The Big Middle Eastern Thread

[Azeem]

There are reports IDF lost much of its soldiers that tried the limited ground operation into Lebanon. As opposed to Middle Eastern and other third world people who are used to getting killed and bombed people in fancy parts of the world are not used to such loss of life since WW2. Many a time there are allegations of casualty laundering, Bush allegedly stopped the publication of 60 American deaths in 2004 in Iraq during election season.

That is also the reason these cuntries focus heavily on Air force and maintaining an edge on aerial power because dropping bombs from air is easy than sending ground troops, which Dr. Gonzo highlighted is Iran's weakness and most probably will be their plan to send planes if they really want to attack Iran. Ground invasion is unlikely. 

 

[Toinho]

6 hours ago, Azeem said:

There are reports IDF lost much of its soldiers that tried the limited ground operation into Lebanon. As opposed to Middle Eastern and other third world people who are used to getting killed and bombed people in fancy parts of the world are not used to such loss of life since WW2. Many a time there are allegations of casualty laundering, Bush allegedly stopped the publication of 60 American deaths in 2004 in Iraq during election season.

That is also the reason these cuntries focus heavily on Air force and maintaining an edge on aerial power because dropping bombs from air is easy than sending ground troops, which Dr. Gonzo highlighted is Iran's weakness and most probably will be their plan to send planes if they really want to attack Iran. Ground invasion is unlikely. 

 

US would definitely be ready. I think it's ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

[Spike]

7 hours ago, Azeem said:

There are reports IDF lost much of its soldiers that tried the limited ground operation into Lebanon. As opposed to Middle Eastern and other third world people who are used to getting killed and bombed people in fancy parts of the world are not used to such loss of life since WW2. Many a time there are allegations of casualty laundering, Bush allegedly stopped the publication of 60 American deaths in 2004 in Iraq during election season.

That is also the reason these cuntries focus heavily on Air force and maintaining an edge on aerial power because dropping bombs from air is easy than sending ground troops, which Dr. Gonzo highlighted is Iran's weakness and most probably will be their plan to send planes if they really want to attack Iran. Ground invasion is unlikely. 

 

 

1 hour ago, Toinho said:

US would definitely be ready. I think it's ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

Yeah, I don’t really get that ‘westerners aren’t ready’. Is anyone ever really ready for war, and when will war be on a ‘western front? The proxy wars keeps the westerners safe from harm, save those that get scooped up into the military

War is an act that happens in faraway lands, to uncivilised people that don’t have democracy, which is the most pure, incorruptible, morally transcendent ideal, that could never be abused, manipulated, or exploited.

[Dr. Gonzo]

5 hours ago, Toinho said:

US would definitely be ready. I think it's ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

I think the US is always ready for a war to start... but they've had a pretty poor go of things since the Korean War (and even the way that ended wasn't great because it's technically still not over). Vietnam, the Bush era Iraq invasion, the pointless Afghanistan 20 year adventure.

Honestly the Afghanistan one is kind of cruel, the US and allies came in looking to find Bin Laden - who had fucked off to Pakistan lol- then settled on removing the Taliban. Afghanistan, especially their women, then got 2 decades of improved human rights and a taste of a more normal life. Then the US fucked off and the Taliban came back and rolled back human rights for a shitload of people.

The Iraq invasion really ended up shaping the modern Middle East though. The US coming in and toppling Iraq's government and trying to make Iraq the sandbox for wahabis to run wild ultimately led to the creation of ISIS and similar groups. That ended up spilling into Syria and then we got the Syrian civil war and Syria turning into a sandbox for the US, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Israel to fuck around with warfare they don't want to call warfare and nobody really gives too many shits about it. And this led to the Islamic Republic of Iran gaining a huge amount of influence in both Syria and Iraq - a situation they'd dreamed of since 1979.

The US's problem is that since WW2, they've gone into wars with big lofty and general goals - but I think not too much thought's put into smaller short term goals to get to that end result. That ultimately leads to their wars being pointless despite their military superiority and their ability to land big wins on the battlefield. But the Vietcong and the Taliban ultimately just had to wait out the US. ISIS was made into a much smaller and less threatening group - but that took an international effort from... the US, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Syria weirdly.

I think if the US truly wants to beat Iran too... like I said earlier, a ground invasion's probably not going to get them much success. It could be like Iraq where they can quickly defeat the opposition military and depose the government - but it's a lot harder of a country to occupy than Iraq because of the geography. So then they'd be in that same position they were in with Iraq where they've taken out a government but won't truly have a plan for what's next.

If the US and Israel did strike Iran's weapon facilities... I wonder what that would mean for Russia's war in Ukraine where they've been using Iranian drones, missiles and rockets.

[Spike]

7 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I think the US is always ready for a war to start... but they've had a pretty poor go of things since the Korean War (and even the way that ended wasn't great because it's technically still not over). Vietnam, the Bush era Iraq invasion, the pointless Afghanistan 20 year adventure.

Honestly the Afghanistan one is kind of cruel, the US and allies came in looking to find Bin Laden - who had fucked off to Pakistan lol- then settled on removing the Taliban. Afghanistan, especially their women, then got 2 decades of improved human rights and a taste of a more normal life. Then the US fucked off and the Taliban came back and rolled back human rights for a shitload of people.

The Iraq invasion really ended up shaping the modern Middle East though. The US coming in and toppling Iraq's government and trying to make Iraq the sandbox for wahabis to run wild ultimately led to the creation of ISIS and similar groups. That ended up spilling into Syria and then we got the Syrian civil war and Syria turning into a sandbox for the US, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Israel to fuck around with warfare they don't want to call warfare and nobody really gives too many shits about it. And this led to the Islamic Republic of Iran gaining a huge amount of influence in both Syria and Iraq - a situation they'd dreamed of since 1979.

The US's problem is that since WW2, they've gone into wars with big lofty and general goals - but I think not too much thought's put into smaller short term goals to get to that end result. That ultimately leads to their wars being pointless despite their military superiority and their ability to land big wins on the battlefield. But the Vietcong and the Taliban ultimately just had to wait out the US. ISIS was made into a much smaller and less threatening group - but that took an international effort from... the US, Russia, Turkey, Iran, and Syria weirdly.

I think if the US truly wants to beat Iran too... like I said earlier, a ground invasion's probably not going to get them much success. It could be like Iraq where they can quickly defeat the opposition military and depose the government - but it's a lot harder of a country to occupy than Iraq because of the geography. So then they'd be in that same position they were in with Iraq where they've taken out a government but won't truly have a plan for what's next.

If the US and Israel did strike Iran's weapon facilities... I wonder what that would mean for Russia's war in Ukraine where they've been using Iranian drones, missiles and rockets.

It’s simple. You’re overthinking it. The Vietcong live in Vietnam. The Taliban live in Afghanistan, regardless of the USA being near or far doesn’t change that.