So a long ground invasion of Iran would be America's Ukraine right?

Iran is two and half times the size of Ukraine, and roughly twice the population at 86 million.

Sure we could bomb the shit out of stuff, but the sheer size of both the population and country is formidable.

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Nope. It would end exactly like Iraq in the long term probably, but militarily speaking there is no way to the resist Nato. The army and aviation would all be destroyed and crippled within 48 hours. I am not even going to discuss those ridiculous boats they keep in the gulf as a 'counter' to the American fleet

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      What if the Iranian military simply refused to engage us conventionally, taking off their uniforms and vanishing into the population?

      That'd be what I would do.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        And then they would be defeated, their cities invaded and everything conquered. Also a regime is not smart enough to do this, nor Saddam nor Putin nor whoever will be in Iran will do it because they thrive On their narrative and their narrative says that USA are the strongest nation in the world but the most corrupt and weak when it comes to go against(insert regime) because (regime) is outer and stronger blah blah blah. You better believe that they would fight conventionally like the republican guard.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Conquered

          By a force WHAT size? How many troops would we have to lose ever day to hold a country largely than Iraq was?

          We know the fighting will really begin in the cities and long after we begin occupying them.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Oh it would be no pushover, not an easy task. But I guess a 1000 kia at least in the first month or so. Then probably something I'm the range of 30-100 per month between carbombs, Shooting from windows etc. The point is that there would be no exit strategy unless the general population sides against the regime. This could happen but, like in Iraq, they would be against Ba'ath but not friends of the USA

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              We need the political solution first.

              https://i.imgur.com/gay41CN.jpg

              There’s no need for a ground invasion in iran. I’m tired of people saying iran will be like iraq.

              Taking out their nuclear facilities can be done in under an hour.

              Optionally also take out AA, long range missiles, airforce and navy. Can be done in a few hours, using nothing but air superiority.

              For good measure you can also hit government buildings and shit and hopefully the iranian people will take over from there. Maybe start the attack by surprise with hitting the supreme leader with a cruise missile for good measure.

              >b-but we need to install a democracy!!!
              No we don’t. Let the people figure this out on their own. The military’s job is to take out threats ASAP, not to build nations for 20 years costing trillions, simple as. Take out the threat and move on with your life.

              >b-but then there’ll be a new ebil iranian gubment instead!!!
              Not my problem. As long as they don’t have the means to hurt the West’s interests, it doesn’t fucking matter.

              >b-but hijabs!!!
              Don’t care

              What we NEED is not to leave behind total chaos in our wake. All we need is the political groundwork laid out, but do it right this time.

              We know what we did wrong in Iraq: Debaathifcation, not letting Iraqis do the lucrative contracts, etc. We also know what went wrong in Afghanistan: i.e the government was so corrupt and ineffective, people missed the Taliban. Also the government should NOT openly embrace us. Let's keep a distance for a good while so they're not seen as our puppets.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The political solution would be easy to find if the glowies from Israel and the USA can organize more and more revolts like the current one. Then you could have a regime change made of young people that could somehow brand itself as 'democrat'. I am sure that Israel would fuck it up tho because they would very much prefer a Lybia situation in Iran than a stable country.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >I am sure that Israel would fuck it up tho because they would very much prefer a Lybia situation in Iran than a stable country.
                Iran and Israel were allies prior to the Islamic Revolution. It was a very natural alliance actually because both hate the Arabs.
                Many Israelis are also Persian garden gnomes and the Israeli population is very supportive of the Iranian people especially during this recent uprising.
                They would definitely want an ally.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I hope man. To have a western friendly democracy with tons of oil would do wonders for the world order but I don't think it's possible. Iranians are pissed for what British and USA did in the past and I cannot blame them. Foreign policy was really idiotic at that time.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                No, what went wrong in iraq and afghanistan is this retarded attitude:
                >What we NEED is not to leave behind total chaos in our wake

                Lol, lmao. Why the fuck not? Name one (1) good reason why that’s our problem.

                The issue with iran is that their insane leaders have the means to hurt the West and soon they will have nuclear capabilities that will forever change the game. You cannot have an insane regime with those capabilities.

                Can you cure the insanity? Maybe. But it’s much more effective to destroy the means and pull out.

                Besides, you said it yourself, the iranian people are not arabs, so they are not inherently savage. It’s possible that they will topple the regime on their own and get a democracy going. They just need a little push.

                In any case, the heckin hijabareenos are not our problem. The nukes are.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Iranians already DO elections!

                The transition isn't as hard as you think it is.

                We blow up one regime. The Iranians elect another.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >The issue with iran is that their insane leaders have the means to hurt the West and soon they will have nuclear capabilities that will forever change the game. You cannot have an insane regime with those capabilities.
                Their leaders are not insane, in fact they are completely rational. Nuclear weapons are a means to ensuring national sovereignty and survival. There will not be any regime change in Iran and installation of a pro-western government that will need tons of resources (externally) to prop itself up like what was the case in Afghanistan. The threat of a mushroom cloud appearing over US forces is enough to keep them at bay.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >not letting Iraqis do the lucrative contracts
                lmao this was by design

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The Iranians know the conditions to defeat us. Just lock us into a prolonged stalemate where a political solution evades us, and we finally get tired of years of guerilla warfare.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            And the US can refuse to fight on those terms

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You would need about 2 million soldiers to have a chance of holding Iran. If you just want to vandalise the place vatmoron style then they can delete Saudi's oil exports and massively fuck the world economy.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          So easy to spot a clueless redditor. The regime is prepped exactly for this. They began reforming the entire military to fight an occupation since like 2005. They're all in A2/AD tech like ballistic missiles and drones. They have totally decentralised logistics chains which is inefficient but it means USA can't knock it out in shock and awe like Iraq. If they get invaded the military will melt away into the population and turn it into a generational war. If the Iranian regime wasn't smart they wouldn't have defeated the USA in every single flashpoint as they did

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            The regime doesn't trust the army further than it can throw it, so the IRGC is their main fighting force. And they have been geared to expeditionary wars since the SCW.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Yes. That's all true. It's not Iran's professional army which is an issue, it's the IRGC. I know that.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                You can't focus on preparing for a guerilla war in your own country when you're also spending years trying to crush rebels in a different country.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Iran is already prepared for a guerilla war, that has been on going since 2005, they continuously build missiles and drones and stash them around the country. The entire coastline of Iran has Chinese silkworms buried along it. Iran doesn't have much personnel in Syria, they use Afghan proxies as soldiers and assist Syria developing its own local factories.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        If they were smart enough to actually do that then the occupation would be fucked.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        USA wouldn't occupy Iran. If the Iranian military doesn't fight, all the easier for the US to destroy what it wants to destroy.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Then we'd destroy all the infrastructure that couldn't "vanish" for free and they'd be out a trillion dollars of equipment. Ammo depots, armor, etc, can't take off its uniform and disappear.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          What are we? Fucking Vatniks?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Just do what I'd do in any war with anyone else. Murder every singe city and leave. I only care about destroying all population centers. They can live in the deserts but they lost the right to cities. N Korea style. Why hold when you can just destroy?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        fallujah until fail

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Iran would get BTFO
        Just look operation praying mantis

        Reduce the country into the Stone age

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        The populace would sell them out for money and probably beat them to death like they are now.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          You fell for propaganda. Outside the cities people are a lot more protective of the regime especially if attacked by a foreign government.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            What's outside the cities doesn't matter.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Sure that's why Kabul surrendered to mountain goatfuckers after one day

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Think about it another way, would anyone have cared if the taliban hadn't taken Kabul?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                the cities decide which funko pops top the sales chart and that's what really matters

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I know you are shitposting, but that concept applues to all commodities. Density is simply more efficient.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Then we win the war since anyone in the Iranian population wielding any kind of secular influence wants the islamists to fuck off.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        We pull out after using them to train officers for 20 years.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I am not sure why you would want to mount a ground invasion of Iran. Outside of the coastlines and (portions of) border with Iraq, the country is very mountainous.

      And then they would be defeated, their cities invaded and everything conquered. Also a regime is not smart enough to do this, nor Saddam nor Putin nor whoever will be in Iran will do it because they thrive On their narrative and their narrative says that USA are the strongest nation in the world but the most corrupt and weak when it comes to go against(insert regime) because (regime) is outer and stronger blah blah blah. You better believe that they would fight conventionally like the republican guard.

      It's very naive to think Iran would be easy. Maybe they were 10-15 years ago but now they have an overmatch in drone and missile capabilities, not to mention regional partners that would cause havoc to US forces and allied countries. I can easily envision Iran sinking a few US navy ships. Swarm them with drones and missiles.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I don't. This thread is a warning that Iran is another rabbit hole we don't want to jump down.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          No, iran is a shit hole which we would overun in about 48 hours. The mistake made in iraq was that the cia and special ops convinced many to flee with thw weapon resulting in guerilla warfare for years. With Iran we should just mow them down without mercy, it would only take a bit.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        America physically cannot invade Iran now lol. It was in a position to do so from 2003 to 2011, maybe even all the way up until 2021, when it had control over both Iraq and Afghanistan and could invade from two directions. But now that American troops have left those countries, the only way to invade Iran now would be an amphibious landing in the Persian Gulf, where the sea lanes are narrow and the Iranians have a lot of anti-ships missiles already pointed. Not to mention as said, the Iranians took notes and narrowed the technological gap considerably by proliferating cheap drones.

        Politically-speaking, any prospect of a full-scale Iranian-American War ended when Obama took office. He wasn't interested in it, Trump opposed regime change and nation-building in general (although he obviously wasn't opposed to knocking down Iran a peg or two with limited military action), and Biden has hands full in Ukraine.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/B031XCp.jpg

        America physically cannot invade Iran now lol. It was in a position to do so from 2003 to 2011, maybe even all the way up until 2021, when it had control over both Iraq and Afghanistan and could invade from two directions. But now that American troops have left those countries, the only way to invade Iran now would be an amphibious landing in the Persian Gulf, where the sea lanes are narrow and the Iranians have a lot of anti-ships missiles already pointed. Not to mention as said, the Iranians took notes and narrowed the technological gap considerably by proliferating cheap drones.

        Politically-speaking, any prospect of a full-scale Iranian-American War ended when Obama took office. He wasn't interested in it, Trump opposed regime change and nation-building in general (although he obviously wasn't opposed to knocking down Iran a peg or two with limited military action), and Biden has hands full in Ukraine.

        I'm Iranian and agree with you guys. Maybe USA could have invaded in 2003-2010 but that window has closed. Iran now has accurate ballistic missiles with solid state fuels, USA won't risk losing a carrier or base.
        Iran was never going to be an easy victory. Americans don't realize Iran is 2x size of Texas but with 3x the population, terrain is like the Rocky Mountains. The regime will never engage American army in open field. Just melt away into population and fight any puppet government USA tries to install.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >now they have an overmatch in drone and missile capabilities
        fucking LMAO
        no they don't

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Imagine thinking this after the last 20 year misadventure

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        What happened in the last 20 years to suggest Iran could withstand the United States militarily? Their military is a joke, and would get bowled over as fast as the Iraqis, if not faster. They might try to fight a guerilla war, but they couldn't stop the Artesh from being wiped out.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          There is zero public motivation for another desert war. It will be Afghanistan x10

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Whether the public is willing to support a ground invasion of Iran is a separate question from whether the US military can turn the Iranian military into pulp within a week.
            >It will be Afghanistan x10
            Vast swathes of the population hates the government, and like Iraq, there are public institutions to rely on unlike Afghanistan, which is essentially tribal. Rely on local militias with grudges against government and back the revolutionaries you see on the streets today = utterly different outcome.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Vast swathes of the population hates the government
              Yeah and they'd love the government the moment the US decides to invade and bomb them

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                The people chanting "Death to the dictator" and "“Our enemy is right here, they lie that it's USA" while shooting at security forces are not going to fall in line the moment the US starts bombing the government oppressing them.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Doesn't mean they'd support an actual invasion from the US. There's tons of tankies in the US but if Russia or China decided to bomb the US do you think they'd continue to support them?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If large numbers of tankies across America grouped together, grabbed guns, and called for the downfall of the US government in states across the union, with signs of support from people across the country?
                They either would support an invasion, or they'd at minimum, cooperate to secure their interests, ie a new government.
                The protestors have repeatedly called for international support for revolution. These people don't want a different Ayatollah. Everyone knows the entire system has to go.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If they'd continue to oppose the US even after Russia/China invaded the US they'd be considered traitors and swiftly executed.
                The Iranian people aren't stupid, they know the US wouldn't invade Iran and waste trillions merely to "liberate" them.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >they'd be considered traitors and swiftly executed.
                Not if they win, have the levers of power, and and are either popular or crush the opposition.
                >they know the US wouldn't invade Iran and waste trillions merely to "liberate" them
                I wouldn't project your anti-American cynicism onto people standing up to Basij shootouts.
                And even if they believed it would be done for US national interests, anyone can recognize an opportunity when they see it.
                You aren't making a case for why people who are willing to die to fight the government would do a 180 and suddenly fight for it. They'd either rally behind the invasion, or work in tandem to exploit it for their own interests.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                NTA
                The cases do not allow a 1:1 comparison, sure, but there is plenty of historical precedent for violently opposed groups within a country suspending hostilities to deal with an external threat that would would end that country's sovereignty outright. A pro republican Iranian movement cannot be considered to automatically be pro American intervention, and even if some fringe or CIA controlled elements are calling for it they cannot reasonably be expected to react homogenously to the invasion. We have seen and done this before. One poor decision or bad gesture from the invading force and regional elements of that opposition, the people you are hoping will work in tandem with us, and suddenly they are the new "betrayed by the west" freedom fighters and they, their associates, and their kin are hardened against the invasion.
                Even the French resistance did not rally homogenously behind the Allied invasion of Europe and on many levels they were literally a creation of the Allied intelligence apparatus. You are vastly oversimplifying the challenge of motivating and preparing a population of angry, politically kinetic people for the invasion of their homeland and maintaining cooperation/control of them for the duration.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I agree with you that not all segments of a revolutionary movement will automatically back an American invasion (in all respects). But even those who are cynical about the United States would be happy to see the greater evil, namely the Iranian government, get crushed.
                In seeking political relevance, would they distance themselves from the US, claiming that they hope the US will leave after the government is destroyed? Quite possibly. Would they support the government in fighting invasion? Very unlikely.
                Imagining that the sight of an American flag eliminates their sense of reason, when there's quite a few videos of the Iranian government putting a US flag on the ground and people deliberately stepping around it or jumping over it, is silly. We're getting to the point where protestors are calling for the government in exile to return, ie the Shah, if it means getting rid of the Ayatollah. It's very clear what it is that's taking precedence over what.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I think Iran would fair better than Iraq. They've got a native arms industry, longer prep time, tons of foreign "advisors", and no country bordering it would let the US host land forces.
      They'd lose, but hold out a lot longer.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        The war will be more similar to Afghanistan. Iran isn't going to contest for territory it'll just melt away and start guerilla campaign. Regime counts on rural supporters.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Iran is a mountainous rugged clusterfuck not a flat desert squished between two rivers like Iraq
      >80 million population vs Iraq's 30 million
      >not a non-country propped up by the USSR and divided by sectarian lines that the invaders could exploit (so no shia vs sunni civil war like in Iraq)
      >can project power into Iraq, the peninsula and the Levant, Saddam's Iraq didn't even control their own airspace for over a decade
      >Iran has a domestic weapons industry that doesn't rely on 30 years old Soviet scrap metal
      >probably already has nukes from Best Korea and soon they'll be able to build their own

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        This just proves that Iran, like Turkey, is a greedy asshole country that have plenty of resources and could trade and live secure and free with little worry (besides internal minority troubles or Iraq), but they've chosen imperalistic dreams instead.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >>not a non-country propped up by the USSR and divided by sectarian lines that the invaders could exploit (so no shia vs sunni civil war like in Iraq)

        No but it could racial tensions could be exploited.

        Western Iran is very kurdish. The northern part bordering the caucus is almost entirely azeri. there are racial tensions between them and the persians, as well as with other minorities in the country

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          This is very much overstated, even your ethnic map is waaaay exagerated to the point of beingcomical, minority regions are only half as much as what's depicted in your map. Azeris are like 15 million people in Iran and there isn't a single Azeri separatist group. There are two kurdish separatist groups I know of and one of them is communist and another one I know less about but it's tiny.

  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No, because America's military isn't poor and retarded.
    your coping won't bring back the circa 2,000 vaginers that got killed trying to take Bakhmut this week.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Iran military knows they can't face US in a conventional war. So if invaded, they would retreat into mountains and start a guerilla war. Iran's geography is perfect for this. It would be an Afghanistan on steroids. If US would keep at it would eventually win but I doubt they would have the political will for that.

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    America wouldn't sit at the border lying about the upcoming invasion before trying to pull a fast one, they'd make their intentions clear and invite the rest of the western world to take part.

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The only real way to win a war against Iran in the LONG run is to get the political solution FIRST.

    Establish the groundwork for a successor regime that is seen as legitimate beforehand.

    Iranians will only accept being led by other Iranians. We just want a regime not interested in nuking us and oppressing its people.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    There’s no need for a ground invasion in iran. I’m tired of people saying iran will be like iraq.

    Taking out their nuclear facilities can be done in under an hour.

    Optionally also take out AA, long range missiles, airforce and navy. Can be done in a few hours, using nothing but air superiority.

    For good measure you can also hit government buildings and shit and hopefully the iranian people will take over from there. Maybe start the attack by surprise with hitting the supreme leader with a cruise missile for good measure.

    >b-but we need to install a democracy!!!
    No we don’t. Let the people figure this out on their own. The military’s job is to take out threats ASAP, not to build nations for 20 years costing trillions, simple as. Take out the threat and move on with your life.

    >b-but then there’ll be a new ebil iranian gubment instead!!!
    Not my problem. As long as they don’t have the means to hurt the West’s interests, it doesn’t fucking matter.

    >b-but hijabs!!!
    Don’t care

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Taking out their nuclear facilities can be done in under an hour.
      Boomer tier post. And how are you gonna do that?
      1. Their facilities are deep underground, deep enough that your biggest bunker busters dropped only by b-52s can't reach.
      2. As soon as they see planes in their airspace, they start launching missiles and drones on carriers and air bases. Why do fucktard boomers like you assume your enemy will sit on their ass and watch you bomb their entire military with impunity without doing shit? The moment they see a squadron of fighter jets flying toward them within 10 km of their border in international airspace, they start launching their missiles. After they take out your carriers and air fields, what are you gonna do? You're not gonna invade by land? As people tried (and failed) to tell you, Iran is not Iraq. They have more than enough missiles to retaliate to any air strike by the US. Then from there, you're dragged into a naval war which you will loose in the persian gulf and walk away with tail between your legs or start a land invasion which you will lose 10x faster than afghanistan.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >yeah bro iran can just take out US carriers
        stopped reading

        https://i.imgur.com/gay41CN.jpg

        There’s no need for a ground invasion in iran. I’m tired of people saying iran will be like iraq.

        Taking out their nuclear facilities can be done in under an hour.

        Optionally also take out AA, long range missiles, airforce and navy. Can be done in a few hours, using nothing but air superiority.

        For good measure you can also hit government buildings and shit and hopefully the iranian people will take over from there. Maybe start the attack by surprise with hitting the supreme leader with a cruise missile for good measure.

        >b-but we need to install a democracy!!!
        No we don’t. Let the people figure this out on their own. The military’s job is to take out threats ASAP, not to build nations for 20 years costing trillions, simple as. Take out the threat and move on with your life.

        >b-but then there’ll be a new ebil iranian gubment instead!!!
        Not my problem. As long as they don’t have the means to hurt the West’s interests, it doesn’t fucking matter.

        >b-but hijabs!!!
        Don’t care

        this tbqh

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Iran has had the ability to take out carriers for like 15 years. That's why the USA never invaded

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Incredibly delusional cope

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Iran has 80+ nuclear facilities and some deep underground. Zoomer fags on PrepHoleope don't remember the Bush years. There was discussion of bombing the nuclear facilities back then and Pentagon said it would take a mobilization total of 80,000 to do eradicate Iran's nuclear facilities. They weren't interested in doing it because it brings carrier groups into Iran's firing range.
          Which brings us to the next point. Iran's nuclear program was seen as an apocalyptical threat to the USA in the Bush era, fucking 15+ years ago. Because Iran isn't actually building nukes, and the Pentagon also knows that too. It's purely political.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Iran's nuclear program was seen as an apocalyptical threat to the USA in the Bush era, fucking 15+ years ago. Because Iran isn't actually building nukes, and the Pentagon also knows that too. It's purely political

            This. If Iran wanted nukes they literally would have had them right now. North Korea made theirs way back in the 2000s. Not only are Iranians not less capable than North Koreans, but Iran has had relations with the DPRK for decades that the North Koreans themselves could help Iran make nukes. Not to mention Iran could also gather scientists or knowhow from neighboring states.

            Nuclear Iran is a boogeyman. If Iran wanted WMDs they could easily make chemical weapons and that alone would be enough for their missiles to use to devastate any of their regional enemies.

            No, iran is a shit hole which we would overun in about 48 hours. The mistake made in iraq was that the cia and special ops convinced many to flee with thw weapon resulting in guerilla warfare for years. With Iran we should just mow them down without mercy, it would only take a bit.

            >No, iran is a shit hole which we would overun in about 48 hours. The mistake made in iraq was that the cia and special ops convinced many to flee with thw weapon resulting in guerilla warfare for years. With Iran we should just mow them down without mercy, it would only take a bit.

            You're completely clueless. And Iraqi insurgent weapons didn't come from fleeing. There were buried caches all over Iraq filled with guns and mortars. And ever heard of a thing called war booty? One pistol is enough to get your hands on a rifle, and one rifle is enough to get your hands on several rifles and trucks. They made rockets homemade themselves. And I'm just talking about the Sunni insurgents.

            And mow down Iran how exactly? You realize their main cities are near the Caspian Sea? The US would be coming from a completely different direction. Iran is mountainous all over, and they have bunkers filled with weapons. Not guns and mortars but missiles and drones. Iran's insurgency would make Iraq and Afghanistan combined seem like a picnic.

            It would be America's third Vietnam, they would easily win every battle but the social, political, and economic cost would be too much which will cause the US to leave Iran.

            It would be worse. Vietnam didn't have missiles that reach other countries, nor did they have effect on global energy and inflation crises.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Why do fucktard boomers like you assume your enemy will sit on their ass and watch you bomb their entire military with impunity without doing shit?
        because that's how it went down in iraq. both times.
        saddams army was on par with irans army. burgers curbstomped them. it's not unreasonable to extrapolate from this outcome that an iran war would look similar.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Didn’t Iraq have the fifth largest army in the world at the time of the invasion?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      This reads exactly like what a Redditor would think after reading worldnews headlines for 10 years

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >b-but then there’ll be a new ebil iranian gubment instead!!!
      The problem has always been that there WON'T be a government. Just an empty power vacuum, filled with 27 mujahideen groups, of which 12 are international terrorists, Al-Qaeda and ISIS adjacent, that will want to enact revenge upon the US for destroying their homeland.
      I bet the CIA already has its hands full making sure that the rumps of the goat-fucker nations they've destroyed aren't able to reach the US. If you make their job 3 times harder, soon enough the Swiss Cheese Model national defense will have a weakness exploited, and the US might suffer an another 9/11.
      The only way to prevent that is to suppress it by strong-arming the country, making sure that the local insurgents don't get a chance to move freely - but then we're back into trillions-of-dollars occupation that went oh so well in Afghanistan.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    America is not interested in invading Iran or any other ME country ever again for at least a generation. And maybe ever, because the tipping point is starting to be reached on fossil fuels and accelerated by Russia. BEVs, renewables and nuclear taking over will mean rapidly shrinking domestic consumption easily covered by domestic production and the ME will cease to matter much to America geopolitically.
    >Sure we could bomb the shit out of stuff, but the sheer size of both the population and country is formidable.
    Only if the population was even against us and no lessons were learned from Iraq. But Iran isn't Iraq anyway, pop is much less sectarian. Right now we're seeing the population is extremely fed up with theocratic bullshit and is actively rebelling. If the US squashed the existing government and army and then just left immediately Iran might well end up in a different place.

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >So a long ground invasion of Iran would be America's Ukraine right?
    Why do you think they haven't?
    No troll. They are literally developing nukes, have openly stated they would nuke Israel/America, and America is letting them.
    The only reason for this to be allowed is that America has assessed it's capabilities and decided it's better to let them have nukes.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Why? It's inevitable that the theocracy will fall and Iran will return to U.S. orbit. Then we can finally cut our ties with the ass-backwards Arab oil states and let the Turks, garden gnomes, and Persians carve up the region.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >it’s inevitable
      >*goes nuclear in your path*

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        nuclear armed regimes have collapsed in the past, what's you're point?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          khomeini said himself that he would rather see iran burn to the ground if it means islam will win globally. this regime does not care about its people or its country whatsoever. and they are literally suicidal. if they will face collapse you can bet your ass they’ll launch those nukes.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Khomeini is dead and Khamenei is on his way out.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    We're not coming to colonize IRAN we're coming to kill their government. I imagine it would be like IRAQ part 2 at a much larger scale.

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >So a long ground invasion of Iran would be America's Ukraine right?

    You're forgetting that Ukrainians don't want to become subject to Russia.

    Iranians meanwhile, especially the young ones (and it's a young country demographically), are quite Westernized and not very fond of their government.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It would be like Iraq. Except that in the end Palestine would become the largest exporter of glass in the world.

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ukraine proved how dissimilar America and Russia are. Russia can't do to the 40th strongest military what America could do to the fourth in the fucking 90s

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It would depend on finding locals who would side with the invasion.
    The Kurds, Arabs, and Balochis would all side with the US.
    The Azeris are a coin flip. Some might, some might not. If the Azerbaijanis would accompany an invasion, I think you could flip them pro-invasion.
    As for the Iranians, many of the young, especially the urban young, hate the Mullahs, and would be supportive of an invasion.
    The issue is the boomers, the 40+ year old rural population. They would be the issue.
    It's really about finding collaborators, locals to work with you know know the terrain, the culture, who can absorb the deaths willingly because they hate the government. Thankfully, the government is not exactly popular.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I think Azeris are one of the most guaranteed collaborators tbh. Iranian authorities have been brutally fucking them for decades because of separatist fears and Azeris would absolutely relish the chance to burn it all to the ground and reunite with the north.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        There over 10 million Azeris in Iran and not a single separatist group. All the online separatism is coming from Turkey nationals. Even in the current riots the Azeri areas have the lowest reported deaths, they're really quiet.

        https://i.imgur.com/rhsEiXx.png

        It would depend on finding locals who would side with the invasion.
        The Kurds, Arabs, and Balochis would all side with the US.
        The Azeris are a coin flip. Some might, some might not. If the Azerbaijanis would accompany an invasion, I think you could flip them pro-invasion.
        As for the Iranians, many of the young, especially the urban young, hate the Mullahs, and would be supportive of an invasion.
        The issue is the boomers, the 40+ year old rural population. They would be the issue.
        It's really about finding collaborators, locals to work with you know know the terrain, the culture, who can absorb the deaths willingly because they hate the government. Thankfully, the government is not exactly popular.

        This is all incorrect. If Iran is attacked by an outsider the country is going to rally behind the regime.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          The cognitive dissonance of assuming that Iranians won't rally together under occupation, in a thread that's comparing it to Ukraine. Lol.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Ukraine isn't a dictatorship that shoots its own people because they're unhappy with the government.
            They were, and surprise, the entire country shifted pro-west as soon as the Russian puppet was kicked out.
            Even after decades of brainwashing by the government, the Iranians are still calling for the head of the Supreme Leader in the streets today. That's unrest even Russians don't dare show towards Putin.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >the entire country shifted pro-west as soon as the Russian puppet was kicked out.
              Besides certain now well known regions which had violent demonstrations against the coup. Coincidentally the same ones always voting for the “Russian puppet”, and now it’s impossible for redditors to believe they would vote to join the Russian federation.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Muh coup
                >Muh "refereundums"
                >Muh reddit
                Post indoor plumbing.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                no one here but you cares what redditors believe, and if you're so upset your safe space 'betrayed' rossia go back there and try to change their mind. Don't show them the actual number of people who voted for the annexation though

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Nice election map, here's a more recent one

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It'd be interesting to see what the Armenians would do. A lot of Armo diaspora is in the US. I think they would be happy to have the regime replaced by a pro-US one.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Easy, kill anyone who doesnt have their hands in the air.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >ctrl+f
    >"hormuz"
    >crickets
    nuPrepHole == amateurs

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >muh whoremooz!
      You mean the one that the United States has been ramming their haze gray steel penises in and out of every single day for the past 20 years?

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You are assuming that everyone is loyal to Iran. In reality almost half the country's population is comprised of minorities who fucking hate the Iranian government and want to be independent while Iranian shills pretend that no, everything is totally cool and everyone likes and wants to be part of Iran. They can't even get the current riots under control because they keep doubling down on being brutal assholes.

    It would go even worse than Iraq did for Saddam, they'd have massive amounts of traitors in their midst from the word go.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      All the West has to do is be extremely vocal about supporting the Iranians protesting, while secretly arming them. The regime will collapse within a year.

      Unfortunately the West is cucked and thirsty for Iranian oil at all cost, similarly to hope Germany was thirsty for the Russian gas. Same reason why the US stopped Israel from going apeshit on Iran for years (refused to sell bunker busters etc).

      Biden will rather have Iran developing nukes if it means he can lift the sanctions and pump his ass full of Iranian oil before the elections.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Everyone including traitors would turn Against occupiers once the vers second the régime is toppled. I remember peacceful sufis taking weapons and killing Mutts in Iraq.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        There's no reason for that. The people who would work with the US would all have a vested interest in maintaining stability for a new government. Especially for minorities, who would want to avoid majoritarian rule.
        It's especially unlikely because Iran was the major source of external unrest during the Iraq occupation. Who's going to organize and ship weapons to insurgents this time? The Taliban?

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It would be extremely painful.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You're a big guy!

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    A ground invasion of Iran would be very limited. The objectives would basically just be kill the mullahs, destroy anything that looks like a nuclear site, establish some shitty provisional government, and leave

  19. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    something like 20% of Iran's population is azeri, which are close allies of Turkey and because of that have geopolitical ties to NATO
    if we were ever to do anything, it would be the funding separatist groups to destabilize the country further, rather than setting up a ground invasion

  20. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No, America is separated from Iran by multiple oceans and continents and has 0 historical connection. Russia and Ukraine share a land border and are historically intertwined. Stop trying to turn this into a comparable situation, the US will never get into a comparable position.

  21. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Ukraine's 40 million are (almost) all united in belief that they are Ukrainians and not Russians.
    Iran's 80 million are people of different cultures stitched in one country. Kurds and Azerbaijanis in the west and Turkmeni at the east wouldn't want to defend the regime that they don't consider "their own"

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Iran's 80 million are people of different cultures stitched in one country. Kurds and Azerbaijanis in the west and Turkmeni at the east wouldn't want to defend the regime that they don't consider "their own"

      I'm pretty sure if the USAF started raining cruise missiles onto Iranian cities, the attitude of Iranians towards one another and their own government would drastically change. Especially if the United States initiated hostilities unilaterally.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Aren't Iranians fighting their own government right now, over some extremely milquetoast entry level civil rights bullshit? I don't buy it man.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Some Iranians in big cities.
          They would absolutely gather around in a war, not all tribes, but I'm sure 60 mil would
          They despise the West, later they can go back to their blood feuds and ethnic conflicts

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Only the hardcore religious ones hate us. The rest want to be us

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >They despise the West
            Doesn't look like it right now

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I get what you’re saying but Iraq proved that the resulting power vacuum caused by the bombing would just lead to more sectarian violence. Anyone here cheering on the massive clusterfuck that would come from a Iran Invasion is a retard, post-Feb 24th Eastern European ESL, or both (but I repeat myself)

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      40mil are Persians, other 40 mil hate the West as well
      With a good reason to do so
      All Muslims, pretty much.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Saddam made that assumption to

  22. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    They dont look white
    Why iranians say that they are white on the internet ?

  23. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No. USA is not russia, and Iran is not Ukrainie.
    It would be Desert Storm 2.0 electric boogaloo

  24. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Iran would be America's Ukraine right?
    Lmao

  25. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    If US was smart they would systematically balkanize Iran by breaking off regions with ethnic minorities into their own states (or have these territories annexed by border states of the same ethnicity). This would hopefully secure the loyalty of the populations of these regions and limit our vulnerability to insurgent tactics. Once the US secures control of a few border regions they could then use the threat of breaking of other areas (most notably the Arab region bordering Iraq where a significant fraction of Iran's oil comes from). If that fails, the border regions can be a secure base from which to brutalize Iran from the air.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      pic related

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      We can already brutalize Iran from the air via the Gulf, which is right where all their money is.
      Iran's entire economy is next door to the Arabs, in the south/southwest.
      Fun fact: revolutions do not happen when people are oppressed. They happen when there is a perception of rising living standards that are suddenly reversed, the "J-Curve".
      Guess what happens when the fossil fuel spigot shuts off?

  26. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I thought from the thumbnail all the pajeets were wearing googly eyes.

  27. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    no need to invade when the CIA is doing its part in making it fall apart from the inside

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      No cuckboy, the cia is too busy trying to get dirt on trump and the Parents at school board meeting. Wake the the fuck up

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        think youre getting your federal agencies confused

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Nope cia was loaded with liberals, gays and lesbians under obama. CiA is just as bad as the fbi if not worse

  28. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Iran is buttfucking all Sunni rivals
    Look how they took Iraq, how they screw with everyone in Yemen
    AL Quds are no joke, they know asymmetrical warfare. Why in the name of fuck would anyone want to go and try to invade them
    Maybe arm Baluchis, Azeris, Kurds, Armenians, etc and hope they civil war breaks them apart

  29. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I for one luv new /polk/.American bad! EU bad! USA bad! 20 spam threads! Ukraine bad! Some fake Russian shit. Stop posting here anons, let this board die, it is already ded since vatnikpol hijacked the jannies and mods did nothing

  30. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
  31. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It'd probably be somewhere in between Ukraine and Iraq. The Iranians are a lot more competent than the goatfuckers, that's how they can start a nuclear program and built effective combat drones despite massive sanctions. They'd certainly give the US a better fight than Iraq, but I don't see it devolving into a Ukraine situation. The US would win the conventional war with heavier casualties than expected, but the counterinsurgency would almost certainly fail.

    But in all honesty, I'd rather be allies with Iran. They're an educated people. Iranians hold the highest ratio of masters degrees to general population of any immigrant group in the US. We can team up and genocide those backstabbing Saudi cunts.

  32. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No. I'm sorry delusional sandmoron but it would be just like Iraq.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Iran won in Iraq you idiot. Annexed in all but name only.

  33. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    America doesn't even NEED to outright invade Iran. Just crippling their ability to make war would do the trick, demolishing their military and nuclear development capabilities from the air.

  34. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It's also mountainous. Cheney wanted to invade Iran mid GWOT because Iran was running a proxy war in Iraq from over the border. The reason he didn't is that he was advised it wouldn't have gone well for the US.

  35. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Nobody is invading Iran. It's armed to the teeth with ballistic missiles and itll stop world oil trade. US carriers and based within 2000km are in range. If USA could invade Iran without taking casualties it would have done it already. People talking otherwise are typical stupid Americans

  36. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    As an Iranian it shocks me how little the west knows about Iran even after 40 years of geopolitical contest. Im not sure on all the reasons, but it's a mixture of your arrogance, hubris and propaganda.
    Iran won in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and soon Yemen too. The Iranian government might be behind in tech but they're good at roleplaying crazy and theyre a lot more cunning than Washington DC or the Pentagon. Many in Iran understand America, but nobody in America understands Iran.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I am American, have lived in Iran, and I don't buy in to the narrative that Iran is America's enemy.

      Putting that aside, it is utter folly to believe that America couldn't crush Iran economically and militarily.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        You misunderstand. USA takes Tehran on <30 days. Then what? Iranian regime will have melted away into population and half the country will be hostile to American occupation and any government tried to set up. They will fire missiles at every carrier or base within 2000km. Iran can destroy world oil trade hitting refineries and ships. USA doesn't have a pathway to success in this. It'll be a waste of time like Afghanistan, except Iran can bring down the world economy with it. Anyone talking about USA invading Iran is a child or an idiot.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          I don't think that there's any reason to invade Iran. But there might be a reason to destroy Iran. Being a local nuisance doesn't really factor into that conversation.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Because American politicians and bought and paid for by Israel and big business. USA even has pistachio farmers lobbying politicians to sanction Iran.
            Don't undersell it. Iran is a local nuisance because it took over much of the region from under USA.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Iranians are only good at filling power vacuums when the US decides it's no longer worth power projection or nation building in a region for domestic political reasons, and even that was only possible after the US took out two of their bordering regional adversaries. It's just so ironic for an Iranian to talk about hubris while having zero clue that their country can only do shit purely due to windfall. You aren't master manipulators, your people are just pedophile worshipping oil salesmen that can offer some cheap weapons to those that need them, and their competitors happened to have been thrashed to shit in the last 20 years. Of course this whole thread reeks of Iranian cope, especially with the artificially repeated lines of
      >muh drones
      >muh 2000km range missiles
      >muh stopping oil trade
      >muh melting into populace
      ... so clearly this is some Persian ass blastedness since riots are still all over the news (guess your prisons are catching fire now?). Oh well enjoy your food shortages and crushed economy over the next few years, but those heckin' ebil burgers probably won't notice a thing.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        that's not what happened. Iran took over Iraq in its entirety pre-2009. USA gave up 10 years later. Maliki was elected PM 2006 and was effectively an Iranian puppet. You clueless idiot. Typical american, having no fucking idea.
        >muh riots
        >still trusting your media
        you're too naive and gullible for any of this conversation.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        btw I should probably explain what happened to you, since you're a zogbot and got all your information from Reddit and the zogbox in your living room;
        Objective of the USA was to roll Iraq and replace it with a US friendly government. That government would pay American trans-nationals using Iraqi oil for infinite civil and military projects much like Saudi does. Haliburton etc began immediately. Then Iraq could become a staging ground for further US interventions including Iran. When it became clear to the Iranian regime that this whole thing was a threat and Iran was also on a the chopping block they backed Iraqi exiles into Iraqi politics and used militias to destroy any pro-American political parties. So the strategic objectives were lost in 2004-2005. Your government was too stupid and arrogant to foresee it or believe it. If Washington gets outsmarted by mullahs it has no chance against Beijing

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >no marvel reference
          2/10

  37. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No it wouldn’t. The main similarity is how poorly equipped the Iranians are compared to Ukes. And even then I’m sure Iran has a large mechanized maneuver capability. The US isn't even slightly comparable to Russia. You see, the US won’t send in the Army until AFTER the Air Force and Navy have obliterated everything they can find beforehand. The war would already be won, essentially, before the Army goes in.

  38. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Yes, the Iran wank is strong on the internet.
    No, Iran wouldn't turn into Ukraine. It'd just be Iraq x 4.
    Actually, probably better than that, since Iran provided a substantial amount of men and material to the insurgency, whereas it is unlikely that Pakistan or Saudi-Arabia would do the same for an Iranian insurgency. Iran also has some civil institutions and is more homogenous than Iraq and doesn't run EXCLUSIVELY on strongman politics like Iraq did, and while I wouldn't rule out the US doing a dumbass move like putting an MEK guy as its future head of state, by and large, I suspect the chance of the US successfully setting up a future government without too much hassle are better than they were in Iraq.
    Conventionally, Iran does of course stand precisely zero chance.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      You're dumb as dog shit if you think USA can set up a puppet government in Iran. The only people supporting it will be university liberals in the cities. You understand the Hardliners have like 40% support in Iran? It'll be a never ending guerilla war. The regime wont fight the war conventionally like Ukraine fights Russia. They'll just melt away into population and it'll be never ending ambushing and IEDs etc.

  39. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Iran is ages behind the US but an invasion or anything past surgical cruise missile strikes doesn’t make sense.
    The terrain is difficult to control, and the willingness of locals to support US forces is overrated, iran and the empire’s prior have been traditionally multiethnic, they will throw rocks at each other but US hostilities would pose an outside threat to unite against, basically proving decades or propaganda by the religious elite right
    Only thing the west can do in directly or indirectly supporting moderates inside the state and wait

  40. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >destroy uranium enrichment plants
    >you won
    Wow that wasn't all that hard.

    >they rebuild them deeper underground
    >send special forces to explode them
    >win again
    It just keeps happening.

    Why would the west enter that shithole? We don't want to annex them.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Iran isn't actually building nukes. It's just an excuse to sanction Iran. USA is butthurt because Iran took over a lot of the middle east despite USA spending $6 trillion trying to secure it.

  41. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    found the nervous shia lmao

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >found the nervous shia lmao

      https://i.imgur.com/eG1UtTx.jpg

      [...]
      You're either from 4chan or some young shiashill currently shitting themselves.
      You're giving Iran too much credit or not giving the US enough. Either way, you're either wrong or oblivious on most every point you made.

      >You're either from 4chan or some young shiashill currently shitting themselves.

      You guessed wrong on both counts.
      Azeris are Shia, you dumb motherfucker. Kys.

      bro my wife is Kurdish no one in her family wears hijab even back in Iraqi Kurdistan . FGM is fucked ip tho.

      [...]
      Israel is the Middle East’s boogeyman because they all hate each other but hate Israel more

      > bro my wife is Kurdish no one in her family wears hijab even back in Iraqi Kurdistan . FGM is fucked ip tho.

      Most Kurds living in the west might be irreligious and liberal, but most Kurds in the Near East are highly conservative, and the majority are religious. Furthermore, wearing hijab and being conservative aren't mutually inclusive or exclusive per se.

      [...]
      >As long as Zionists run US foreign policy, that's never going to happen. Every war in the region the past 2 decades has been to lead up to a hot war with Iran. That's what Israel wants
      If Iranians had any brain, they would forget about Israel that isn't even a neighbouring country to them and has only murdered arabs in the middle of their land grabs. But they're cucked by their mullahs and islamist bullshit, so they need to self insert in shit where they don't need to belong.

      I get that the UK and the US were assholes and they needed to give them the finger, and the Iran-Iraq war didn't help, but since the 90s Iran has wasted decades for nothing. As a much superior culture than the arabs, with many educated people and with good resources, Iran could be very prosperous and easily a western ally in the ME that made Israel irrelevant like it was before the 70s oil crisis and Jomeini (if you are so obssesed about that).

      Seriously, without a retarded theocracy you could have been much more. Just look at how Turkey has regressed under Erdogan's islamist bullshit. You should not give a fuck about Israel and the arabs killing each other except cheering for them in TV.

      >If Iranians had any brain, they would forget about Israel that isn't even a neighbouring country to them and has only murdered arabs in the middle of their land grabs. But they're cucked by their mullahs and islamist bullshit, so they need to self insert in shit where they don't need to belong.

      Is it Iran that's cucked, or is it the US and thereby the wider West that's cucked to Israeli interest?

      Most Iranians may or may not care about Israel per se but they do care about their own national security, and many do care about their religious kin in Lebanon who have faced Israel's wrath since the 1970s. Every Iranian isn't dumb either. They know that Iran needs a belt extending from the Levant to Iran for their own strategic and security interests.

      Ever since Israel increased their meddling in Lebanon, it was inevitable that their ties with Iran would also worsen, this would have happened even if there wasn't an Ayatollah-led state. Every secular Arab state in the region hated Israel too in the 20th century.

      Israel even managed to severely worsen ties with Turkey in 2010 after it raided the Mavi Marmara aid flotilla and ended up killing 9 unarmed Turkish aid workers.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      > found the nervous shia lmao

      https://i.imgur.com/eG1UtTx.jpg

      [...]
      You're either from 4chan or some young shiashill currently shitting themselves.
      You're giving Iran too much credit or not giving the US enough. Either way, you're either wrong or oblivious on most every point you made.

      > You're either from 4chan or some young shiashill currently shitting themselves.

      You think a Shia would give a shit about China or its genocides or expansionism?? Most Shia, much like most Arabs in general, love China. You are one dumb motherfucker.
      I don't like Iran, but I hate Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE and China.

      >You're giving Iran too much credit or not giving the US enough. Either way, you're either wrong or oblivious on most every point you made.

      Care to elaborate on those points?

  42. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Afghanistan was America's Ukraine
    20 years and Taliban still rule it and American values of liberalism and garden gnome worship are not accepted there.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      > We did it bros, we regressed 100 years and will never achieve more than being tribal toothless villagers!

      Ironically, an Afghan man painted the Floyd mural. Probably dead now.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        because why? zog tv said this is what Taliban do?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Probably because it's economy regressed to Africa-tier within a year. The Taliban were also very, very stupid by hosting Zawahiri, thus giving the US an excuse to never unfreeze it's assets or aid.

          Not that I care of course, this is the government Afghans wanted, I have no moral responsibility for their choices.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            It's not that they wanted the Taliban, it's that the American friendly government was even worse. Afghans I've spoken to basically said American forces enabled bacha bazi to return, enabled drug smuggling, crime was out of control, US forces drone striking everywhere. Things are safer under Taliban.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Yeah anon, not letting women go to school is hecking based and redpilled.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            They are mass murdering people, which was my point. Stick to the point you gay

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >probably dead now
        Good. he was likely a progressive gay. EU, Canada and Australia are too far gone, but good to see rest of the world reject American progressivism.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous
      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        lel

  43. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >China with easy access to support them
    >Pissed off Russia doing whatever it can to funnel arms in to their ally
    >talibananas next door with decades of experience fighting coalition forces
    It would be one hell of a ride. Also, I think Turkey's border with Iran is why they were allowed in NATO lol.
    God I hate globohomo.

  44. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Iran can be pretty based, I remember when their response to Muslim outrage over the Mohammed cartoon contest was to hold a Holocaust cartoon contest, and it provoked the same kind of threats and outrage from the west. Even the captcha agrees people were mad.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >and it provoked the same kind of threats and outrage from the west.
      oh?? how many people died in these riots? where did they take place? Post sources

  45. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    It would be America's third Vietnam, they would easily win every battle but the social, political, and economic cost would be too much which will cause the US to leave Iran.

  46. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You are assuming the US would use the same strategy as Russia.
    >Invade during the worst possible weather
    >Expect the military to roll over
    >Expect the population to accept you with open arms
    >Expect no economic or political repercussions
    >Don't establish air superiority at the beginning
    >Send the best troops in with no supply
    >Only mobilize after losing tens of thousands of "professional" contract soldiers
    >Annex regions you don't even fully control

    Iraq had about the same population as Ukraine when the US invaded and it was a whole different story. The size of the population doesn't matter, a country with 2 million citizens can be a lot harder to take over than a country with a population of 10 million, it all depends on morale. If you can break that then the country is basically open to you.

  47. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    invading iran is peak neolib wet dream shit. literally not one good reason for it. name one reason we would ever want to hold iran
    >muh oil
    wouldn't even pay off the invasion and you know what little infrastructure exists would be fucked. 10 years before you even see a drop of profit

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It's the neocons who are pushing to invade Iran

      >they'd be considered traitors and swiftly executed.
      Not if they win, have the levers of power, and and are either popular or crush the opposition.
      >they know the US wouldn't invade Iran and waste trillions merely to "liberate" them
      I wouldn't project your anti-American cynicism onto people standing up to Basij shootouts.
      And even if they believed it would be done for US national interests, anyone can recognize an opportunity when they see it.
      You aren't making a case for why people who are willing to die to fight the government would do a 180 and suddenly fight for it. They'd either rally behind the invasion, or work in tandem to exploit it for their own interests.

      So operation Ajax 2.0? It'll end up like a more expensive Afghanistan with an even more radical government once the US fucks off after a couple of years.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Afghanistan didn't have riots in the streets telling the Taliban to fuck off.
        >with an even more radical government
        lmao I'm sure the Iranians who are specifying political Islam and Iranian regional mischief making as the problem are secretly all jihadists.
        Iran is as radical as it gets without self-destruction anyway. There's no much to lose.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Iran isnt radical, it's just continuing rhetoric from the 80s. It's a very pragmatic regime now, it works with everyone. Nobody gives a shit about Khomeinism. Have you not noticed they aren't enforcing Islamism in areas they control like Lebanon or Iraq? Western media uses it for propaganda purses

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Some Muslim countries are stricter than others. The Iranian women who died was from Kurdistan, which is an unrecognized state that stretches from Iran to Iraq to Syria and to Turkey. Kurds are generally less conservative with regards to Islam. Their women may or may not wear hijabs, and even then, a Kurdish women’s hijab does not have to cover all of her hair, maybe only half of it or sometimes they just wear it around the neck.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Unrecognized state
              The state doesn't exist. It's never existed in human history.
              Kurds are also far more conservative. It's the only area in the middle east that still has FGM and it's the only part of Iran that stones women to death. You clearly spent too long on reddit. Everything you think about Iran is probably wrong.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                bro my wife is Kurdish no one in her family wears hijab even back in Iraqi Kurdistan . FGM is fucked ip tho.

                [...]
                >As long as Zionists run US foreign policy, that's never going to happen. Every war in the region the past 2 decades has been to lead up to a hot war with Iran. That's what Israel wants
                If Iranians had any brain, they would forget about Israel that isn't even a neighbouring country to them and has only murdered arabs in the middle of their land grabs. But they're cucked by their mullahs and islamist bullshit, so they need to self insert in shit where they don't need to belong.

                I get that the UK and the US were assholes and they needed to give them the finger, and the Iran-Iraq war didn't help, but since the 90s Iran has wasted decades for nothing. As a much superior culture than the arabs, with many educated people and with good resources, Iran could be very prosperous and easily a western ally in the ME that made Israel irrelevant like it was before the 70s oil crisis and Jomeini (if you are so obssesed about that).

                Seriously, without a retarded theocracy you could have been much more. Just look at how Turkey has regressed under Erdogan's islamist bullshit. You should not give a fuck about Israel and the arabs killing each other except cheering for them in TV.

                Israel is the Middle East’s boogeyman because they all hate each other but hate Israel more

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Unrecognized state
                The state doesn't exist. It's never existed in human history.
                Kurds are also far more conservative. It's the only area in the middle east that still has FGM and it's the only part of Iran that stones women to death. You clearly spent too long on reddit. Everything you think about Iran is probably wrong.

                Also she’s not my wife but we’re engaged

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Iraqi Kurdistan is not Iranian Kurdistan

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I’m retarded disregard

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >they aren't enforcing Islamism in areas they control
            Because they think it would lose them influence, not because they aren't political islamists, don't prefer it to other forms of government, and aren't looking to curb US influence wherever possible or destabilize their opponents.
            Being more pragmatic as an opponent just makes them more dangerous.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        the only difference between neocons and neolibs is the justifications they like to use, and it just so happens this topic starts coming up right after iran has a wave of protests that suits the quasi-prog POV. they're salivating.

  48. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    You can never win with US/NATO in conventional war. You can wear them down by using your population as bio weapon but nothing more.

  49. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    You're either from 4chan or some young shiashill currently shitting themselves.
    You're giving Iran too much credit or not giving the US enough. Either way, you're either wrong or oblivious on most every point you made.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Invading Iran would literally only benefit Israel and Saudi Arabia.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        That's just flat out wrong.

        Yes let's just pretend Afghanistan never happened lol. USA can't do anything about Iran. It's a mode of warfare it can't control.

        That's just retardedly wrong.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          What's wrong? USA can't hold Iran. The regime reformed it's military to fight an occupation. It won't be contesting territory, it's designed for longevity and survivability. That's because it feared US invasion back in 2005 in the bush era. The USA can't possible occupy Iran. USA just spent $6 trillion losing Iraq and Afghanistan to Iranian and Taliban tactics. Invading Iran will be Afghanistan on steroids. The regime will just melt away into the population and start a generational guerilla war. You'd understand this if you weren't a Zoomer

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            I’ll never understand why so many complain about $1.5 billion per month in aid to Ukraine when America spent half a billion $ per year to invade Iraq and Afghanistan

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >i'l never understand why anyone would be mad that the government is pissing away an even larger amount of money that sees no benefit to us when in the past they did the same thing but on a smaller scale

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                What's wrong? USA can't hold Iran. The regime reformed it's military to fight an occupation. It won't be contesting territory, it's designed for longevity and survivability. That's because it feared US invasion back in 2005 in the bush era. The USA can't possible occupy Iran. USA just spent $6 trillion losing Iraq and Afghanistan to Iranian and Taliban tactics. Invading Iran will be Afghanistan on steroids. The regime will just melt away into the population and start a generational guerilla war. You'd understand this if you weren't a Zoomer

                I meant half a trillion my bad. US is spending $18 billion a year in Ukraine, while they spend $350 billion or so a year in Iraq + Afghanistan

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >I meant half a trillion my bad
                oh ok gotcha

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Most of that money ends in US companies, or is used in weapons that finally met their purpose instead of rotting away in storage. Both advance US interests without wasting US lives and a very cheap price tag for the results
                Tards complaining about it are delusional or hipocrites.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            That's beyond retardedly wrong.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              Sorry you fell for propaganda

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Sounds like you did, retard.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I've been reading interested in all this stuff for a long time. Do yourself a favor and pick up the book The Devil We Know which is written by a CIA Case Agent working on Iran for 20 years. The book is from 2009 and isn't even outdated. Even then he was saying Iran isn't building a nuclear bomb. Because even 13 years ago the media was pounding the issue of Iranian nuclear weapons. He says exactly what I'm telling you now. Even back then brainwashed zogbots like you were telling me about Iranian nuclear weapons and Islamism. Read the book and turn off your tv you homo

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Once again, and I can't stress this enough, you're retarded.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If I wanted your opinion I'd just read Jerusalem Post

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous
      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Iran is a religiously-motivated opponent of the US and the world order it presides over since 1979. They've either directly commanded and financed with money and arms terror groups who have killed Americans around the world and are hostile to all US-led regional security architectures.
        The collapse of the Iranian government would be a massive boon not just to the US, but the planet, excluding Iranian allies like China and Russia.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Iran hasn't been religiously motivated since the 80s. I'm not sure if it's just propaganda or if Washington DC seriously doesn't understand Iran. USA has done far more damage to the world than Iran ever did. How many successful regime changes in 30 years? How many millions dead from us foreign policy?

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Iran hasn't been religiously motivated since the 80s.
            lol
            >USA has done far more damage to the world than Iran ever did
            lmao

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Post skin

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >Iran hasn't been religiously motivated since the 80s.
            This has to be bait

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >Iran hasn't been religiously motivated since the 80s.
              lol
              >USA has done far more damage to the world than Iran ever did
              lmao

              Iran genuinely hasn't been religiously motivated since the 80s. It just continues on with the rhetoric because it's part of the Revolutionary government. If Iran was religiously motivated it would be imposing Islamism in Iraq and Lebanon. Iran is just a typical empire building nation now. Just like china isn't communist anymore but maintains the rhetoric.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >If Iran was religiously motivated it would be imposing Islamism in Iraq and Lebanon.
                The PMF do impose Islamic norms in Iraq, notably the weaker state of the two, because they know they can get away with it.
                But it doesn't matter, because Iran isn't stupid, and knows imposing Iranian religious norms on everyone as hard as possible would be counterproductive to gaining influence at the expense of the United States and US-aligned countries.
                You keep saying they aren't religious. It doesn't really matter at the end of the day. They're hostile to the US and work against it every chance they get every US enemy they can.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                I said not religiously motivated. They're just typical imperialists. They use religion to conscipt IQ 85 rurals. Revolutionary Guards are just a standard criminal organization like a mexican cartel. In fact they even get involved in drug smuggling

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >They're just typical imperialists.
                That wouldn't be a problem if they played ball and weren't sitting on the opposite side of the table with the Russians, Chinese, and Norks.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >They're hostile to the US and work against it every chance they get every US enemy they can.
                Which is stupid when westerners outside the US influenced by the scared israeli lobby do not hate Iran at all. Giving weapons to the russians is gonna make the EU turn against them, when the euros are generally friendly to their culture outside the mullahs.
                If Iran became a secular republic they could easily be western allies without sanctions and be more prosperous and secure. Their current policy is serbian-in-the-90s retarded, and can only end badly.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Iran has nothing to lose supplying weapons to Russia. EU sanctioned Iran despite Iran complying with the nuclear deal. So they stopped caring

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >EU sanctioned Iran despite Iran complying with the nuclear deal
                The EU was removing sanctions to Iran as agreed for the last decade, ignoring the Syrian mess, and stopping the US for going full retard, until Iran stabbed us in the back helping Russia in Ukraine. The sanctions about the recent protests "for humanitarian reasons" were just a warning.

                https://i.imgur.com/TfkzYS5.png

                >Everyone loves Iran bro
                lol. Nobody likes Iran. Not even their allies.
                Not that public opinion is the best gauge of what your interests should be. Leaders lead, including convincing the population that a country is a major threat, which Iran is and has been since 79.
                >Giving weapons to the russians is gonna make the EU turn against them
                I know. I'm happy as a clam Iran is sending weapons to the Russians. If they want to tie themselves to the sinking ship that is Putin's Russia, by all means.
                >If Iran became a secular republic they could easily be western allies
                Which is why an invasion would center around empowering those people willing to die in the streets to make it happen.

                Iran is not the same as the Iran goverment. People in the west dislike the mullahs and islam, but not iranians like they may dislike arabs, turks or pakis. Their diaspora seems to be mostly educated people or businessmen. There's no gangs of iranian youths fucking shit up in western countries. EU tourists seem to like to travel there when they can, and compare it very favourably to shitholes like Egypt outside the ancient stuff.

                The middle ground is that Iran is a shithole but America shouldn’t invade because that’s retarded

                Accurate.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                No. USA stabbed Iran in the back by withdrawing from the nuclear deal and then Biden continued on with more demands before resigning. EU complied because they have no backbone. So Iran has nothing left to lose anymore

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Everyone loves Iran bro
                lol. Nobody likes Iran. Not even their allies.
                Not that public opinion is the best gauge of what your interests should be. Leaders lead, including convincing the population that a country is a major threat, which Iran is and has been since 79.
                >Giving weapons to the russians is gonna make the EU turn against them
                I know. I'm happy as a clam Iran is sending weapons to the Russians. If they want to tie themselves to the sinking ship that is Putin's Russia, by all means.
                >If Iran became a secular republic they could easily be western allies
                Which is why an invasion would center around empowering those people willing to die in the streets to make it happen.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >We might have lost Levant and Mesopotamia to Iran
                >But at least theyre polling bad!

                Lol oh no!

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Seethe about it zigger. Or Paki, judging by those numbers.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                What country are you from?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Seethe about it zigger. Or Paki, judging by those numbers.

                Iran

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                If aliens invade tomorrow and offer me a place to rule on earth, and the choice is Syria and Iraq on one hand, and Detroit on the other... then Motor City here I come.

                That's how terrible and unsolvable those two countries are. And you think its a victory.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                It's unsolvable because foreign powers meddle in them. Iran, USA, Russia Saudi etc won't let these people rule themselves. Do you understand this?

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                Iraq and Syria are shitholes only because of Israel
                >inb4 they are retarded Arabs
                Well so are the Saudis but they suck gnomish cock so they get to be filthy rich

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yes let's just pretend Afghanistan never happened lol. USA can't do anything about Iran. It's a mode of warfare it can't control.

  50. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Do people on PrepHole actually support the Taliban and Iran?
    If so, why not move to Afghanistan or Iran then, lol.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >If so, why not move to Afghanistan or Iran then, lol.
      not my people

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I support anyone defending their country against invaders.

  51. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    In the 80’s Operation Praying Mantis was a US attack on Iran that destroyed most of their fleet. How did this not result in a war?

  52. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The Iranians would should shoot down a lot of iranian airliners

  53. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Iran has violent protests every other year now. The regime is on borrowed time. Nobody takes the achmeds seriously, the whole solemaini fiasco showed how much of a paper tiger they are

  54. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >As long as Zionists run US foreign policy, that's never going to happen. Every war in the region the past 2 decades has been to lead up to a hot war with Iran. That's what Israel wants
    If Iranians had any brain, they would forget about Israel that isn't even a neighbouring country to them and has only murdered arabs in the middle of their land grabs. But they're cucked by their mullahs and islamist bullshit, so they need to self insert in shit where they don't need to belong.

    I get that the UK and the US were assholes and they needed to give them the finger, and the Iran-Iraq war didn't help, but since the 90s Iran has wasted decades for nothing. As a much superior culture than the arabs, with many educated people and with good resources, Iran could be very prosperous and easily a western ally in the ME that made Israel irrelevant like it was before the 70s oil crisis and Jomeini (if you are so obssesed about that).

    Seriously, without a retarded theocracy you could have been much more. Just look at how Turkey has regressed under Erdogan's islamist bullshit. You should not give a fuck about Israel and the arabs killing each other except cheering for them in TV.

  55. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Say what you want about Iranians but their officer uniforms are PrepHole as fuck

  56. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    whatever the next one is will be it

  57. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Countries beg and plead America to do something
    >America invaded the nation to stop it
    >Everyone tells America to leave
    >America leaves the nation
    >Nation collapses and everyone asks why oh why America left

    Why is it like this? I’ve seen people telling America to leave Afghanistan, and when they did, the same people were mad America left

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      It is almost like we didn't learn our lesson in Vietnam...

  58. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >destroy most conventional military targets
    >create unpopular government and only half heartedly support local allies while completely misunderstanding their priorities, beliefs, and motivations
    >give several billion more to the MIC to shoot expensive missiles at barely trained goatherders until people in America are tired of the war and demand you leave
    >your puppet government immediately collapses while you abandon your allies
    This will happen

  59. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Most likely end result is NGAD gets left behind and falls into jihadi hands because neocon glowies are certain that this time, our collaborator troops will fight to the death for trans rights.

  60. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Supporting Iran is LE BASED!!!!!
    ITT Right now

  61. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Half of the thread is people shilling Iran because it's Le Based even though it has some of the highest rates of garden gnomes and chuds in MENA
    >Other half is accusing anyone that thinks invading Iran is a bad idea of being Vatniks

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      The middle ground is that Iran is a shithole but America shouldn’t invade because that’s retarded

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Accurate post.

        Trying to build neoliberal potemkin villages in the middle east is dumb as fuck, it would be cheaper and more useful to build one on the moon.

  62. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Didn't the Iraqi's get rid of their former Prime Minster because of his ties to Iran?

  63. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    No. Iran is the same as Iraq. Decapitation strike, bombing campaign, roll through with tanks and APCs.
    When all your problems are nails, all you need is a hammer.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      t. zoomer

      Didn't the Iraqi's get rid of their former Prime Minster because of his ties to Iran?

      No. Western media has no idea what's going on and just spits out dumb shit. New Iraqi government is also friends with Iran. Iraq is annexed by Iran in all but name only.
      They only just made it illegal in Iraq to recognize Israel. That should give you some idea of where things are at

  64. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    US would seize the oil fields and let the rest of the country rot

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      it's cute you think USA is able to set the limits to intervention when Iran has ability to strike bases and carrier groups within 2000km of the border

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >strike bases
        The air force will be over Iran like chiggers on roadkill.
        Could they make some launches? Yeah. It's not going to stop them getting wiped. Saddam launched Scuds too. Didn't help.
        >carrier groups within 2000km of the border
        Delusional

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Iran reformed its military beginning 2005 to fight an occupation. It's not a centralised military like a typical western army. logistics is decentralised so there's no 1 point of origin. There are missiles everywhere in Iran, silkworms along the coast etc. There is no shock and awe plan to deal with Iran.

          Iran can absolutely hit carriers within 2000km. Iran has had missiles with solid state fuels and laser guided systems for a long time. Their lowest grade missiles hit saudi oil refineries launched from Iraq accurate to within metres.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >It's not a centralised military like a typical western army. logistics is decentralised so there's no 1 point of origin
            None of these things are true. You are pulling them out of your ass.
            The Iranian military is the same big bulky garbage all shitty militaries are. In fact, the only thing they've done is developed missiles, some drones, and some "sexy" (if you can call it that) projects like the Karrar.
            None of their strategies have changed, which is static emplacements hedgehog-style and trying to wear out the enemy with concentric lines of defense and IRGC guerilla tactics. All of this will get completely wiped in any invasion with a serious adversary outside the guerillas
            They're doing this because they literally can't fight any other way. They don't have the logistical train for widely dispersed caches, which is extremely inefficient, and their C2 is so abysmal it would become a mess if the a war becomes hot.
            What is going through your mind is "Insurgents... but a military!" That does not work. You cannot hide, arm, and coordinate a military, especially a large one, this way.
            The West, especially Israel, has completely penetrated Iran. We know where everything is. We are listening to their phone calls. There are no secrets they can hide.
            >Iran can absolutely hit carriers within 2000km
            Citation needed.
            >But muh missiles
            Barely useful when you've lost the air and everything you do is listened to, seen. Ballistic missiles cannot win a war anyway. See: Ukraine.

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              My information comes from reading book Devil We Know written by a CIA case agent working on iran and its proxies for 20 years. In this book he describes Iranian reformation in its military and explains why it means USA won't invade it.
              You're a gay that's projection ex soviet allies on Iran, Iran didnt have a big bloated army like Syria or baathist army you dumbass.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                My information comes from literally every single monograph that's written by any think tank making an assessment of the Iranian military. All of them uniformly accept the Iranian military is a giant mess of bifurcated C4I (Artesh v. IRGC), badly trained conscripts, officers who can't lead and promoted on the basis of political allegiance, not enough transportation, a strategy of static emplacements (especially for artillery), and no clue how to conduct combined arms operations with few exercises even bothering trying to remedy it.
                The only difference is recent assessments center around platform modernization while failing to fix the structural weaknesses of the military (bad soldiers, bad command, bad inter-operation). All that invisible glue failing is what destroys militaries. See, again, Ukraine.
                Your source is a 9/11 truther and shilled for Ahmadinejad. No thanks.
                >Iran didnt have a big bloated army like Syria or baathist army you dumbass
                That is exactly what they have, outside of the IRGC, which in many ways makes things worse by over-complicating things in the name of avoiding coups.

                >ballistic missiles dont win wars
                USA isn't going to risk losing thousands of soldiers in a large navy incident, USA won't start a war with iran because it can hit back

                The risk isn't destroying the Iranian military, which is fairly simple. It's navigating a tricky occupation.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                USA can destroy Artesh easily. Not the Pasdaran. USA trying to bomb out Revolutionary Guard in oblivion would go the same way as IDF trying to deal with Hezbollah in 2006 or USA trying to deal with Taliban for 20 years.
                IRGC isn't going to contest for territory. You keep applying conventional military issues for an organization that isn't a conventional military. If it was really that simple the USA wouldn't have abandoned Afghanistan to the Taliban lol.
                >cope on 9/11 and Ahmedinehjad
                right right instead you believe Iraqi WMD's and Iran is months away from a nuclear weapon for 30 years

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >IRGC isn't going to contest for territory.
                That's not entirely true, they'll fight, as will the Basij. But they may avoid more direct engagements.
                To the extent they don't fight, it just means ceding territory. When you take the cities (which is what happens when you "don't fight", and even camping out in Tehran will eventually fail, especially when the people hate you), and have a strong base looking to overthrow the Mullahs, that decision to just allow the enemy in doesn't seem so bulletproof. Imagine every single Iranian protesting today with a rifle and the US air force above them. Yes, that is what is going to happen.
                >you believe Iraqi WMD's
                Strawman. Your shit source is not my problem.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                you believe too much western media which doesn't give you full bell curve data of the situation. It gives you information 2 standard deviations from the mean. Regime is unpopular but there is a lot more support for it than western media gives credit for. For example, the streets of Tehran when Soleimani was assassinated.

                Use your head, what's going to happen when USA actually invades the homeland?

                >Imagine every ingle Iranian protesting with a rifle
                You mean like already? They do have guns in Kurdistan, baluchistan and Ahwaz, that's why every year there's like 200+ killed. Revolutionary Guard gets into gun battles. That's why they launched missiles at Kurdish HQ in Iraq this month.
                >shit source
                It's a good source. He said back in 2009 Iran wasn't building a nuke while misinformed dopes believed Bush, Obama, Trump, etc. Still going on lol

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >ballistic missiles dont win wars
              USA isn't going to risk losing thousands of soldiers in a large navy incident, USA won't start a war with iran because it can hit back

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        bases sure, but carriers don't have waypoints telling you where they are in real life

  65. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Unironically, why was occupying Germany and Japan more successful than Vietnam and the Middle East?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because Japan and Germany were 1st world nations with a lot of infostructure and a populace who didn't want anymore fighting

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Japs and Germans are bugmen who kneel and obey conquerors.

      Ragheads and Charlies aren't

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Not gonna lie mad respect for them in that regard.
        If the world were different and I wasn’t a US marine I would probably be good friends with them.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because WW2 absolutely devastated German and Japanese male population. There was barely anyone left to fight Germany was packed with women, old people and kids.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Japs and Germans are bugmen who kneel and obey conquerors.

      Ragheads and Charlies aren't

      Not gonna lie mad respect for them in that regard.
      If the world were different and I wasn’t a US marine I would probably be good friends with them.

      japs and krauts were brutalized to a ridiculous degree, the level of devastation they suffered is far beyond anything the sandmorons in iraq and afghanistan endured

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Because the governments of those countries had just spent decades systematically killing everyone who could run an insurgency

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Those two countries didn't have multiple foreign countries meddling in their affairs. Take a look at Iraq. Iran, USA, Saudi Turkey and Russia all in there trying to change things for their benefit.

  66. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Europe really fucked over the middle east by making such retarded borders

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Middle easterners also fucked up Germany's borders

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Now, what would cause refugees to leave the Middle East? Is it wars caused by European and American interventionism? No, can’t be…

  67. 2 months ago
    Anonymous
  68. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    More vatnik spam, sign of a dead board/site

  69. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    iranians are builders of civilization

  70. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    it would 99% depend on what the civ population does
    if somehow US pisses them off and they go into mideast insurgency mode its fucking over
    iran would be another afghanistan
    however should the civ population support any sort of US invasion it would be game over for the mullahs
    shit would still be very expensive though, its a huge country and would require lots of troops

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >if somehow US pisses them off and they go into mideast insurgency mode its fucking over. iran would be another afghanistan

      Iran was quite united during the war with Iraq in the 80s, a war with the US won't be any different. People will be pissed off about their lives being ruined. There would be a refugee crisis bigger than Syria as well.
      Iran's insurgency would be far worse than Afghanistan's. Some regions like Baluchistan and parts of the Northwest may try to break away, but everyone else won't be trying to form separate states. The concept of Iranian nationhood is strong among the people.

      My information comes from literally every single monograph that's written by any think tank making an assessment of the Iranian military. All of them uniformly accept the Iranian military is a giant mess of bifurcated C4I (Artesh v. IRGC), badly trained conscripts, officers who can't lead and promoted on the basis of political allegiance, not enough transportation, a strategy of static emplacements (especially for artillery), and no clue how to conduct combined arms operations with few exercises even bothering trying to remedy it.
      The only difference is recent assessments center around platform modernization while failing to fix the structural weaknesses of the military (bad soldiers, bad command, bad inter-operation). All that invisible glue failing is what destroys militaries. See, again, Ukraine.
      Your source is a 9/11 truther and shilled for Ahmadinejad. No thanks.
      >Iran didnt have a big bloated army like Syria or baathist army you dumbass
      That is exactly what they have, outside of the IRGC, which in many ways makes things worse by over-complicating things in the name of avoiding coups.
      [...]
      The risk isn't destroying the Iranian military, which is fairly simple. It's navigating a tricky occupation.

      >My information comes from literally every single monograph that's written by any think tank making an assessment of the Iranian military.

      Gee, I can't imagine why they wouldn't all have the same delusions about Iran. It's not like they all collectively advocate for its destruction. What were these think tank's analyses on Afghanistan, remind me again?

      >The risk isn't destroying the Iranian military, which is fairly simple. It's navigating a tricky occupation.

      No it's not simple. And the US coalition didn't occupy Libya either. They just ruined it and left it at that. Iran won't go the same way because the IRGC, Basij and loyalists would just overwhelm any domestic opponents and retake the country after the initial war is over.

      [...]
      [...]
      japs and krauts were brutalized to a ridiculous degree, the level of devastation they suffered is far beyond anything the sandmorons in iraq and afghanistan endured

      >japs and krauts were brutalized to a ridiculous degree, the level of devastation they suffered is far beyond anything the sandmorons in iraq and afghanistan endured

      Germany and Japan don't have religious significance, nor did most people have emotional attachment to Germany by that point. Japan could have been nuked into extinction and literally nobody would have cared.
      Afghanistan on the other hand has deep religious significance in Sunni Islam. Iraq has deep religious significance in Shia Islam and historical importance in Sunni Islam. Dropping nukes on either would create a lot of more enemies globally.

  71. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    The US would've invaded Iran long ago at Israel's behest if it were viable. It would be Vietnam on steroids. Their system of conscription, terrain, and even megacities would make for a very long drawn out and costly war.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *