Iran launches Operation True Promise - massive missile/drone strikes across Israel, Israel allegedly responds with quadcopters

[Eşbah]

Of course they will! Are you in any doubt brother?

Yes and Azarbaijan as well

Türkiye didn't give permission for the US to use its territory for the invasion of Iraq. What makes you think Ankara would greenlight an assault on Iran?

 

[Persian Gulf]

Türkiye didn't give permission for the US to use its territory for the invasion of Iraq. What makes you think Ankara would greenlight an assault on Iran?

of those three routes the one over turkey is least likely in my opinion

Jordan --> Iraq --> Iran
Syria --> Iraq --> Iran

are most likely routes

 

[HamidAgha]

Türkiye didn't give permission for the US to use its territory for the invasion of Iraq. What makes you think Ankara would greenlight an assault on Iran?

Because this time around Israel is involved. There will be no compromise on obedience.

 

[KingQamaR]

Cautionary tale, If the Iranians could track the F-35, they wouldn't have shot down a civilian airliner.

This is because the air defense crew of that Buk missile system knew they could not track the F-35. So the second they had contact on the radar, they opened fire. They didn't wait for friendly aircraft to intercept and identify the aircraft. They just opened fire as soon as possible.

 

[Shadihassan28]

of those three routes the one over turkey is least likely in my opinion

Jordan --> Iraq --> Iran
Syria --> Iraq --> Iran

are most likely routes

Jordan wouldn’t allow American forces to go through their territory to attack iran nor would Iraq, two so called friendly nations who don’t have any real issue with iran are not going to be caught in the crossfire. I think you guys forget the fifth fleet in Bahrain double edge sword it would be an easy target for iran if they believed American forces were going to get involved but I really doubt it, also the Shia cells I am sure iran has operating there would attempt to cause havoc

 

[KingQamaR]

Jordan wouldn’t allow American forces to go through their territory to attack iran nor would Iraq, two so called friendly nations who don’t have any real issue with iran are not going to be caught in the crossfire. I think you guys forget the fifth fleet in Bahrain double edge sword it would be an easy target for iran if they believed American forces were going to get involved but I really doubt it, also the Shia cells I am sure iran has operating there would attempt to cause havoc

Americans would not need land bases or route. I wouldn't mess around with one naval strike group let alone two. They've got like 100 F35s on a single carrier & could level a countries capital city within 2 or 3 hours let alone what kinda military who would actually resist it too..

 

[Shadihassan28]

Americans would not need land bases or route. I wouldn't mess around with one naval strike group let alone two. They've got like 100 F35s on a single carrier & could level a countries capital city within 2 or 3 hours let alone what kinda military who would actually resist it too..

Aircraft carriers are based in Bahrain was my point…………….,yes sorry sustained bombing would need somewhere to resupply aircraft carriers don’t carry unlimited munitions and iran isn’t a Syria or Iraq there would be casualties on Americas side so yeah I don’t think America really wants to get involved directly in another messy prolonged war. I’m assuming your trying to flame this thread but so I’m going to put you on ignore

 

[PK784]

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

Accept third party cookies

 

[KingQamaR]

Aircraft carriers are based in Bahrain was my point…………….,yes sorry sustained bombing would need somewhere to resupply aircraft carriers don’t carry unlimited munitions and iran isn’t a Syria or Iraq there would be casualties on Americas side so yeah I don’t think America really wants to get involved directly in another messy prolonged war. I’m assuming your trying to flame this thread but so I’m going to put you on ignore

pearl Harbour 2?

Americans also have 7 Wasp Class and 2 America Class light aircraft carriers!
The USA has 20 aircraft carriers.

Suit yourself I only stated the facts.

 

[Tamerlane]

How on earth the above "implies" what you said in below: ????




All you do is pass out hilarious strategies, don''t know what nuclear deterrence is, then you assume things which I never said, then you misunderstand. What I said in the very first paragraph is exactly what the nuclear deterrence would look like for Iran. You want to twist and pick on some words, then be my guest.
If you really don't have anything substantial to prove your logic then perhaps better to not derail the topic in meaningless explanations.

Both you can @HamidAgha are correct in your arguments. You're right that the idea of having nuclear weapons is to deter the enemy and never be forced to use them. He is correct that declaring nukes can be dangerous in itself.

During the Cold War there was the threat of a first strike by the USSR or USA on the other. The idea was to do a sudden massive nuclear attack to cripple the other side. In light of this threat both sides spent a lot of effort on developing a second strike ability to avoid losing all the nukes in the first enemy strike and then be able to retaliate. That is why they have nuclear armed submarines on the prowl all the time.

In the case of Pakistan it was allowed to have nukes because the Americans know that Pakistan will only threaten India and never threaten Israel or the West. They know that the Pakistani generals are whiskey drinking Anglo-Hindus with families and properties in London and Texas, so they're not a threat.

In the case of Iran the US will most likely do a nuclear first strike on Iran if they are sure Iran has gone nuclear. Therefore, @HamidAgha is not wrong in saying that Iran needs to be stronger before declaring itself as a nuclear state. They need to have a second strike capability.

Also, while I think that Iran can't be stupid enough not to have developed nuclear weapons maybe they really don't have any. I think they have a lot of nuclear weapons but maybe they're not confident enough to be able to retaliate in case of a US/NATO first strike.

We are random people on the web and we don't really have enough information about the ground realities in Iran or Israel to be able to pronounce definite judgements.

 

[Cancerous Tumor]

Iran’s leader says 4 threatening words to Israel, blasts the US and West for 'disaster' in Gaza

Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei vowed to retaliate against Israel for an airstrike on Iran’s consulate in Syria, which left several Iranian generals dead.

www.foxnews.com

Ak-47 ?

 

[HamidAgha]

Both you can @HamidAgha are correct in your arguments. You're right that the idea of having nuclear weapons is to deter the enemy and never be forced to use them. He is correct that declaring nukes can be dangerous in itself.

During the Cold War there was the threat of a first strike by the USSR or USA on the other. The idea was to do a sudden massive nuclear attack to cripple the other side. In light of this threat both sides spent a lot of effort on developing a second strike ability to avoid losing all the nukes in the first enemy strike and then be able to retaliate. That is why they have nuclear armed submarines on the prowl all the time.

In the case of Pakistan it was allowed to have nukes because the Americans know that Pakistan will only threaten India and never threaten Israel or the West. They know that the Pakistani generals are whiskey drinking Anglo-Hindus with families and properties in London and Texas, so they're not a threat.

In the case of Iran the US will most likely do a nuclear first strike on Iran if they are sure Iran has gone nuclear. Therefore, @HamidAgha is not wrong in saying that Iran needs to be stronger before declaring itself as a nuclear state. They need to have a second strike capability.

Also, while I think that Iran can't be stupid enough not to have developed nuclear weapons maybe they really don't have any. I think they have a lot of nuclear weapons but maybe they're not confident enough to be able to retaliate in case of a US/NATO first strike.

We are random people on the web and we don't really have enough information about the ground realities in Iran or Israel to be able to pronounce definite judgements.

Can you contribute more to this forum please?! I think we can all agree that we love reading your posts bro.

 

[KingQamaR]

Both you can @HamidAgha are correct in your arguments. You're right that the idea of having nuclear weapons is to deter the enemy and never be forced to use them. He is correct that declaring nukes can be dangerous in itself.

During the Cold War there was the threat of a first strike by the USSR or USA on the other. The idea was to do a sudden massive nuclear attack to cripple the other side. In light of this threat both sides spent a lot of effort on developing a second strike ability to avoid losing all the nukes in the first enemy strike and then be able to retaliate. That is why they have nuclear armed submarines on the prowl all the time.

In the case of Pakistan it was allowed to have nukes because the Americans know that Pakistan will only threaten India and never threaten Israel or the West. They know that the Pakistani generals are whiskey drinking Anglo-Hindus with families and properties in London and Texas, so they're not a threat.

In the case of Iran the US will most likely do a nuclear first strike on Iran if they are sure Iran has gone nuclear. Therefore, @HamidAgha is not wrong in saying that Iran needs to be stronger before declaring itself as a nuclear state. They need to have a second strike capability.

Also, while I think that Iran can't be stupid enough not to have developed nuclear weapons maybe they really don't have any. I think they have a lot of nuclear weapons but maybe they're not confident enough to be able to retaliate in case of a US/NATO first strike.

We are random people on the web and we don't really have enough information about the ground realities in Iran or Israel to be able to pronounce definite judgements.

What do you mean by a country like Pakistan? Do you think making a nuclear bomb under so much pressure, treaties, sanctions, economic problems, and what not is easy? You need to study about Pakistan's nuclear programme as well as the difficult conditions/environment under which Pakistan became a nuclear power.

 

[Ё-МАЁ]

An acquaintance's father works for the IRGC. Today he was urgently summoned to a meeting in Tehran. He came back late and did not explain anything. All he said was to pack up and run to the store to buy groceries for two weeks. Now we're going somewhere far out of town. I don't know what's going on, but I think it's started.....

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

Accept third party cookies

 

[JaneBhiDoYaaron]

I am not saying Iran is not capable or won’t retaliate but