Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Iran going nuclear or already there ?

1192022242527

Comments

  • Posts: 551 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    It's great that you have such faith in the Israeli military. They have been fighting for more than 100 days and they still haven't managed to eliminate Hamas. All they've managed to do so far is get themselves indicted by the ICJ for mass murdering civilians.

    I don't rate their chances very highly against a more competent enemy like Iran



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,426 ✭✭✭brickster69


    Islamic resistance statement says 3 bases hit in Syria and another in Occupied Palestine. Someone has got the story wrong and should be easy to clarify either way.

    syria.jpg


    "if you get on the wrong train, get off at the nearest station, the longer it takes you to get off, the more expensive the return trip will be."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,756 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    The hardliners have always run the show in Iran even when there was a supposedly more moderate President in place. Despite the increased activity by their proxies there is still a disconnect between the rhetoric and the actions Iran is prepared to take. If they were truly intent on going off a cliff they would have engaged Israel and America in a war long ago over the numerous attacks inside Iran over the years.

    They have denied involvement in this latest attack on the US base because they know there will be a severe reprisal. If America do bomb sites in Iran. We will hear loud noises about revenge on the great Satan but Iran will seek to avoid a direct war as they did when Soleimani(?) was taken out . If America or Israel lost an equivalent figure in an attack by Iran they would likely go to War with Iran. The Iranian leadership motivated by self preservation didn't because they know will lose and likely be removed from power in the process . So they clearly don't really believe in the rhetoric about martyrdom above all. A bit like the Hamas lads in Qatar spouting about how we love death over life as we enjoy an opulent life in the safety of Qatar.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,373 ✭✭✭fly_agaric


    The proxies wouldn't be up to very much at all without large and increasing amounts of support (money, weapons, training) they get.

    I don't think Iran can maintain that "oh it is not us, we don't control these lads, they are loose cannons with their own agenda" argument as the proxies get more serious levels of weaponry and go on to stage bigger and better attacks.

    On their denial, the regime also lies a lot. Parts of it I think were still denying (with a smirk) that any Iranian drones are flying in skies over Ukraine or that they have provided military aid to Russia.

    Who knows how much involvement or say they have in any individual attacks? I suppose that is the point of proxies, but it can cut both ways once those attacked start to reject the deniability.

    I agree the assassination of Soleimani and before that, the US welching on their nuclear agreement made things much worse. Don't know internal politics, but I would think it could have empowered those in regime who would believe there is no point ever engaging honestly with the US, or war with the US or Israel etc. is inevitable etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,082 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    It's complex and very difficult to fight Hamas fighters in built up areas. It was always going to be bloody for the IDF regardless.

    Targeting nuclear facilities would be very different. Not sure how Israel would intend to do it (target parts of the chain, air only, or send in ground forces) but they'd probably do it with the US behind them. Iran is not helping it's cause in that regard with recent attacks and supporting Houthi attacks.

    If Trump does get in, expect Netanyahu's govt to try it during that time-frame (depending on Iran).



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Can't see Israel putting boots on the ground in Iran,but I can't completely rule it out some kind of special forces raid on top of massive air attacks , something Iran hasn't the ability to deal with



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,082 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Some sort of limited ground intervention, not traditional "boots on the ground". If Iran keep proceeding towards weaponisation, then Israel, at a stage in that, will have to take action. If they can't get at the facilities by air/ground, then they are limited to punitive action.

    It's completely up to Iran really, if they pause their program and reign in their support of Hamas and militant groups, then they give Israel no excuse. However I think with the current Iranian regime that's very unlikely.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    If the leadership change course and take an off ramp this is only going to end one way for them



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,426 ✭✭✭brickster69


    Iranian lawmaker on US escalations


    "if you get on the wrong train, get off at the nearest station, the longer it takes you to get off, the more expensive the return trip will be."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,756 ✭✭✭✭nacho libre


    The proxies even with all the funding they get are no match for the Israelis and Americans. They are about to find that out soon enough.

    I suspect the qud forces have a huge say in what operations the proxies carry out. They likely calculate that such low level attacks will not lead to a direct war.

    I agree there is always a danger of a miscalculation and a direct war breaking out, but the hardliners so far seem keen to avoid it. This is the assessment of US Intelligence by the way too.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Looks like strikes are going to happen tonight or over the next 24 hours,

    The US needs to send a loud and unequivocally message what ever happens next



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,298 ✭✭✭ZeroThreat


    We need strikes on Tehran itself to send a clear message to the mad mullahs



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,375 ✭✭✭deirdremf


    What would the "ground intervention" consist of? And who would you see carrying it out?

    I mean Israel can't invade Lebanon, and is having a very difficult time on the ground in Gaza, yet some people see Israel carrying out a ground campaign 1,000 km away from home. Is opium consumption mandatory where you guys are?

    As long as Israel has air superiority, they can carry out sorties but that's about it.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,101 ✭✭✭lumphammer2


    2001 ... Afghanistan is the cause of all terrorism in the world ....

    2002 ... Iraq is the cause of all terrorism in the world ...

    2024 ... Iran is the cause of all terrorism in the world ....

    Well ... they all cannot be guilty .... common denominator is hardliners from the West like Netanyahu and Trump ... the real terrorists ....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 423 ✭✭Robert Nairac


    Any and all steps should be taken to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons, even a pre-emptive nuclear strike or series of strikes. Islamic fundamentalists with nuclear weapons is a horrifying thought and an existential threat.

    Iran should be held responsible for any and all attacks by one of their proxies. Containment is not working. Why play tit for tat when you have overwhelming military superiority? A devastating and disproportionate military response seems appropriate.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,531 ✭✭✭combat14


    the common denominator may be radical islam in the case of taliban Afghanistan and mullahs in iran of course no one wants to say that



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,068 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Soleimani oversaw missile strikes on Arabia's largest oil refinery.


    They were unlucky they didn't destroy more of it. That was nearly a global economy killing event.


    Taking him out was the smallest act that should have been done, it also should have ended any deals.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,558 ✭✭✭mulbot


    No no, Iran needs to publicly admit their nuclear capability now. That'll put a stop to those Israel terrorists and the US will have no option other than to FK back and stay within their own inbred hillbilly border. The world will be a better place for it



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Not a chance if Iran has nuclear weapons it will be turned into a lake



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,225 ✭✭✭flatty


    Israel don't need an excuse. They'll just make one up as desired.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,225 ✭✭✭flatty


    I reckon the US is as likely to be the common denominator.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 941 ✭✭✭JPCN1


    Two entirely different theatres to operate in…

    Iran might also face an internal uprising if conflict were to break out.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,426 ✭✭✭brickster69


    "if you get on the wrong train, get off at the nearest station, the longer it takes you to get off, the more expensive the return trip will be."



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,781 ✭✭✭weisses




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,426 ✭✭✭brickster69


    The same place as Pakistan will wipe Iran out. Look at them yesterday getting on like a house on fire now, amazing what a little chat can achieve to resolve a problem isn't it ?


    "if you get on the wrong train, get off at the nearest station, the longer it takes you to get off, the more expensive the return trip will be."



  • This content has been removed.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,553 ✭✭✭Wolf359f


    I can remember another map being posted in the Russia thread by the same poster which had a NATO base in Ireland!



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    That's worse than the fake NATO map used by the Russians .....

    That's poor



  • Advertisement
  • This content has been removed.


Advertisement