How Iran will defeat Trump and America

[+Hammerclaw]

2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Can you justify that statement ? That the "Zionists" are in a "war of ethnic cleansing with the Arab world ? 

The "Arab World" includes Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Saudi, Kuwait, the UAE, and a few others. 

In what way has Israel attempted ethnic cleansing in any of those territories ? 

I fear that you are resorting to hyperbole in order to criticise the Jews, @Hammerclaw !

In addition, read your Koran. The Jews are pariahs throughout. 

I was referring to events Immediately following the end of the mandate. Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, all members of Nasser's grandiose dream of a United Arab Republic, some of whom have no diplomatic relations recognize Israel's right to exist to this day. Yeah, the Arab world. and the ethnic cleansing occurred in Palestine. If you're going to correct me, try to sound like you know what you're talking about.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2019 by Hammerclaw

[+Hammerclaw]

1 hour ago, and then said:

You left out the words of the Quran regarding Jews.  Check me if I'm wrong but I think that tome dates earlier than 1948.

You should read some of the stuff in the old Testament. The Iberian Sephardim fled to Islam to escape Christian persecution following the Reconquista. 

 

[RoofGardener]

58 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

I was referring to events Immediately following the end of the mandate. Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, all members of Nasser's grandiose dream of a United Arab Republic, some of whom have no diplomatic relations recognize Israel's right to exist to this day. Yeah, the Arab world. and the ethnic cleansing occurred in Palestine. If you're going to correct me, try to sound like you know what you're talking about.

 

 

You stated that the "Zionists" attempted to ethnicly cleans the "Arab World". 

Of COURSE they didn't. 

I know what I'm talking about. You used hyperbole to make some sort of point, and didn't succeed. 

[+and-then]

53 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

You should read some of the stuff in the old Testament. The Iberian Sephardim fled to Islam to escape Christian persecution following the Reconquista. 

 

You speak accurately of a horrific HISTORY of so-called Christians who murdered, tortured, stole and enslaved Jews for centuries.  That it happened is even LESS excusable, IMO, than what some Muslims do to Jews today.  At least Muslims are exhorted to such behavior by their holy book.  Christians undertook such acts on their own authority and desires completely.  However, that does not mean that Islamic FUNDAMENTALISTS are any less a threat to modern civilization and especially to Jews and Christians.  

[+Hammerclaw]

55 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

You stated that the "Zionists" attempted to ethnicly cleans the "Arab World". 

Of COURSE they didn't. 

I know what I'm talking about. You used hyperbole to make some sort of point, and didn't succeed. 

No I did not. You will not find the phrase " ethnically cleanse the arab world" in my post. You read that into it. Your reading comprehension skills could use some work. 

[Tatetopa]

4 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Those where done by people citing texts on White Supremacy and Nationalism. At no point did they quote the bible. When was the last time that some crazy Christians or Jews committed an atrocity whilst citing Scripture as their motivation and justification ? And citing it accurately ? 

Did I go to far afield?  It is not enough that they be Christians or Jews, they have to be reciting a Holy Text while committing violence?  I will stick to  my statement:Hate can hide itself in any religion.  Could count violence against abortion clinics and murder of doctors as religiously inspired?

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Hate can hide itself in any religion.  Could count violence against abortion clinics and murder of doctors as religiously inspired?

"Religiously" inspired?  Yes.  Inspired by Christ's words?  Not that I've ever read.  And hate can "hide" in any religious tradition but it is in plain sight in many of the Sura's in the Qur'an.  Most Muslims seem unwilling to ever just admit this, they want to argue that non-Muslims simply aren't capable of understanding the words but that kind of silliness is just a conceit that fools no one but themselves.  Jews aren't really enamored with "turning the other cheek" either.

[RoofGardener]

8 hours ago, Hammerclaw said:

No I did not. You will not find the phrase " ethnically cleanse the arab world" in my post. You read that into it. Your reading comprehension skills could use some work. 

Does the phrase "... and are instantly in a war of ethnic cleansing with the Arab world. " ring any bells  

[+Hammerclaw]

17 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Does the phrase "... and are instantly in a war of ethnic cleansing with the Arab world. " ring any bells  

Yes, they were, on all sides as the nascent states of the Levant dismembered Palestine, tearing off chunks for themselves while trying to strangle the infant Jewish state in it's cradle. The war was, indeed, with the surrounding Arab world and the ethnic cleansing occurred on both sides as lines of demarcation were drawn in blood. Does the phrase "Palestinian Refugees" ring a bell and "The Right of Return"?

[RoofGardener]

6 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Did I go to far afield?  It is not enough that they be Christians or Jews, they have to be reciting a Holy Text while committing violence?  I will stick to  my statement:Hate can hide itself in any religion.  Could count violence against abortion clinics and murder of doctors as religiously inspired?

The actions of religiously inspired anti-abortion nutters like the Army of God are pretty minuscule compared to Certain Other Religions. Still, it's a fair point. 

[RoofGardener]

9 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Yes, they were, on all sides as the nascent states of the Levant dismembered Palestine, tearing off chunks for themselves while trying to strangle the infant Jewish state in it's cradle. The war was, indeed, with the surrounding Arab world and the ethnic cleansing occurred on both sides as lines of demarcation were drawn in blood. Does the phrase "Palestinian Refugees" ring a bell and "The Right of Return"?

Nevertheless, your statement that Israel (or rather, Zionists) are in a 'war of ethnic cleansing' against the "Arab World" is hyperbole, to say the least. 

[+Hammerclaw]

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Nevertheless, your statement that Israel (or rather, Zionists) are in a 'war of ethnic cleansing' against the "Arab World" is hyperbole, to say the least. 

No it is not. Jewish settlements in lands not within the present boundaries of the Modern State were forfeit.

[+Hammerclaw]

Understand, there is a distinction between Jewish settlement and Zionist Settlement. Some of the Jewish settlements had been there for centuries and most were lost.

[RoofGardener]

3 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

No it is not. Jewish settlements in lands not within the present boundaries of the Modern State were forfeit.

That is a VERY interesting map, @Hammerclaw, and one that is not often printed. You'll notice the HUGE area that was given to the Arabs ? The area now known as Jordan ? That was ORIGINALLY part of the territory of "Palestine" that was supposed to be divided between the Jews and the Arabs. The Arab's got their huge chunk, and the REST was supposed to be for the Jews. 

Anyway, going back to the opening post topic. Iran's motor-boat "swarm" flotilla's could indeed damage a US warship (not a carrier, as they would be held at some distance from the coast, and protected by a screen of destroyers.) However, in turn, the 'swarm' motorboat fleets would be utterly destroyed, along with their bases and supply depots. It would be a Pyrrhic victory for the Iranians. A few more victories like THAT and their military would be on its knees.  

[+Hammerclaw]

9 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

That is a VERY interesting map, @Hammerclaw, and one that is not often printed. You'll notice the HUGE area that was given to the Arabs ? The area now known as Jordan ? That was ORIGINALLY part of the territory of "Palestine" that was supposed to be divided between the Jews and the Arabs. The Arab's got their huge chunk, and the REST was supposed to be for the Jews. 

Anyway, going back to the opening post topic. Iran's motor-boat "swarm" flotilla's could indeed damage a US warship (not a carrier, as they would be held at some distance from the coast, and protected by a screen of destroyers.) However, in turn, the 'swarm' motorboat fleets would be utterly destroyed, along with their bases and supply depots. It would be a Pyrrhic victory for the Iranians. A few more victories like THAT and their military would be on its knees.  

Yes and no. Their air force and navy would be neutralized, but they could still project force beyond their borders via land, at significant casualty rates, of course. It would be "pyrrhic" for us as, well, as the cost of peace and occupation would far outweigh the cost of war. The Iraq occupation would be a playground in comparison. Give the Persians time and they'll, eventually, destroy themselves, as they always have.

Edited May 26, 2019 by Hammerclaw

[RoofGardener]

17 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Yes and no. Their air force and navy would be neutralized, but they could still project force beyond their borders via land, at significant casualty rates, of course. It would be "pyrrhic" for us as, well, as the cost of peace and occupation would far outweigh the cost of war. The Iraq occupation would be a playground in comparison. Give the Persians time and they'll, eventually, destroy themselves, as they always have.

Well, a forced landing on Iranian soil would be a dodgy proposition, and any attempt at occupation would be a disaster. 

But the USA doesn't have to do that. It could give the Iranian leadership a significant slap in the face - and all but wipe out the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp - using a mixture of air strikes, cruise missile strikes, and even shore bombardment alone. 

Missile factories, munitions stores, barracks .. they could all be targeted. Along with Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp training and supply camps in other countries. (I'm mostly thinking of Syria here). 

Consider; if the USA where to destroy Iranian ports, that alone would be a massive blow against Iran, as it would be unable to (easily) export its oil. For that matter, refineries could be targeted. The economy of Iran would be ravaged. 

Power stations and electrical distribution nodes could also be targeted. So could railways and bridges. How long would the leadership last if the people are cold, in the dark, and starting to run out of food ? 

 

[+Hammerclaw]

27 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Well, a forced landing on Iranian soil would be a dodgy proposition, and any attempt at occupation would be a disaster. 

But the USA doesn't have to do that. It could give the Iranian leadership a significant slap in the face - and all but wipe out the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp - using a mixture of air strikes, cruise missile strikes, and even shore bombardment alone. 

Missile factories, munitions stores, barracks .. they could all be targeted. Along with Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp training and supply camps in other countries. (I'm mostly thinking of Syria here). 

Consider; if the USA where to destroy Iranian ports, that alone would be a massive blow against Iran, as it would be unable to (easily) export its oil. For that matter, refineries could be targeted. The economy of Iran would be ravaged. 

Power stations and electrical distribution nodes could also be targeted. So could railways and bridges. How long would the leadership last if the people are cold, in the dark, and starting to run out of food ? 

 

Any war with the Persians would be folly, unnecessary and to no purpose. We'll be leaving the Middle East to it's own devices, before long, as it's geopolitical and economic significance wanes. We won't need it's oil and no longer feel obliged to hold the hands of it's quaint and archaic despots. India will become our new strategic partner as our focus moves east to contain Chinese expansionism in the region. Stripped of the wealth generated by fossil fuels, the Gulf States will stagnate and have to go back to herding goats and farming rocks for a living. Their ruling elites are living on borrowed time.

Edited May 26, 2019 by Hammerclaw

[RoofGardener]

4 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Any war with the Persians would be folly, unnecessary and to no purpose. We'll be leaving the Middle East to it's devices, before long, as it geopolitical and economic significance wanes. We won't need it's oil and no longer feel obliged to hold the hands of it's quaint and archaic despots. India will become our new strategic partner as our focus moves east to contain Chinese expansionism in the region. Stripped of the wealth generated by fossil fuels, the Gulf States will stagnate and have to go back to herding goats and farming rocks for a living. Their ruling elites are living on borrowed time.

Hmmm... perhaps. Although it WOULD serve as a warning to any uppity states in the region. And the economic disruption would set back Iran's plans to get an atomic bomb. 

[+Hammerclaw]

6 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmmm... perhaps. Although it WOULD serve as a warning to any uppity states in the region. And the economic disruption would set back Iran's plans to get an atomic bomb. 

Sorry, but the US military only permits one disaster per region in a century. Looks bad in the papers and upsets civilians at their breakfast. The atomic bomb, a weapon so terrible, no one dare use it. The atomic albatross around the necks of any who possess it. All you do is fret over someone else using theirs against you.

Edited May 26, 2019 by Hammerclaw

[Tatetopa]

18 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

But the USA doesn't have to do that. It could give the Iranian leadership a significant slap in the face - and all but wipe out the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp - using a mixture of air strikes, cruise missile strikes, and even shore bombardment alone. 

Missile factories, munitions stores, barracks .. they could all be targeted. Along with Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corp training and supply camps in other countries. (I'm mostly thinking of Syria here). 

Consider; if the USA where to destroy Iranian ports, that alone would be a massive blow against Iran, as it would be unable to (easily) export its oil. For that matter, refineries could be targeted. The economy of Iran would be ravaged. 

Power stations and electrical distribution nodes could also be targeted. So could railways and bridges. How long would the leadership last if the people are cold, in the dark, and starting to run out of food ? 

 

What a wonderful way to slap leadership in the face .destroy hundreds of thousands of civilians by direct bombing and starvation. , and as a side benefit, the survivors will certainly love the West even more.  A wonderful testament to those who think unborn life is so sacred, death and starvation to  Iranian children.  Almost as great as our efforts to support thew Saudis in their war with Yemen.  Got to hand it to you Roof, a tried and true formula for success in war.

[Tatetopa]

6 hours ago, and then said:

"Religiously" inspired?  Yes.  Inspired by Christ's words?  Not that I've ever read. 

So very true.  Not inspired by Christ's words.

[+Hammerclaw]

6 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

What a wonderful way to slap leadership in the face .destroy hundreds of thousands of civilians by direct bombing and starvation. , and as a side benefit, the survivors will certainly love the West even more.  A wonderful testament to those who think unborn life is so sacred, death and starvation to  Iranian children.  Almost as great as our efforts to support thew Saudis in their war with Yemen.  Got to hand it to you Roof, a tried and true formula for success in war.

It's virtually another proxy war. Iran supports the rebels and we support the government and it's ally.

Edited May 26, 2019 by Hammerclaw

[RoofGardener]

12 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Sorry, but the US military only permits one disaster per region in a century. Looks bad in the papers and upsets civilians at their breakfast. The atomic bomb, a weapon so terrible, no one dare use it. The atomic albatross around the necks of any who possess it. All you do is fret over someone else using theirs against you.

Under normal circumstances, I would agree. 

However, I fear that Iran is run by lunatic mullah's. If they had a bomb, and a missile to fit it onto, I think they would launch against Israel the very next day !

[RoofGardener]

9 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

What a wonderful way to slap leadership in the face .destroy hundreds of thousands of civilians by direct bombing and starvation. , and as a side benefit, the survivors will certainly love the West even more.  A wonderful testament to those who think unborn life is so sacred, death and starvation to  Iranian children.  Almost as great as our efforts to support thew Saudis in their war with Yemen.  Got to hand it to you Roof, a tried and true formula for success in war.

Yup.. it's a real "win-win", isn't it ?  

Joking apart; I think direct civilian casualties could be kept to a minimum. 

[+Hammerclaw]

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Under normal circumstances, I would agree. 

However, I fear that Iran is run by lunatic mullah's. If they had a bomb, and a missile to fit it onto, I think they would launch against Israel the very next day !

Really? Turn the land containing Islam's first great monument and shrine outside of Arabia into a radioactive wasteland? Don't underestimate their intelligence. The whole of  Sunni Islam would fall on them in wrath and fire and there'd be little left of the Shia Persians afterwards.