2025 Israel vs Iran War

Tactical Wizard said:
Nigger, I was actually there three times. I should add that the Taliban are a special case. Those guys actually prepared and would test defenses and creep up in the middle of the night to turn our claymore's around to point at the guard towers.
Click to expand...
I'm sure your experience is how it always turned out. That's why the US is still in Iraq and Afghanistan. Oh wait.
 
  • Dumb
  • Like
Reactions: Welfare Bum, DΛRK MΛGΛ, NuruMaleMasseuse and 1 other person
BradeRunna said:
This as well. It will basically be like what happened in Afghanistan during the Soviet and American invasions. Dune coons will flood in from all over the Middle East and central Asia.

They can't carry out anything truly effective against Iran without putting soldiers in the country. The idea that this can all be done from the air is a fantasy. Soldiers will need to be sent in. Sure, they can bomb stuff, but it won't do the job 100%. Israel can't do it so guess who can?

It will basically be Iraq 2.0.
Click to expand...
The sectarianism might be even crazier if it does happen but considering the amount of risk involved, I'm inclined to believe the US would not consider invading. Then again, anything can happen.
 
1749882965968077.webp
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Dropa5pack, SlavSquater, Blacknigger_1488 and 23 others
Salvatore Leone said:
The sectarianism might be even crazier if it does happen but considering the amount of risk involved, I'm inclined to believe the US would not consider invading. Then again, anything can happen.
Click to expand...
It only takes a few Iranian terror cells assisted by the Mossad to make it happen.
 
BradeRunna said:
I'm sure your experience is how it always turned out. That's why the US is still in Iraq and Afghanistan. Oh wait.
Click to expand...
80,000 Taliban died and only ~3500 Coalition Soldiers and a further 3000 contractor died and 70,000 ANA.
While in Nam 1.1 million Vietnamese died for 400,000 allied troops out of which 300,000 were South Vietnamese.
Like all insurgents they are only good at assassinating local troops opposing them and lose every single battle.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Dumb
Reactions: Dropa5pack, Ughubughughughughughghlug, Le Pew and 10 others
Smashed & Slamed said:
80,000 Taliban died and only ~3500 Coalition Soldiers and a further 3000 contractor died and 70,000 ANA.
While in Nam 1.1 million Vietnamese died for 400,000 allied troops out of which 300,000 were South Vietnamese.
Like all insurgents they are only good at assassinating local troops opposing them and lose every single battle.
Click to expand...
But guess who ended up fleeing Vietnam with people falling off the helicopters. It wasn't the Vietcong or NVA it was the US. The point of an insurgency isn't to win battles. It's to grind the other side down. To kill just enough that the population of the invading country gets disgusted. That's what happened in Vietnam Iraq and Afghanistan. You think the US media isn't going to report every time a dozen or so US soldiers get killed in Iran by the insurgency?
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Rainbow Idiot, Welfare Bum, NuruMaleMasseuse and 4 others
Doinker Marmalade said:
How is it, then, that you still managed to lose all of those wars then?
Click to expand...
Because to win as an insurgent all you need is to not give up. Afghanistan and Vietnam are not even impressive.
The Balkan anti-Ottoman resistance lasted 800 years. The Reconquista lasted 1000 years. Even recent stuff like the Anti Communist Resistance in the Baltics and Romania also lasted longer.
The only way you lose as an insurgent is if you give up or get exterminated.
BradeRunna said:
But guess who ended up fleeing Vietnam with people falling off the helicopters.
Click to expand...
Do the lives of Americans matter less than a Democratic government in South Vietnam?
The reason US has lost all of these insurgencies is that it has valued the lives of it's own troops more than geopolitical gains. Not because US can't win that type of war. The US subjugated the injuns and dealt with the suicidal Japs. The US can be motivated to outlast/exterminate someone for the right reasons.
Thinking this is about competency is the cope of midwits. The Tet Offensive was seen as disaster on the home front in US. Meanwhile Vietnam and their advisors saw it as the end of the war because it proved to them they stood 0 chance of driving out the US with conventional warfare.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Optimistic
Reactions: poggies123_, Dropa5pack, Le Pew and 10 others
Smashed & Slamed said:
Because to win as an insurgent all you need is to not give up. Afghanistan and Vietnam are not even impressive.
The Balkan anti-Ottoman resistance lasted 800 years. The Reconquista lasted 1000 years. Even recent stuff like the Anti Communist Resistance in the Baltics and Romania also lasted longer.
The only way you lose as an insurgent is if you give up or get exterminated.

Do the lives of Americans matter less than a Democratic government in South Vietnam?
The reason US has lost all of these insurgencies is that it has valued the lives of it's own troops more than geopolitical gains. Not because US can't win that type of war. The US subjugated the injuns and dealt with the suicidal Japs. The US can be motivated to outlast/exterminate someone for the right reasons.
Thinking this is about competency is the cope of midwits. The Tet Offensive was seen as disaster on the home front in US. Meanwhile Vietnam and their advisors saw it as the end of the war because it proved to them they stood 0 chance of driving out the US with conventional warfare.
Click to expand...
Insurgency only wins because people invent rules of how to merk each other, at least in the modern era. I do not like rules, they're silly and inefficient for the sake of not looking like a bad guy whilst you kill people.
 
  • Dumb
  • Autistic
  • Like
Reactions: Dropa5pack, EliteBolete, Welfare Bum and 1 other person
Smashed & Slamed said:
Because to win as an insurgent all you need is to not give up. Afghanistan and Vietnam are not even impressive.
The Balkan anti-Ottoman resistance lasted 800 years. The Reconquista lasted 1000 years. Even recent stuff like the Anti Communist Resistance in the Baltics and Romania also lasted longer.
The only way you lose as an insurgent is if you give up or get exterminated.

Do the lives of Americans matter less than a Democratic government in South Vietnam?
The reason US has lost all of these insurgencies is that it has valued the lives of it's own troops more than geopolitical gains. Not because US can't win that type of war. The US subjugated the injuns and dealt with the suicidal Japs. The US can be motivated to outlast/exterminate someone for the right reasons.
Thinking this is about competency is the cope of midwits. The Tet Offensive was seen as disaster on the home front in US. Meanwhile Vietnam and their advisors saw it as the end of the war because it proved to them they stood 0 chance of driving out the US with conventional warfare.
Click to expand...
That's a nice argument, too bad it consists entirely of cope over the fact you lost all your wars to much more poorly equipped opponents.

The American mind simply refuses to acknowledge other countries might be more competent at war.
 
  • Dumb
  • Like
  • Autistic
Reactions: April Ryan, poggies123_, Dropa5pack and 9 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back