Iran vs the US Megathread

[Tarsonis]

Yeah, Iran long ago embraced assassination. Assassination is a valid tool of the state, security, foreign relations etc.

So you're OK with Iran assassinating US generals, cabinet officials...presidents? It's a valid tool of the state after all.

You seriously overestimate Iran’s capabilities.

[Tarsonis]

Not for nothing, we’ll assassinate as many as it takes. It’s a very delicate situation but can be done. You have to consider the state of Iran. It’s government only remains in control of the country through oppressive measures. Most Iranian civilians are dissatisfied with the Iranian Government, and further their views of the US are largely benign. It’s the Regime that’s the issue for us, not the people. It’s a delicate situation but can be maneuvered tactfully, but that we can achieve our objectives without undoing the progress the Iranian people have made

We'll be welcomed as liberators!...This time...I'm sure of it!

Nope. If we actually go to war with Iran we’ll lose all that good will. Ideally we won’t be welcomed at all, cause we’ll never set foot there.

[US-SSR]

So you're OK with Iran assassinating US generals, cabinet officials...presidents? It's a valid tool of the state after all.

You seriously overestimate Iran’s capabilities.

Do I? I certainly don't underestimate them. That is the more common mistake, and one that has led and will lead to military fiascos.

[Novus America]

Yeah, Iran long ago embraced assassination. Assassination is a valid tool of the state, security, foreign relations etc.

So you're OK with Iran assassinating US generals, cabinet officials...presidents? It's a valid tool of the state after all.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_R._Higgins

They already do this type of stuff when they can.
Our guys generally do not go driving around Iraq with virtually no security though.

I bet you if a US general or politician were as reckless and stupid as this guy was they would have a high chance of getting killed.

[Northern Dependencies]

First of all, source.

Second of all, whoever they replace him with will be decades behind this man. They won't be as effective or as experienced of a leader.

Google is your friend.

That's not how debate works. You made a claim, substantiate it.

All the sources I've seen disagree with you anyway.

By all accounts Soleimani's deputy is not "decades behind" his mentor. Is Pence "decades behind" Trump? Why would Iran be different?

Pence has no experience being president, so he would be behind in that regard. Experience and effective leadership are real things, no matter how much you wish they weren't.

Again, were you against killing bin Laden?

[Tarsonis]

Not for nothing, we’ll assassinate as many as it takes. It’s a very delicate situation but can be done. You have to consider the state of Iran. It’s government only remains in control of the country through oppressive measures. Most Iranian civilians are dissatisfied with the Iranian Government, and further their views of the US are largely benign. It’s the Regime that’s the issue for us, not the people. It’s a delicate situation but can be maneuvered tactfully, but that we can achieve our objectives without undoing the progress the Iranian people have made

Would assassinating US leaders tend to divide or unite the US population behind its government? Why would Iran be different?

Because the political situation is different. In the US, despite current tensions, there still is the belief that our government is of the people, by the people, for the people. We still associate the government with ourselves. Their our leaders. Less so in Iran. Iran is in the midst of a series of popular revolts. So they have less an attachment to their leaders, and are less likely to see the death of such a guy as this one as a breach of sovereignty. Sort of “it’s the Kings fight not mine” type mentality.

As I said, it’s delicate. The US could easily muck it up.

[Tarsonis]

You seriously overestimate Iran’s capabilities.

Do I? I certainly don't underestimate them. That is the more common mistake, and one that has led and will lead to military fiascos.

In terms of military capability, Iran is a mid tier feather weight trying to take on the Heavy Weight champion of the world. Our 5th fleet is bigger than their entire navy. Our Military is 7 times larger, and far more advanced than their outdated Cold War relics.

Toe to toe Iran does not have the capabilities to take direct action against American military targets successfully. Every actual engagement we’ve have with Iranian forces has been an overwhelming US victory.

They might score a point here and there, but there’s know way they’re on an even keel with us

[Jebslund]

I've joked about it coming to WWIII, but I highly doubt it. Iran is wont to bluster about severe revenge. They do that every time Israel so much as touches them. They don't have the financial resources to start much less win a war with a major superpower.

No they likely don’t but we wouldn’t take over Tehran as quickly as we did Baghdad. It would be a brutal drawn out affair costing tens of thousands of lives

So it'll be exactly like Baghdad, then? I mean, the deaths and the fighting didn't stop with Saddam being ousted, you know.

[Myrensis]

No they likely don’t but we wouldn’t take over Tehran as quickly as we did Baghdad. It would be a brutal drawn out affair costing tens of thousands of lives

So it'll be exactly like Baghdad, then? I mean, the deaths and the fighting didn't stop with Saddam being ousted, you know.

Difference being Iran is about 4 times the size of Iraq, has twice the population, much rougher terrain, and are just about as likely to welcome their American "liberators" as the Iraqis did.

[Northern Dependencies]

So it'll be exactly like Baghdad, then? I mean, the deaths and the fighting didn't stop with Saddam being ousted, you know.

Difference being Iran is about 4 times the size of Iraq, has twice the population, much rougher terrain, and are just about as likely to welcome their American "liberators" as the Iraqis did.

Daily reminder that an invasion of Iran still isn't going to happen.

[Jebslund]

So it'll be exactly like Baghdad, then? I mean, the deaths and the fighting didn't stop with Saddam being ousted, you know.

Difference being Iran is about 4 times the size of Iraq, has twice the population, much rougher terrain, and are just about as likely to welcome their American "liberators" as the Iraqis did.

The point being that Iraq wasn't exactly as bloodless as San Lumen seems to think for our side.

[Tarsonis]

So it'll be exactly like Baghdad, then? I mean, the deaths and the fighting didn't stop with Saddam being ousted, you know.

Difference being Iran is about 4 times the size of Iraq, has twice the population, much rougher terrain, and are just about as likely to welcome their American "liberators" as the Iraqis did.

I should point out that a seizable portion of the Iraqi population did celebrate American forces ousting Sadam. It was the aftermath where they really fucked it up.

[Plzen]

When dealing with a terror state the only appropriate approach is to treat them as terrorists.

I disagree. Treating the United States like a terrorist organisation just because they act like one would definitely not be good for human civilisation.

[Tarsonis]

Difference being Iran is about 4 times the size of Iraq, has twice the population, much rougher terrain, and are just about as likely to welcome their American "liberators" as the Iraqis did.

The point being that Iraq wasn't exactly as bloodless as San Lumen seems to think for our side.

It is the most Bloodless war the US has ever fought though. Well except for Grenada, if you can call that a war

[Northern Dependencies]

When dealing with a terror state the only appropriate approach is to treat them as terrorists.

I disagree. Treating the United States like a terrorist organisation just because they act like one would definitely not be good for human civilisation.

"nou"

[Plzen]

"nou"

What can I say? I’m always simultaneously amused and irritated by the blatant hypocrisy that the people of the United States tend to indulge in whenever someone actually tries to defend themselves from the American problem.

[Genivaria]

"nou"

What can I say? I’m always simultaneously amused and irritated by the blatant hypocrisy that the people of the United States tend to indulge in whenever someone actually tries to defend themselves from the American problem.

That's a tough position to put yourself in because you're talking about a population of 300 million+ people and pretending that they're a hive mind.

[Northern Dependencies]

"nou"

What can I say? I’m always simultaneously amused and irritated by the blatant hypocrisy that the people of the United States tend to indulge in whenever someone actually tries to defend themselves from the American problem.

Iran wouldn't have much of an American problem if they'd just stop murdering our soldiers or bombing Western embassies and such.

I mean, it seems like an easy thing to do, no?

[Northern Dependencies]

What can I say? I’m always simultaneously amused and irritated by the blatant hypocrisy that the people of the United States tend to indulge in whenever someone actually tries to defend themselves from the American problem.

That's a tough position to put yourself in because you're talking about a population of 300 million+ people and pretending that they're a hive mind.

It's true. We all eat at McDonald's, go to church on Sunday, and kick little Iranian kids around for shits and giggles.

[Tarsonis]

"nou"

What can I say? I’m always simultaneously amused and irritated by the blatant hypocrisy that the people of the United States tend to indulge in whenever someone actually tries to defend themselves from the American problem.

Foreign Relations is prison rules

[US-SSR]

Reading today's background briefing from the State Dept. I see the same wishful thinking that drove the Iraq fiasco and is exhibited here. Needless to say not everyone agrees that whacking a couple guys is going to be sufficient:

“There may well have been an ongoing plot as Pompeo claims, but Soleimani was a decision-maker, not an operational asset himself,” said Jon Bateman, who served as a senior intelligence analyst on Iran at the Defense Intelligence Agency. “Killing him would be neither necessary nor sufficient to disrupt the operational progression of an imminent plot. What it might do instead is shock Iran’s decision calculus” and deter future attack plans, Bateman said.

Given the history of this administration's decision-making "process" I can't help thinking the US has bitten off considerably more than it is going to be able to chew, and its employees, citizens and interests in the region are about to suffer for it. Again.

[Tarsonis]

Reading today's background briefing from the State Dept. I see the same wishful thinking that drove the Iraq fiasco and is exhibited here. Needless to say not everyone agrees that whacking a couple guys is going to be sufficient:

“There may well have been an ongoing plot as Pompeo claims, but Soleimani was a decision-maker, not an operational asset himself,” said Jon Bateman, who served as a senior intelligence analyst on Iran at the Defense Intelligence Agency. “Killing him would be neither necessary nor sufficient to disrupt the operational progression of an imminent plot. What it might do instead is shock Iran’s decision calculus” and deter future attack plans, Bateman said.

Given the history of this administration's decision-making "process" I can't help thinking the US has bitten off considerably more than it is going to be able to chew, and its employees, citizens and interests in the region are about to suffer for it. Again.

Sufficient to what exactly?

[Northern Dependencies]

Reading today's background briefing from the State Dept. I see the same wishful thinking that drove the Iraq fiasco and is exhibited here. Needless to say not everyone agrees that whacking a couple guys is going to be sufficient:



Given the history of this administration's decision-making "process" I can't help thinking the US has bitten off considerably more than it is going to be able to chew, and its employees, citizens and interests in the region are about to suffer for it. Again.

Sufficient to what exactly?

Orange man bad, or something to that effect.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Yeah, Iran long ago embraced assassination. Assassination is a valid tool of the state, security, foreign relations etc.

So you're OK with Iran assassinating US generals, cabinet officials...presidents? It's a valid tool of the state after all.

tbh the only one of those that would be a real loss on our part is the generals

[The Two Jerseys]

So you're OK with Iran assassinating US generals, cabinet officials...presidents? It's a valid tool of the state after all.

tbh the only one of those that would be a real loss on our part is the generals

Face it, nobody is going to miss the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development...