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

Frankly, Iran's air defense network is abysmal. The Tomahawk is a slow, outdated cruise missile that flies straight and lacks stealth capabilities. Even 30 years ago, Iraq managed to shoot down numerous cruise missiles during the U.S.'s intense bombing campaign.
Yet Iran couldn't intercept a single one—they didn't even realize they were under attack.
The Iraqi military during the Gulf War was far more competent.
This is an unforgivable blunder. This is what happens when religious leaders seize power and meddle in state affairs and military matters.
 
US military sources say the underground nuclear complex in Isfahan is deeper and more powerful than expected and may not have been fully destroyed by the Tomahawk.

What idiot even came up with the idea that an underground fortress buried dozens of meters deep could be completely destroyed by a battle axe?
 
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
So it true
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Gripen9 said:
Stuck between rock and a hard place.

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

In the Middle East, you either eat or get eaten, there is no middle ground.
 
gambit said:
BRIC is not NATO, not even in the same principled level that created NATO, in other words, BRIC was weak to start. Not 'weakened' but simply weak. NATO was a response to a threat, the Warsaw Pact. BRIC was created as a threat like how the Warsaw Pact was created. Unfortunately, at least the Warsaw Pact had at least a perceived threat, the West, whereas BRIC had nothing and China was a weak leader of BRIC.
Click to expand...
BRICS is an economic collection (not even an alliance or trade partnership), NATO is a military alliance. Both are not same even one single bit.
 
HAIDER said:
UN should be moved from US , if they want to serve any purpose ...lol...otherwise yes, it's a waste of time... but diplomatic point of view, it's ok..having some lip service.
Click to expand...
First, no one can 'force' or 'eject' or 'remove' US from the UN. See Security Council.

Second, if the US exit the UN, the UN as an institution would collapse. Sure, alternatives would rise, but the world would have to see a chain or rise/fall until a sufficiently cohesive and attractive idea endure. League of Nations then United Nations, for example.

Personally, I want the US to exit the UN and let any other fool take on the task of building an equivalent. Excuse US if we do not wish 'Good luck' to that task.
 
gambit said:
First, no one can 'force' or 'eject' or 'remove' US from the UN. See Security Council.

Second, if the US exit the UN, the UN as an institution would collapse. Sure, alternatives would rise, but the world would have to see a chain or rise/fall until a sufficiently cohesive and attractive idea endure. League of Nations then United Nations, for example.

Personally, I want the US to exit the UN and let any other fool take on the task of building an equivalent. Excuse US if we do not wish 'Good luck' to that task.
Click to expand...
Major funding for a lot of the UN"s corruption comes from the US.
 
Why US can just randomly attack a sovereign nation scot free? where is what US always calls the global law and order?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 7 more.
    • Total: 200 (members: 43, guests: 157)

    Pakistan Defence Latest

    Country Watch Latest

    Latest Posts

    Share this page

    Back
    Top