with a far more advanced military. Exactly how advanced their military is no one here knows. But what we do know about Iran's military strength...

- They successfully sent missiles from within Iran and destroyed a US base in Iraq with great precision. So we know their military is far more advanced than Iraq could dream to be, but what else do we know.

- They are launching a military satellite into space.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
AManLikePutin said:
wannable alpha said:
Handsome Creepy Eel said:
Because carpet bombing worked out so well in Vietnam...

Just accept that there are limits to what the USA (or any other country) can do no matter how genocidal it gets.
Didn't the North Vietnamese come to the negotiating table after the Dec 1972 bombing raids? Even after the war was over, the communist Vietnamese government hid up the casualties in order to present the image of a great victory to their people.

What if the USAF dropped a 1,000 MOABs on Iran? Basically a Dresden over every Iranian city, town and village as well as civilian and defense facilities.

Iran would retaliate with its conventional forces and proxies throughout the world. But American causalities would number in the tens of thousands, at the most a 100,000 while Iran would suffer tens of millions. The American public would be incensed for every American death esp ones that happen due to terrorist activities on American soil. This would give any U.S. prez carte blanche and the international community could be bribed with favors or quid pro quo arrangements to not do anything beyond symbolic opposition.
Why are you such a genocidal maniac?

Do you get butterflies in your stomach typing that shit out?
Yeah it's not only a sociopathic take on the conflict, saying the US will do OK losing only 100,000 soldiers because they will kill tens of millions of Persians, but it's also stupid, because Iran has thousands of missiles that can accurately hit one of the several dozens bases in the region. It turns out their retaliation to Suleimani's death caused severe brain trauma to dozens of US soldiers.

For the sake of South Asia and the rest of the world, you have to hope that the people running India are a bit more sane than that, because a nuclear war between them and Pakistan is going to kill hundreds of millions and create a nuclear winter...
 

wannable alpha

Woodpecker
911 said:
AManLikePutin said:
wannable alpha said:
Handsome Creepy Eel said:
Because carpet bombing worked out so well in Vietnam...

Just accept that there are limits to what the USA (or any other country) can do no matter how genocidal it gets.
Didn't the North Vietnamese come to the negotiating table after the Dec 1972 bombing raids? Even after the war was over, the communist Vietnamese government hid up the casualties in order to present the image of a great victory to their people.

What if the USAF dropped a 1,000 MOABs on Iran? Basically a Dresden over every Iranian city, town and village as well as civilian and defense facilities.

Iran would retaliate with its conventional forces and proxies throughout the world. But American causalities would number in the tens of thousands, at the most a 100,000 while Iran would suffer tens of millions. The American public would be incensed for every American death esp ones that happen due to terrorist activities on American soil. This would give any U.S. prez carte blanche and the international community could be bribed with favors or quid pro quo arrangements to not do anything beyond symbolic opposition.
Why are you such a genocidal maniac?

Do you get butterflies in your stomach typing that shit out?
Yeah it's not only a sociopathic take on the conflict, saying the US will do OK losing only 100,000 soldiers because they will kill tens of millions of Persians, but it's also stupid, because Iran has thousands of missiles that can accurately hit one of the several dozens bases in the region. It turns out their retaliation to Suleimani's death caused severe brain trauma to dozens of US soldiers.

For the sake of South Asia and the rest of the world, you have to hope that the people running India are a bit more sane than that, because a nuclear war between them and Pakistan is going to kill hundreds of millions and create a nuclear winter...
Both India and Pakistan combined don't have enough nukes to cause a global nuclear winter. And even the concept of a nuclear winter has been exaggerated by the anti-nuclear weapons peace activists.

If FDR and Churchill had been worried about casualties Hitler and Hirohito would have never been stopped.
 

rotekz

Ostrich
Gold Member
wannable alpha said:
If FDR and Churchill had been worried about casualties Hitler and Hirohito would have never been stopped.
If FDR and Churchill had not been warmongers there would have been no WW2 in the first place. Churchill, who was literally owned by Jewish financiers, worked tirelessly though the (((Focus Group))) to foment war with Germany by endlessly creating tensions and sabotaging peace efforts. When he finally got his war, and through subsequent incompetence as Prime Minister facing the greater strength and ability of Germany, Great Britain inevitably began to lose very badly. Churchill knew he had to do everything possible to drag the United States into the war. This included the secret fire-bombing of German civilians to provoke Hitler to do the same in return to British civilians, thereby creating US sympathy and calls for supportive action.

FDR needed war for his own reasons including re-election. Pearl Harbour was fully engineered by actions including the imposition of intolerable sanctions on the Japanese. The Americans intelligence services knew though possession of Japanese codes and intercepted messages that the Peal Harbor attack plan has been successfully provoked into action but did nothing to warn the US Navy there. The attack needed to go ahead for the US to have a moral case to enter the war.

Hitler’s program was to put Germany back together again. He succeeded without war until it came to Poland. Hitler’s demands were fair and realistic, but Churchill, financed by the Focus Group with Jewish money, put such pressure on British prime minister Chamberlain that Chamberlain intervened in the Polish-German negotiations and issued a British guarantee to the Polish military dictatorship should Poland refuse to release German territory and populations.

The British had no way of making good on the guarantee, but the Polish military dictatorship lacked the intelligence to realize that. Consequently, the Polish Dictatorship refused Germany’s request.

From this mistake of Chamberlain and the stupid Polish dictatorship came the Ribbentrop/Molotov agreement that Germany and the Soviet Union would split Poland between themselves. When Hitler attacked Poland, Britain and the hapless French declared war on Germany because of the unenforceable British guarantee. But the British and French were careful not to declare war on the Soviet Union for occupying the eastern half of Poland.

Thus Britain was responsible for World War II, first by stupidly interfering in German/Polish negotiations, and second by declaring war on Germany.

Churchill was focused on war with Germany, which he intended for years preceding the war. But Hitler didn’t want any war with Britain or with France, and never intended to invade Britain. The invasion threat was a chimera conjured up by Churchill to unite England behind him. Hitler expressed his view that the British Empire was essential for order in the world, and that in its absence Europeans would lose their world supremacy. After Germany’s rout of the French and British armies, Hitler offered an extraordinarily generous peace to Britain. He said he wanted nothing from Britain but the return of Germany’s colonies. He committed the German military to the defense of the British Empire, and said he would reconstitute both Polish and Czech states and leave them to their own discretion. He told his associates that defeat of the British Empire would do nothing for Germany and everything for Bolshevik Russia and Japan.

Winston Churchill kept Hitler’s peace offers as secret as he could and succeeded in his efforts to block any peace. Churchill wanted war, largely it appears, for his own glory.

..............................................................................

Hitler forbade the bombing of civilian areas of British cities. It was Churchill who initiated this war crime, later emulated by the Americans. Churchill kept the British bombing of German civilians secret from the British people and worked to prevent Red Cross monitoring of air raids so no one would learn he was bombing civilian residential areas, not war production.

The purpose of Churchill’s bombing—first incendiary bombs to set everything afire and then high explosives to prevent firefighters from controlling the blazes—was to provoke a German attack on London, which Churchill reckoned would bind the British people to him and create sympathy in the US for Britain that would help Churchill pull America into the war.

One British raid murdered 50,000 people in Hamburg, and a subsequent attack on Hamburg netted 40,000 civilian deaths. Churchill also ordered that poison gas be added to the firebombing of German civilian residential areas and that Rome be bombed into ashes. The British Air Force refused both orders.

At the very end of the war the British and Americans destroyed the beautiful baroque city of Dresden, burning and suffocating 100,000 people in the attack. After months of firebombing attacks on Germany, including Berlin, Hitler gave in to his generals and replied in kind. Churchill succeeded. The story became “the London Blitz,” not the British blitz of Germany.
 

wannable alpha

Woodpecker
I am very well aware of what kind of a man Churchill was and also what he said about and did to Indians. Yes, you are right that U.S. and U.K. were not in danger and it was a war that FDR and Churchill wanted. Pat Buchanan also wrote a book on this topic saying the same things that you mentioned.

However, this does not change the fact that both men are lionized in their countries even today. Also, no matter their intentions, the American and British public knew they were in for a long fight and there would be hundreds of thousands of deaths. But they didn't protest because they saw it as the good fight.
 

Bijanazad

Newbie
I've found Brendon O'Connell to provide the most informative, high level, and reliable information on geopolitics so far.

Recommend watching the first few of his videos, especially 5 and 6.

He's talking about things no one is talking about. Particularly Microsoft and Intel moving to Israel (!).

You can also find more of his videos here (from his previous channel that was deleted). https://www.bitchute.com/channel/talpiot/

Consider the value and premise of cryptocurrency when the prevalent spyware inside the CPU is controlled by the same people who control the world's currencies.
 
If FDR and Churchill had not been warmongers there would have been no WW2 in the first place. Churchill, who was literally owned by Jewish financiers, worked tirelessly though the (((Focus Group))) to foment war with Germany by endlessly creating tensions and sabotaging peace efforts. When he finally got his war, and through subsequent incompetence as Prime Minister facing the greater strength and ability of Germany, Great Britain inevitably began to lose very badly. Churchill knew he had to do everything possible to drag the United States into the war. This included the secret fire-bombing of German civilians to provoke Hitler to do the same in return to British civilians, thereby creating US sympathy and calls for supportive action.

FDR needed war for his own reasons including re-election. Pearl Harbour was fully engineered by actions including the imposition of intolerable sanctions on the Japanese. The Americans intelligence services knew though possession of Japanese codes and intercepted messages that the Peal Harbor attack plan has been successfully provoked into action but did nothing to warn the US Navy there. The attack needed to go ahead for the US to have a moral case to enter the war.
While I agree with you regarding Japan, I do not in regards to Germany. Hitler viewed Russia as a "rotten barn that just needed the front door kicked in for a victory," and he was waiting for his chance to conquer them. And once his Russian invasion started, the dominoes of world war would start falling into place, even if England and France had not declared war over Poland.
 

It_is_my_time

Hummingbird
While I agree with you regarding Japan, I do not in regards to Germany. Hitler viewed Russia as a "rotten barn that just needed the front door kicked in for a victory," and he was waiting for his chance to conquer them. And once his Russian invasion started, the dominoes of world war would start falling into place, even if England and France had not declared war over Poland.
Strongly disagree.

#1) There was no Russia. It was the Soviet Union, and it was run by a Satanic Elite Group who hated ethnic Russian people more than Hitler did.

#2) The Satan Elite Group had already tried to purge Germany into the same situation, causing a civil war in Germany in 1919, right after WW1 ended. Lucky for the Germans they were able to beat this communist hoard out of the USA.

#3) Everyone knew that the Satanic Elite would come back for Germany. And they were being heavily armed and supplied by Wall Street and FDR in the 1930's, before WW2 broke out.

It wasn't Hitler v. Russia. It was Hitler v. a Satanic Elite who was funded and backed by Wall Street, specifically Jacob Schiff.
 

ralfy

Pigeon
This is from seven years back, but the points raised are notable:


That is, the U.S. is threatening Iran because the latter started an oil bourse which threatens the petrodollar. It might also be similar to the reason why Iraq was invaded and Libya destabilized.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
I've found Brendon O'Connell to provide the most informative, high level, and reliable information on geopolitics so far.

Recommend watching the first few of his videos, especially 5 and 6.

He's talking about things no one is talking about. Particularly Microsoft and Intel moving to Israel (!).

You can also find more of his videos here (from his previous channel that was deleted). https://www.bitchute.com/channel/talpiot/

Consider the value and premise of cryptocurrency when the prevalent spyware inside the CPU is controlled by the same people who control the world's currencies.

This is a very good summary of Kay Griggs' 6+ hour interview from 1997, very relevant today with the Beirut incident, she has revealed that her husband, a high-ranking Marines officer, was part of the crew that organized the 1983 US Embassy bombing.

 
Top