2025 Israel vs Iran War

Wyróżnienie
draggs powiedział(a):
Even though there are in fact examples of other people making the same mistake to the same degree of retardation and not even having a possible ulterior motive to explain it
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
I specifically pointed out the USS Stark for that reason, the US gave Iraq a huge pass on that and even punished the captain of the ship for it.


draggs powiedział(a):
I suspect you read somewhere that Israel was reluctant to give back the Sinai and never bothered to look into it more
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
This is what's killing me, he's calling me an incoherent shill and referring to my posts as "incoherent psychobabble and logical non sequiturs that do not flow from point to point," for the simple fact of pointing out that the Sinai was hard to secure militarily and that Israel was happy to let it go in exchange for peace. Apparently 7k people living in settlements there means I'm completely wrong.
 
gay porn is the best porn powiedział(a):
Arguing over the USS libtard is pointless because regardless of the outcome of that discussion specifically peoples views towards Israel, it's foreign policy, and American foreign policy will remain the same. You guys are writing paragraphs about this shit when you could literally just talk about the undeniable lobbying that Israel does within the US government and or the statements made by Israeli politicians regarding the US. It's been obvious since 1948 that Israel has the full intention of colonizing the Levant and anyone saying otherwise is a retarded faggot or shill, the end.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
The Jews even got the Chinese beat for playing the long game. The entire Levant is about 120,000 square kilometers (about 180,000 square kilometers if including the Sinai which I'm not). Israel minus the West Bank and Gaza is about 20,800 square kilometers. So that's about 1/6 of the Levant right there. Since its 1948 borders were established Israel took the Sinai (about 61,000 square kilometers and sometimes considered part of the Levant, sometimes not, I'm not including it) but gave it back. Israel occupied about 800 square kilometers of Lebanon from 1985 to 2000 but also gave that back. The Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights, and the territory Israel took after Assad fell is about 8,200 square kilometers. So since the first war ended in 1949, 76 years, Israel has taken and held about 8,200 square kilometers out of the ~99,200 remaining. That leaves ~91,000. To take ~91,000 square kilometers at the rate of ~8,200 in 76 years means Israel will take another ~920 years to colonize the Levant. Like I said, the long game
 
i440BX powiedział(a):
How probable is US deploying soldiers to fight in Iran? And if they do, will they use conscription?
I hope not. If US remains limited at just deploying bombs, and equipment to Israel, US will suffer less.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
Everything depends how Iran will respond to the bombings. In there event there is any kind of American ground invasion in the future, the buildup of forces would be impossible to ignore. Drafting or conscription most likely wouldn't be needed unless something went very badly as it's a generally disliked concept with no real support behind it as of time.
 
Null powiedział(a):
"would have meant all this other shit that only makes sense in the context of the US not retaliating for Egypt sinking a spy ship off its coast".
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
As shown with the USS Stark, the American reaction to events can be unexpected and they can let things go if it benefits American interests

I'm also still bemused how you decided I'm a shill for giving the common consensus of the Israeli occupation of the Sinai then go to another thread to complain about me being a shill. I've been posting neutral news and somehow I'm a shill?
 
draggs powiedział(a):
That leaves ~91,000. To take ~91,000 square kilometers at the rate of ~8,200 in 76 years means Israel will take another ~920 years to colonize the Levant. Like I said, the long game
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
The fact is the attempts are right there in your face, they're just limited by foreign pressure, local resistance, and the fact that they're 150+ years late to the whole colonization thing.
 
Catch The Rainbow powiedział(a):
As shown with the USS Stark, the American reaction to events can be unexpected and they can let things go if it benefits American interests

I'm also still bemused how you decided I'm a shill for giving the common consensus of the Israeli occupation of the Sinai then go to another thread to complain about me being a shill. I've been posting neutral news and somehow I'm a shill?
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
its amusing how upset you are about being called a shill despite very obviously being a shill
 
Null powiedział(a):
"would have meant all this other shit that only makes sense in the context of the US not retaliating for Egypt sinking a spy ship off its coast".

I appreciate the length of the response and the effort involved but you've predicated the entire thing on extant circumstances and not hypothetical circumstances.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
Under your standard it makes as little sense for the US to want to court Egypt after hypothetically attacking it in 1967 as it did for the US to switch from 'turn Germany and Japan into pre-industrial farm societies' to 'turn Germany and Japan into strong industrial economies with sizable militaries' after fighting them for almost 4 years of war much bigger and more brutal than a US-Egyptian war would have been. Even the reasons were the same for the US and Germany/Japan and the US and Egypt in the real world, trying to increase the size and power of the anti-Soviet bloc.

I think the US would have been just as forgiving of Egypt in the 1970s if the Liberty attack had drawn it into war with Egypt in 1967. I mean maybe if you were running the United States in the late 1940s you wouldn't have been so forgiving to Germany or Japan, but the US was. So I don't think it's unreasonable that in hypothetical US attacks Egypt in 1967 world, that in the 1970s, to draw Egypt out of the Soviet camp, the US would have seriously listened to what Egypt wanted and tried to accommodate it, like it did in the real world 1970s

Or maybe it would have said get fucked you pyramid building faggots, what's up with all those animal headed freak gods you got are you fucking furries? Certainly possible
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
Null powiedział(a):
He's not even making sense. It's not pro-Israeli talking points, it's incoherent psychobabble and logical non sequiturs that do not flow from point to point. I regret bothering.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
Nigger you're directly quoting GDF without an ounce of critical thinking. Can't wait for the "How Iran OWNED Israel" video that you will also quote directly on your MATI stream.

i440BX powiedział(a):
How probable is US deploying soldiers to fight in Iran? And if they do, will they use conscription?
I hope not. If US remains limited at just deploying bombs, and equipment to Israel, US will suffer less.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
The US military would have to turn a complete 180 from their current force posture of cutbacks and restructuring for competition against Chyna. They're in no position to be an occupying force of a country as big as Iran, and the US public isn't willing to accept a single casualty for what's effectively a modern war of aggression on behalf of a third party (Israel).
 
Mr.F. powiedział(a):
That's quite the leap in effectiveness


The Shill is immunized against all dangers...
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
Meh, 77% interception rate

harmacist powiedział(a):
its amusing how upset you are about being called a shill despite very obviously being a shill
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
If I got called a shill for arguing about the Iran war or something like that, fine I get it. Getting called a shill for pointing out that holding the Sinai was very difficult for Israel and trading it for peace was a good move, a view that's common among people who study the conflict, is just confusing.
 
gay porn is the best porn powiedział(a):
The fact is the attempts are right there in your face, they're just limited by foreign pressure, local resistance, and the fact that they're 150+ years late to the whole colonization thing.
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
Once they clear out Gaza and assuming they get away with it, they will probably speed up. It is much faster to take over farmland and deserts than it is one of the most densely populated pieces of land on earth. Takes far fewer people to maintain aswell, plus you can move those local security forces off Oct 7th duty into borderguard duty because non-sleeper cell hostiles have to cross hard points and are geographically far more removed (Flying a glider from the eastern cliffs would be a great way to get a experience how impotent the iron dome truly is).
 
Catch The Rainbow powiedział(a):
As shown with the USS Stark, the American reaction to events can be unexpected and they can let things go if it benefits American interests
Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...
We also did so with Iran in the aftermath of Operation Praying Mantis when they fired missiles at more of our ships, which missed but by our posturing at the time would have warranted retaliation, instead the Reagan admin publicly denied the attempted attacks ever happened not wanting to actually engage Iran further than we already had.
 
Wyróżnienie
Musisz się zalogować lub zarejestrować, aby odpowiedzieć.
Wstecz
Top Na dole