Mehdipersian
Trusted Member
Unofficial statistics of casualties in Syria
23 martyrs and many wounded among the Syrian army
23 martyrs and many wounded among the Syrian army
Iranian Foreign & Resistance Front Strategy & Operations
- Thread starter jauk
- Start date
Flotilla
Trusted Member
Agreed.
But Israel must pay the price of this genocide. From now, 10 or 15 years later Iran must rebuild the entire IRIAF, develop nuclear weapons and after it punish entire Israel. Same they are doing with Gaza and East Bank. Same.
Tehrani021
Registered Member
It's not bs and is a credible risk of attacking a rabid genocidal country like Israel who will use these weapons against Muslims especially Iran. Israel is wiping Gaza out as we speak because of 1000 Israelis, they fight disproportionately. I think we should have nukes, I've told you this before so I dont know why you're pleading with me. We just disagree on how it should be used. However I'm not hearing any sort of risk assessment from these solutions that you guys are giving out. Iranians have a saying for people like you and Immortal "sedat az jaye garm dar miyad" or it's easy to say things like that sat in your cozy room.
Last edited:
- Thread starter
- #589
A ‘wider conflict’ aimed at dislodging the US and neutralizing Zionia benefits everyone. The US is being gradually dislodged and Zionia is in shambles.
Iranian grand long term strategy unfolding right before our eyes.
This is war.
Angels are lost and the noble (the linguistic meaning of ‘Iran’) pay a heavy price. Painful and necessary.
- Thread starter
- #590
Zionia will be counter-nuked if that happens. Iran is a ‘threshold’ nuclear state—at least publicly.
Tehrani021
Registered Member
Zionia will be counter-nuked if that happens. Iran is a ‘threshold’ nuclear state—at least publicly.
If Iran has nukes then yes we should be attacking Israel. But the fact that we haven't attacked directly makes me doubt this or the willingness to break out.
- Thread starter
- #592
You’re thinking far too simplistically. The entire goal is NOT to get there. It’s like the minute (‘newt’ pronunciation) mechanisms of a watch. The watch movement. The watch complications.
Delicate and complex actions are involved. Remedies when things go wrong are invoked to keep things ticking.
And Iran has nukes. You not seeing them means little.
Last edited:
Tehrani021
Registered Member
Iran having nukes is purely speculation, so equally meaningless to me, and not a good strategy to break out only in the event of a nuke attack because that might be too late. They need to be there ready, locked and loaded.
I can only judge if they have them or not based on how they behave, and their reluctance to directly attack can not be ignored. Also, a state like Iran firing missiles at another nuclear state, who happens to be genocidal, without a detterance, is not something I would call "delicate".
- Thread starter
- #595
No speculation. It’s IMPOSSIBLE that Iran doesn’t have nukes. You should follow what’s happened over the past 40 years and the conclusion is indisputable.
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
No Iranian casualties in yesterday's American airstrikes against Syria and Iraq, despite being sold to their audience as strikes against Iranians!
Mehdipersian
Trusted Member
America did not even attack empty Iranian bases.They only attacked Syrians and Iraqis under the title of "Iranian targets"!
Peregrine
Trusted Member
In order to save one self from rabid zionists and their morally corrupt enablers, there is really no other choice than to have nuclear weapon
Persian Gulf
INT'L MOD
The #US killed 16 Iraqis & 7 Syrians with 120 missiles launched against 2 sovereign countries, #Iraq & #Syria, which it occupies & bullies. No Iranian casualties in the bombing & far from stopping the resistance from hitting back at the US and supporting #Gaza & bombing #Israel.
Tehrani021
Registered Member
Preaching to the choir, my friend.
Last edited:
