• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed Israel/US Attacks Iran /Yet Another Country/Iran

A certain amount of cynicism is healthy...some people consider me to be a cynical bastard..but too much becomes nihilism, a total denial of any kin of morals or ethics.
 
The transition from "Trump is a hero because he never got us into any wars" to "If you don't support Trump's war, you hate America" is complete.
In the case of the poster in question, yes, but there is a real split in MAGA over this. MAGA is not monolithic, it is a loose coaltion and the split between the more isolatioist wing and the CHristian Fundy wing is real.
Well, of course. It's all spin, too. With both individuals and nations what matters most is what they do, not what they say.



Again, nations will say anything. They're not bound by internet message board conventions where they have to try to appear consistent, or honest, or decent. They'll say whatever suits them best at the moment. They have zero problems with ignoring criticism, even when that criticism is actually true. A country isn't going to say "oh! You're right, we're being evil! We'll stop, thanks for pointing it out!" are they?


It's encouraging, really, to see that all over the world people are just the same.
 
This probably belongs in the SYria thread, but there was an attack on a Greek Orthodox church in Damascus today killing tweny..a suicide bombing by a ISIS member , apparently. Things keep getting better in that part of the world, don't they?
 
A military analyst pointed out that it would be enough for Iran to jam commercial navigation systems to force tankers to massively increase the safety distance they have to keep and thus slow progess through the Strait to a crawl.
And any movement of US naval assets into the Strait would have the same, if not worse effects, as Carriers like company even less than commercial tankers.
Just like Suez, Hormuz and the Gulf of Aden require flawless throughput to keep the world economy humming.
 
Last edited:

According to the UN, and Iran, Iran had been enraging uranium up to 60%, and even sometimes 84%. None of this has any civilian purpose whatsoever.

Clearly they were just playing a game of chicken and apparently they just lost big time. I think they believed that if they enriched to 60%, the world would say we better back off and be nice to them otherwise they will go to weapons grade.

Instead the world decided 60% is too close to weapons grade and we have to stop them we no longer have a choice.

 

According to the UN, and Iran, Iran had been enraging uranium up to 60%, and even sometimes 84%. None of this has any civilian purpose whatsoever.

Clearly they were just playing a game of chicken and apparently they just lost big time. I think they believed that if they enriched to 60%, the world would say we better back off and be nice to them otherwise they will go to weapons grade.

Instead the world decided 60% is too close to weapons grade and we have to stop them we no longer have a choice.

Assuming I agree with you: wouldn't an agreement with close checks and balances be a far safer way to makes sure that Iran doesn't have non-civilian use nuclear material?
It will be next to impossible to investigate the bombing sites and estimate how much of the uranium has become inaccessible.
 
According to the UN, and Iran, Iran had been enraging uranium up to 60%, and even sometimes 84%. None of this has any civilian purpose whatsoever.

Clearly they were just playing a game of chicken and apparently they just lost big time. I think they believed that if they enriched to 60%, the world would say we better back off and be nice to them otherwise they will go to weapons grade.

Instead the world decided 60% is too close to weapons grade and we have to stop them we no longer have a choice.
mad38loneranger.jpg
 
A military analyst pointed out that it would be enough for Iran to jam commercial navigation systems to force tankers to massively increase the safety distance they have to keep and thus slow progess through the Strait to a crawl.
Jamming is relatively easy to do, but sending a HARM missile at the jammer is pretty easy as well.
 
And hit, according to your sources.

Maybe there's more work to be done. Do you support doing that work?

Do you support the work that's been done so far?
What does my support have to do with anything? I support the Secretary of Defense resigning his post and checking into rehab for his alcoholism, doesn't mean he's going to.
 
What does my support have to do with anything? I support the Secretary of Defense resigning his post and checking into rehab for his alcoholism, doesn't mean he's going to.
I'm just asking if you're in favor of a policy or against it. Although I suppose "feeling powerless and therefore apathetic about the matter" is another valid option, you don't strike me as the type to be apathetic about this kind of thing.
 
That's funny; I was idly wondering what the cost of a HARM missile is vs the cost of all the shipping delayed by a jamming signal.
Fair point. Perhaps the comparison is not the cost but the availability of more antennae and feeder cable vs more HARM missiles.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom