Iran - Israel/US War: Israel-US declare war on Iran, Iran responds

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Persian Gulf said:
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


how does the US plan to reach Kharg island in the first place when they can't even approach the Strait of Hormoz?
Click to expand...



No way they can open the strait of Hormuz military, this lesson will be learned by the US.
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Flotilla said:
Ah good, it is SOAR operations inside friendly airspace?.
SOAR does CSAR missions when required.
Click to expand...
1. Its NOT SOAR its NOT CSAR bro. The maximum operarional service cieling for CH-47 is 20,000 ft. That aircraft is flying at 28,000 ft way beyond maximum cieling of a Chinook heli.

*SOAR dont use CH47 in active combat zone (that thing has the heat signature of a tractor in the air)

2. SAR is carried out by PJs - they dont fly around in tractors like the Chinook

3. That is a miscode.
 
Jugantor said:
U.K. has entered the war the same way Arabs have.

They are facilitators not active participants.
Click to expand...
@Emirzad please let us know if and which iranian missiles can hit the UK's (and Germany also, since they welcome it too)air bases hosting US bombers like B-1s.
 
KingQamaR said:
Are you suggesting there should be a plan? A plan from US military 😊 ? Parachuting people will be a disaster and using small boats from the GCC Arab countries may not be the best way either.
Click to expand...
Not saying it is a good plan but everything we have seen so far doesn’t show they planned much of anything
 
Aggregate said:
The "Wrath" will reach Pakistan anyway. Only that it will be far worse then, compared to what it might be now. Its just that none of us want to acknowledge the obvious that is staring us in the face.

Reminds me of the time when Hezbollah were getting decimated and they kept asking Iran for help. Unfortunately, at that time Iran was too concerned about getting dragged into the war. Now it has reached Iran, regardless.

Right now Iran has the capacity to push the zionists back. Yes, US might retaliate a little, but not much, as things are already out of control for them. But if Iran falls, then things will be far worse for Pakistan anyway.

All of us want to live in peace but the zionists are everything that is not peace. Yes its difficult, yes it can have bad consequences, yes, the idea of not joining in seems convenient. But we are all knowingly trading temporary peace for permanent disaster. I hope the decision makes in Pakistan have this in mind and are at least doing whatever is possible behind the scenes to support Iran.
Click to expand...
thanks for laying out the ground work for me.
I will try to be conscise as I cant add anything futher or repeat what you said, but I want to highlight a velnurabilty that affects Pakistan and Iran. that is when Pakistan enters this war on Saudis demands.

this one-sided defense arrangement with the Saudis. (I call it walk the plank while a shotgun is aimed on your back by saudis)
What exactly are we honoring? The Saudis are demanding Pakistan activate a deal that was apparently sealed with two currencies: the blood of Pakistani soldiers who would fight Iran, and the blood of ordinary Pakistani citizens who will bear the cost of a direct conflict—both from the war itself and from the advantage India and its proxies (Afghan Taliban, BLA, TTP) will inevitably take the moment our western front ignites.

The structure of this arrangement has always been asymmetrical. When the Afghan Taliban attacked Pakistan from across the border, where was the Saudi division? When India conducted airstrikes , did Riyadh activate anything? No. The deal only seems to work one way: when Saudi interests are in play, Pakistan is expected to show up with its soldiers. When Pakistan bleeds, the Saudis don't even send a statement (ok they do but it can be confused with a staement from Jameca).
Whether by design or consequence, look at what's unfolded.
Israel provoked Iran into attacking GCC economic infrastructure—followed by false flags, followed by follow-up strikes on Iranian oil and gas when Tehran was not retaliating enough against the Gulf states. Now, Israel has successfully forced Pakistan into the war through the Saudi interface. That's the strategic victory for Tel Aviv: they don't need to fight Iran directly. They just activated a chain where Pakistan does it for them, bound by a deal we signed decades ago and can't walk away from because of dollars. now imagine the Israeli's and indians rubbing their hands with anticipation, their two worst enemies might fight each other because their common economic and strategic ally i.e. Saudi Arabia wills it on Pakistan.

you know, our political parties and clergy (mostly Deobandi) has always termed Pakistan afight against TTP as mercernary war for dollars. our oppostion party and the clerics have always lambasted Pakistan army for fighting "own people" while being mute when their "own brothers" conducted massive terror operations.
I'm going to say something that will make some people uncomfortable. This will be the second real example of the Pakistan Army functioning as a mercenary force—doing the bidding of a foreign power, fighting a war that isn't ours. I am not talking about the fight against the Khawarij. That was, and always will be, Pakistan's war. The TTP, Al-Qaeda, the Afghan Taliban factions that target us—that's our fight, no questions asked.

But the first time we crossed that line was Bahrain. Pakistanis went in to quell an uprising, got paid for it, and then became shy when invited into the Yemen meatgrinder. The Saudis have not forgotten that hesitation. Now they are calling in the favor, and the price of saying no again may be more than this state can afford.

This isn't to question the bravery of Pakistani soldiers. It is to point out that when national defense policy is dictated by the need to protect remittance flows and loan rollovers, strategic autonomy is effectively outsourced. The Pakistan Army—the institution we all revere—is being reduced to a force that picks its wars not based on national interest but based on which foreign capital it cannot afford to lose.

let me tie it all together after Gen Munir threw an iftar dinner to our Shia community leaders and clerics.
General Munir met with Shia clerics and elders. He was not asking for permission. Hehas laid out the strategic compulsion.

his message was simple: the Pakistani state has no choice but to accept Saudi demands to confront Iran. how? that remains to be seen, will Pakistan man the oil fields and borders or will it send in its forces to attack and destroy the drone and missile sites attacking Saudis (something that Israelis and Americans have not fully succeeded but Pakistan is supposed to do so?) All the diplomacy, all the requests for calm, all the behind-the-scenes efforts to de-escalate—none of it has been good enough for Riyadh. Pakistan is now at a point where it must choose the lesser of two evils.

The options were laid out clearly:
  • Option one: resist Saudi pressure and risk the immediate deportation of nearly two million Pakistani workers, the end of Saudi loans, and the collapse of a foreign reserve framework that has been propping up this country for years.
  • Option two: comply with Saudi demands, confront Iran, make a third hostile neighbor, and indirectly hand the BLA, TTP, Afghan Taliban, and India exactly what they want—chaos along the entire western front while our forces are stretched beyond breaking point.
The Shia leadership was effectively told that diplomacy has run its course. And that Iran must not mistake Pakistan's restraint for weakness when the order comes it might have to do something which Americans and other GCC countries have not done ye (and maybe wont do). enter Iran from the east, yes its risky but Saudis are willing to risk Pakistani lives.
Let's be clear what a confrontation with Iran actually means.

A front with Iran means Pakistan's entire western border, from Chabahar to the Torkham Gate becomes a single theater. The BLA and the TTP will not fight Iran. They will exploit the redeployment of Frontier Corps and army units away from Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. India, meanwhile, will use its Chabahar leverage to tighten the noose while our attention is fixed elsewhere.

This isn't just a war with Iran. It's the ungoverned space crisis multiplied by three. now make a guess, will Saudis lose any sleep over this scenario? I know our military planners are not having much sleep.

Finally
in short, Pakistan is cooked—much to the delight of our neighboring adversaries and the domestic doom-mongers who compete with Afghan and Indian trolls to spell Pakistan's collapse.

But the tragedy is not trolls. The tragedy is that a state with the region's most battle-hardened army has allowed its strategic choices to be defined by remittance diplomacy and loan rollovers. Gen Munir's message to the Shia clerics was clear: the Saudis have drawn a line, and Pakistan must choose the 'lesser evil.' The problem is that both options—capitulation or confrontation—lead to the same place: a fragmented western front, emboldened militants, and a strategic vacuum that India and its proxies will fill.

Pakistan fought the Khawarij because that was our war. If we fight Iran, it won't be. And everyone from Tehran to New Delhi to Tel Aviv—already knows it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 4 more.
    • Total: 190 (members: 24, guests: 166)

    Pakistan Defence Latest

    Country Watch Latest

    Latest Posts

    Share this page

    Back
    Top