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

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.


Horrible statement from Pakistan, he does not mention that Saudi Arabia was the one who bombed Yemen’s airport first.
Click to expand...

SS wont be criticizing SA in the open, Paks dependency on SA financial and for oil will out weigh any ills they may do in the open.
 
Ali_Baba said:
For as long as Pakistan cannot break the begging bowl(cheap loans, IMF bailouts, and "foreign remittances") and fixes its own local economy with real organic growth, it's chain will always be yanked by its masters ( hard on the nose for Pakistani's but true ). I would ignore his statement, I am sure Iranian leadership did, they know the deal.
Click to expand...
They do indeed know the deal, well said.
 
Ali_Baba said:
I read that, "as there will be a lot lot lot of new wars to come, new crimes of colonialism, new genocides to commit and the USA does not want the law to get in the way of it ..."
Click to expand...
Basically any US soldier who has been involved in war crimes on holiday in a country that accepts the ICC authority could in theory be arrested and put on trial. This is what Rubio is trying to protect against.

The US is unwinding the rules based order established after WW2, its morally showing itself to be so corrupt with some of the scummiest leaders around, its allies are seeing a greedy unreliable partner who wants to take more territory (Greenland). These are signs of a decaying empire.
 
Persian Gulf said:
What he expects is irrelevant, all that matters is what was agreed in the MOU.
Click to expand...
RescueRanger said:
This 10000%, an agreement was made and it was decided hostilities would stop. The Memorandum of MISUNDERSTANDING was doomed from the start! Also ISRAEL is POS nation that has been lighting fires in the region and expecting Washington to bail them out when the shit hits the fan.

Anyone can be TEN MEN when they have a nuclear superpower backing them.
Click to expand...

Ok. Now what?

Even if you disregard explicit Iranian statements that their attack was about the Strait and not Lebanon, who did this escalation serve? What did Iran gain from it? Did it stop Lebanon from being bombed? Or did it resume the US attacks, sanctions, and blockade on Iran? Will this argument stop the Americans or the Israelis? Did we expect that the world would let Iranian attacks on merchant vessels to further its geopolitical aims become status quo? Iran is not powerful enough. It keeps leverage by allowing safe passage while holding the threat over it. It gets bombed and sanctioned by attacking merchant assets.

There's no point in pretending that this world is a level playing field.
 
Last edited:
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.


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Marandi is a defacto spokesperson for the regime . I think his brother was Khomeini’s doctor.
Opening several minutes is all you need to hear. It is clear that the Americans are using the Gaza model by hitting civilian infrastructure. That is what is vassal occupied state does .

Iranian assets are all underground he says . They are brought out , fire, and removed .

The problem the Americans will have is that Iran is the size of Western Europe . They will run out ammunition long before anything effective occurs .

We can see they a bombed railway is back up in two days .


To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
KAL-EL said:
No nukes were used on Iran. Complete fiction
Click to expand...
Here’s something simple if America under Trump ever decided to use a nuclear weapon in this day and age one Iran would surrender because you can’t win against that but 2 if that did happen countries like china russia North Korea pakistan Israel and India wouldn’t hesitate to use theirs…….Trump is crazy and yes he filled up the pentagon with a bunch of yes men but never going to happen at least hopefully in my lifetime
 
Pakistan First said:
Wrong! Iran cannot destroy US warships. Iran has tried for sure but those missiles / drones got intercepted.

This is war! You don't let you enemy bomb you day and night. and you say you are not even hitting their warships deliberately which are being used actively against Iran.

Iran badly needs deterrence. US is hitting Iran whenever it wants. Iran needs to have capability to destroy its warships OR the aircrafts that are airborne. Without air power and naval power its a daunting task but with modern and sophisticated land based missiles it can be possible.

The "bases" you hit already for 50 days. US is not stupid to deploy its military in those bases next to Iran while its having war with Iran. Iran did the damage whatever it could in first phase of war. Now hitting those bases over and over again is meaningless and is clearly not deterring US and its clearly not working. Iran needs capabilities to hit aircrafts and warships only that will bring deterrence and stop US from aggression.
Click to expand...
Agree. It has always been the USAF and USN (and whatever air corps units the other services have) that have kept the foot on Iran's throat militarily. Iran would need some imaginative solutions.

Maybe a ground incursion could potentially play into Iranian hands, but US are holding off that for the time being.
 
There will door knocks will come soon . The drones hunting Americans in the streets of good old USA soon is around the corner . Never in history.
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.
 
Wingzero30 said:
He is unfortunately beholden to saudis and won't dare utter a word against them.
Click to expand...
It's a treaty, a signed, ratified and notarised binding agreement, which we are correct to honour. It doesn't make a difference whether it's with KSA or anyone else. Certain nations do breach treaties depending on their mood - such behaviour is not in Pakistani interests.

I suppose the missing information here is the actual terms of the agreement, which we can only speculate on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 537 (members: 6, guests: 531)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top