Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
You're sure about that?
Why?
What exactly makes you think that he won't find a reason to send troops somewhere for no particular reason?
Vibes? 
We got lied into going to Iraq. What makes it different this time?

Well, people are more informed and skeptical now than we were in 2001. 4 generations had just been hurt in ways not seen since Pearl Harbor. And the two older generations alive at the time were supportive too.

No social media, ALL were less skeptical then.

This won’t be a repeat.
Posted
30 minutes ago, ABSR said:

Why do people keep saying war?  Iran may say that but assuming the bombings destroyed the nuclear facilities we are done.  We are not putting boots on the ground.  Will they try to strike out through terrorists or their proxies, yes if they can.  But Hamas and Hezbollah  are severely weakened and that leaves Houthis and maybe attacking US bases in Iraq or the area.   But any immediate direct Iranian attack will likely be a show of force for perception purposes.  Worst thing they can do is directly cause some real damage because that would invite more US attacks.

Unfortunately it's not as easy as hitting their sites and saying it's over now peace.  What happens if they close the strait or start hitting what's left of our forces in iraq, Syria, Kuwait or Saudi with their CRBMs? I hope our involvement in this is over, but the dildo of unintended consequences,  well you know the rest.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Colonel Sanders said:

Unfortunately it's not as easy as hitting their sites and saying it's over now peace.  What happens if they close the strait or start hitting what's left of our forces in iraq, Syria, Kuwait or Saudi with their CRBMs? I hope our involvement in this is over, but the dildo of unintended consequences,  well you know the rest.

And possible activation of anyone that wants to do damage here in the states.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Unfortunately it's not as easy as hitting their sites and saying it's over now peace.  What happens if they close the strait or start hitting what's left of our forces in iraq, Syria, Kuwait or Saudi with their CRBMs? I hope our involvement in this is over, but the dildo of unintended consequences,  well you know the rest.

It’s a legit concern but also have to look at that from the Iran side. They aren’t likely to attack our forces while solely in foreign positions. They’ll threaten, but doubtful it happens.
Posted
1 minute ago, Colonel Sanders said:

Unfortunately it's not as easy as hitting their sites and saying it's over now peace.  What happens if they close the strait or start hitting what's left of our forces in iraq, Syria, Kuwait or Saudi with their CRBMs? I hope our involvement in this is over, but the dildo of unintended consequences,  well you know the rest.

True, but doing anything of substance would lead to massive US response and active efforts for regime change.  The mullah’s want to survive first and foremost.  And shutting Hormuz impacts them as much as others and severely impacts China oil supply…and China is going to be their main supporter for peace in order to avoid disturbing the flow of oil.  

Posted

So what path would the bombers take? Was all of the talk of B-2’s taking off from the states a bit of misdirection, would they still be in the air should a follow up be needed at first light?

Posted

Not quoting twitter, in fact, wish I could just not see them, but how soon will there be verification that Fordow is actually damaged/destroyed by this?  Thank you for your attention to this matter!

Posted
So what path would the bombers take? Was all of the talk of B-2’s taking off from the states a bit of misdirection, would they still be in the air should a follow up be needed at first light?

The B2s over the pacific were a complete misdirection. Zero chance they could have made it to Iran in time for these strikes.

Militarily this seems to have been an exceptional operation.
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
Not quoting twitter, in fact, wish I could just not see them, but how soon will there be verification that Fordow is actually damaged/destroyed by this?  Thank you for your attention to this matter!

I would think less than 24 hours. It’s almost daylight there, satellites and scans will be telling. We will also be learning in those same hours based on the Iranian response.
Posted
12 minutes ago, Colonel Sanders said:

Unfortunately it's not as easy as hitting their sites and saying it's over now peace.  What happens if they close the strait or start hitting what's left of our forces in iraq, Syria, Kuwait or Saudi with their CRBMs? I hope our involvement in this is over, but the dildo of unintended consequences,  well you know the rest.

Nope.  There isn't some kind of 10-run mercy rule where the umpires declare the game over and everybody goes home.

It's only over when Iran decides it is.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, atomheartbevo said:

christmas vacation GIF

He means people in civilized countries that don't sacrifice their citizens' health care to do shit like this at the behest of a scared little Nazi that doesn't want to go to jail.

Posted

Some quick screen grabs and a quote from Reuters

Spoiler

U.S. President Donald Trump on Saturday said that a "very successful attack" on three nuclear sites in Iran had been carried out, including at Fordow.

In a posting on Truth Social, Trump added, "All planes are safely on their way home" and he congratulated "our great American Warriors."

Israel launched the attacks on Iran more than a week ago, saying that it wanted to remove any chance of Tehran developing nuclear weapons.

Iran has argued that its nuclear program is intended for peaceful purposes.

Diplomatic efforts by Western nations to stop the hostilities had so far been unsuccessful.

In another social media posting Trump said, "Fordow is gone."

Trump appeared to be referring to the underground nuclear storage facility in Natanz. The bombing came after B-2 bombers had been dispatched to Guam earlier on Saturday, according to U.S. sources.

A U.S. official told Reuters that B-2 bombers were involved in the strikes on Iran's nuclear sites.

It was still unclear whether any Israeli forces were involved in this latest bombing, which significantly expanded the scope of the hostilities.

Trump is set to address the nation at 10:00 p.m. ET (0200 GMT), according to his post on Truth Social. Stay with us -- we'll carry updates from that live.

Screenshot_20250621_202509_Reuters.thumb.jpg.ee324d492d1c294f46b9a574f8e93b27.jpgScreenshot_20250621_202410_Reuters.thumb.jpg.4dcda77cb895a34b33f116f2e5c15a55.jpg

Screenshot_20250621_202430_Reuters.jpg

Posted
that had to use B52's with that many tomahawks ??

The GBU-57, aka bunker buster, is really only deployable by the B2. Far too heavy to deploy by missile.

The tomahawks are there to take out surface targets.
Posted
7 minutes ago, McCroskey said:


Clever quote cut.

None of us know a damn thing about what happens next. We don't know if those 6 bunker busters actually did what they were sent to do. We don't know what is happening in Kileen or what is going on anywhere. We're all mushrooms. 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, mdleast said:

But the Prez says “now is the time for peace” so…I guess it’s all over. No harm, no foul

I mean they can try and attack. And we can just keep dropping 30,000 pound ordinance on them.  Trump will keep bitch slapping them if they want to get froggy.  We can fuck them up as long as they want to keep going without ever touching a boot to the ground.  I like this approach better than paying them a bunch of cash.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Haha 1
  • Fuck You 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, Duane Moore said:

If you’re going to take the plunge and hit the site, glad they made sure they’d get the job done:

 

How many American families would this feed for a decade? 

Posted
Thank you for your attention to this matter?
Holy shit. Sounds like HR telling us to keep the microwave clean.

That was 100% written by an Army gomer. If it had been a Navy nerd it would have been signed “Very Respectfully”. I have many years worth of work emails from guys I’ve never met in person, but I can tell you with absolute certainty what branch they served in based on their email signature.
  • Haha 4
Posted
Just now, Herbie Hancock said:


That was 100% written by an Army gomer. If it had been a Navy nerd it would have been signed “Very Respectfully”. I have many years worth of work emails from guys I’ve never met in person, but I can tell you with absolute certainty what branch they served in based on their email signature.

Best regards.

What branch was I?

Posted
Just now, Frank Drebin said:

I mean they can try and attack. And we can just keep dropping 30,000 pound ordinance on them.  Trump will keep bitch slapping them if they want to get froggy.  We can fuck them up as long as they want to keep going without ever touching a boot to the ground.  I like this approach better than paying them a bunch of cash.  

The bulk of their military leaders are dead. They've killed iirc just 24 Israelis. The potential of nukes and I'm guessing a goodly amount of other tactical assets got swept off the board. 

We have no idea what's occurred under the radar, but Iran doesn't have a lot left to even keep their own government afloat right this minute. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

It’s a legit concern but also have to look at that from the Iran side. They aren’t likely to attack our forces while solely in foreign positions. They’ll threaten, but doubtful it happens.

We have been openly talking about regime change.  The last three high-profile times it happened:

  1. Assad fled to Moscow
  2. Gaddafi ended up dead with literally red-hot pokers up his ass
  3. Saddam ended up being hung by people we turned against him

In theory the rules of Iran have a much easier time of getting to Moscow, but don't think that #2 and #3 aren't in their minds - they have to use a lot of secret police to keep the civilians in check.

We put their backs up against the wall, we don't know what they will do.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
Just now, atomheartbevo said:

We have been openly talking about regime change.  The last three high-profile times it happened:

  1. Assad fled to Moscow
  2. Gaddafi ended up dead with literally red-hot pokers up his ass
  3. Saddam ended up being hung by people we turned against him

In theory the rules of Iran have a much easier time of getting to Moscow, but don't think that #2 and #3 aren't in their minds - they have to use a lot of secret police to keep the civilians in check.

We put their backs up against the wall, we don't know what they will do.

The good thing is in all three of those cases it brought as close to the violence, am I right?

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Drool 1
Posted
I mean they can try and attack. And we can just keep dropping 30,000 pound ordinance on them.  Trump will keep bitch slapping them if they want to get froggy.  We can fuck them up as long as they want to keep going without ever touching a boot to the ground.  I like this approach better than paying them a bunch of cash.  

I’m more concerned with long term consequences of radicalizing other countries/groups against us for “meddling into their affairs” than Iran’s direct response against us.

Also, the Prez tweeting “now is the time for peace” right after such a strike makes me think of a kid punching another kid and then Immediately saying “Truce! truce!”
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, mdleast said:


I’m more concerned with long term consequences of radicalizing other countries/groups against us for “meddling into their affairs” than Iran’s direct response against us.

Also, the Prez tweeting “now is the time for peace” right after such a strike makes me think of a kid punching another kid and then Immediately saying “Truce! truce!”

Fuck that.  They have been attacking us through proxies for 40 years.  Trump is doing exactly what should be done.  

  • Hook 'Em 10
  • Fuck You 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, mdleast said:


I’m more concerned with long term consequences of radicalizing other countries/groups against us for “meddling into their affairs” than Iran’s direct response against us.

Also, the Prez tweeting “now is the time for peace” right after such a strike makes me think of a kid punching another kid and then Immediately saying “Truce! truce!”

The entire middle east supported this attack. 

  • Hook 'Em 6
Posted
9 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

We have been openly talking about regime change.  The last three high-profile times it happened:

  1. Assad fled to Moscow
  2. Gaddafi ended up dead with literally red-hot pokers up his ass
  3. Saddam ended up being hung by people we turned against him

In theory the rules of Iran have a much easier time of getting to Moscow, but don't think that #2 and #3 aren't in their minds - they have to use a lot of secret police to keep the civilians in check.

We put their backs up against the wall, we don't know what they will do.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

It may well be that there is more to this we don’t know than do. We know what's been in the press which is usually only a part of the story. 

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

Lol yeah I wonder why

Because they believe Israel and honestly Jews, Christians and religious freedom, should not exist, and the US supports those in various ways. Add to it they've been in bed with Russia since inception. Yeah... I wonder why too.

Edited by BurntEyes
  • Hook 'Em 6

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...