The Iran deal decision: Tump withdraws the US.

[Steven_Universe]

Many news sources are reporting the deal as dead.

I predict within The next 10 years we have 3000 dead Americans, 1 million plus dead Iranians, maybe a hundred thousand dead Israelis.

Looks like in recent years the petty enemies of America are either falling in line or getting obliterated.

https://www.google.ca/amp/thehill.com/opinion/national-security/385883-obamas-iran-nuclear-deal-is-dead?amp

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/05/04/iran-deal-is-dead-iran-killed-it.html

Edit Update:

 

[spin]

two articles from the opinion sections

 

[TheComebackKid]

Not if treasonous John Kerry can help it

 

[VivaRevolution]

Many news sources are reporting the deal as dead.

I predict within The next 10 years we have 3000 dead Americans, 1 million plus dead Iranians, maybe a hundred thousand dead Israelis.

Looks like in recent years the petty enemies of America are either falling in line or getting obliterated.

https://www.google.ca/amp/thehill.com/opinion/national-security/385883-obamas-iran-nuclear-deal-is-dead?amp

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/05/04/iran-deal-is-dead-iran-killed-it.html

It is done for the US. That is where this could end up being quite the embarrassment for Trump. If we re-institute sanctions, and Europe doesn't follow suit, Trump will be a laughing stock.

On the other hand, if we commit to a full scale war with Iran, I think your numbers are way too low. More like 25,000-250,000 dead US Troops, and 5-10 million dead Iranians.

 

[NC252]

It is done for the US. That is where this could end up being quite the embarrassment for Trump. If we re-institute sanctions, and Europe doesn't follow suit, Trump will be a laughing stock.

On the other hand, if we commit to a full scale war with Iran, I think your numbers are way too low. More like 25,000-250,000 dead US Troops, and 5-10 million dead Iranians.

Iran is not like NK. They are patiently biding there time until they have nukes and then tbey will use them against Israel. Israel will attack before US

 

[Nooob]

.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Iran is not like NK. They are patiently biding there time until they have nukes and then tbey will use them against Israel. Israel will attack before US

Iran is Israel's equal. Not in every aspect, but as a whole. What advantage Israel has in a superior air force, Iran has in numbers. Technology advantage Israel, resource advantage Iran. I think a 1 on 1 Israel, Iran war goes stalemate. Israel controls the skies, Iran controls the ground.

 

[Trotsky]

Iran is Israel's equal. Not in every aspect, but as a whole. What advantage Israel has in a superior air force, Iran has in numbers. Technology advantage Israel, resource advantage Iran. I think a 1 on 1 Israel, Iran war goes stalemate. Israel controls the skies, Iran controls the ground.

Iran also, for whatever reason (I am no military expert, of course), consistently outperforms their metrics. On paper, Iran should have been completely dominated by Iraq when Saddam invaded. Iran was weak, relatively poor, and using a hodge podge militia (even drawing upon child soldiers). And Iraq was more stable, had better technology, and was getting money from the US and Saudi Arabia.

Instead Iran quickly repelled the invasion, flipped the script, and began advancing into Iraq (at which point Saddam deployed chemical weapons and the US played the part of the distracted referee, but that's a whole different story). And, likewise, their proxy forces have been the best in the region.

I would take Iran.

 

[Black Helicopters]

Iran also, for whatever reason (I am no military expert, of course), consistently outperforms their metrics. On paper, Iran should have been completely dominated by Iraq when Saddam invaded. Iran was weak, relatively poor, and using a hodge podge militia (even drawing upon child soldiers). And Iraq was more stable, had better technology, and was getting money from the US and Saudi Arabia.

Instead Iran quickly repelled the invasion, flipped the script, and began advancing into Iraq (at which point Saddam deployed chemical weapons and the US played the part of the distracted referee, but that's a whole different story). And, likewise, their proxy forces have been the best in the region.

I would take Iran.

Iran deserves credit for that but we are talking about the Iraqi army here

You can have all the technology and money in the world but in the hands of unmotivated and incompetent dopes, it goes nowhere

 

[Trotsky]

Iran deserves credit for that but we are talking about the Iraqi army here

You can have all the technology and money in the world but in the hands of unmotivated and incompetent dopes, it goes nowhere

I don't know much about the Iraqi army, but I certainly agree that an army with purpose is (or at least was in olden days) incomparable to mercenaries. Such was claimed and proven by Che and the guerrilleros in Cuba. One of them was worth 20 Batista thugs.

 

[hillelslovak87]

I don't know much about the Iraqi army, but I certainly agree that an army with purpose is (or at least was in olden days) incomparable to mercenaries. Such was claimed and proven by Che and the guerrilleros in Cuba. One of them was worth 20 Batista thugs.

The Iraqi army is among the worst "armies" in the world. Jocko Willink, a SEAL task unit commander in Ramadi, Iraq during the Iraq war.

He essentially said that their gear, full of cheap chinese knockoffs of AKs and other guns, were in such bad shape that most of the time the sights could not even been adjusted. They were/are malnourished, had shifting allegiances, could barely do pushups or jumping jacks, had no grasp of tactics, and would tuck tail and run when shit got tough, firing their rifles over their shoulders, down range with friendlies in the firing zone.

He explained that our only hope in Iraq was to fuck up the insurgency so bad, even the shit army of Iraq could beat them. He said that it would take generations to turn them into a remotely capable force that could rival some of the shittier small nation armies.

They fucked.

 

[Trotsky]

The Iraqi army is among the worst "armies" in the world. Jocko Willink, a SEAL task unit commander in Ramadi, Iraq during the Iraq war.

He essentially said that their gear, full of cheap chinese knockoffs of AKs and other guns, were in such bad shape that most of the time the sights could not even been adjusted. They were/are malnourished, had shifting allegiances, could barely do pushups or jumping jacks, had no grasp of tactics, and would tuck tail and run when shit got tough, firing their rifles over their shoulders, down range with friendlies in the firing zone.

He explained that our only hope in Iraq was to fuck up the insurgency so bad, even the shit army of Iraq could beat them. He said that it would take generations to turn them into a remotely capable force that could rival some of the shittier small nation armies.

They fucked.

Haha, that's such a weird anecdote to me. But very interesting. Thanks for sharing.

 

[InternetHero]

Iran also, for whatever reason (I am no military expert, of course), consistently outperforms their metrics. On paper, Iran should have been completely dominated by Iraq when Saddam invaded. Iran was weak, relatively poor, and using a hodge podge militia (even drawing upon child soldiers). And Iraq was more stable, had better technology, and was getting money from the US and Saudi Arabia.

Instead Iran quickly repelled the invasion, flipped the script, and began advancing into Iraq (at which point Saddam deployed chemical weapons and the US played the part of the distracted referee, but that's a whole different story). And, likewise, their proxy forces have been the best in the region.

I would take Iran.

Take Iran in what?

Saddam's forces lost due to:

- Terrible leadership

- Terrible organization

- Low/no morale, for Iraq it was a political war while for Iran it was a call from Allah to defend the homeland

- No tactical understanding of their weapons systems

A. They tried to use tanks as siege guns

B. Their air superiority was mute due to Iraq being incapable of bombing anything for effectiveness

Rather than a fluid war, it was a war of attraction, and the United States for cynical and savvy reasons was fine letting Iran and Iraq bleed themselves dry in what devolved into literal trench warfare.

Trench warfare that the Iraqi's found was a tad ineffective against allied heavy bombers, attack bombers, and coordinated tank and mechanized infantry in the open desert.

 

[Trotsky]

Take Iran in what?

I don't know. I'm a partial spectator playing a hunch.

 

[Black Helicopters]

I don't know much about the Iraqi army, but I certainly agree that an army with purpose is (or at least was in olden days) incomparable to mercenaries. Such was claimed and proven by Che and the guerrilleros in Cuba. One of them was worth 20 Batista thugs.

A more relevant example is the performance of Saudi Arabia in Yemen.

Houthis have destroyed Saudi equipment and launched several missiles in SA and pretty much all they’ve done in response is kill Yemeni civilians

 

[Seaside]

It is done for the US. That is where this could end up being quite the embarrassment for Trump. If we re-institute sanctions, and Europe doesn't follow suit, Trump will be a laughing stock.

On the other hand, if we commit to a full scale war with Iran, I think your numbers are way too low. More like 25,000-250,000 dead US Troops, and 5-10 million dead Iranians.

Want to take a bet the US and allies own Iran? Since you think it will likely happen I predict the international community will be against Iran to except Russia's allies and China and maybe EU play neutral.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Want to take a bet the US and allies own Iran? Since you think it will likely happen I predict the international community will be against Iran to except Russia's allies and China and maybe EU play neutral.

I will make it even simpler. If the US puts boots on the ground in Iran, WWIII starts.

I will take any bet you want in that regard.

 

[Seaside]

I will make it even simpler. If the US puts boots on the ground in Iran, WWIII starts.

I will take any bet you want in that regard.

Alright just bragging rights lol. Let get it on! For all our sake let hope your ww3 prediction is wrong.

 

[Judge]

If we re-institute sanctions, and Europe doesn't follow suit, Trump will be a laughing stock..

Why? Trump put the embassy in Jerusalem. Western Europe did not file suit. Trump is trying to get abortions out of here. Western Europe is not following suit.

It is really a cuck bitch mentality to think we have to do things to please Europe. The USA has always been different than Europe and we have always been better than those fucks and will remain so.

It is about having principles, not getting FB likes from weak effeminate Europeans.

We don't allow refugees to flat out get dumped on us like Europe does. Is he a laughing stock for this? Is he a laughing stock for getting rid of the Paris Accord?

USA is #winning more than anyone else is currently, but hey, that is nothing new.

I will make it even simpler. If the US puts boots on the ground in Iran, WWIII starts.

I will take any bet you want in that regard.

LOL, please post something less stupid. It would take US fighting China to start WW3. The US fighting in Vietnam and Korea prove this.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Alright just bragging rights lol. Let get it on! For all our sake let hope your ww3 prediction is wrong.

I hope my whole world view is wrong.