Iran Crisis & the 2026 War between Iran and the United States, Gulf States, and Israel - Please focus on news and coverage, not argumentation.

BigJoey41X said:
Muslim societies genuinely believe they are fighting for Allah or some shit like that, which is they are so tolerant of taking massive losses, its a cultural difference that western, individualistic minds can't comprehend, in our perspective, dying in war is horrifying and must be avoided whenever possible, meanwhile, they think dying in a war against their god's enemies is an honor.
Click to expand...
This is because they are inbred pedophiles who think they will get 72 virgin children when they die.
 
IMG_8678.jpeg
 
Make Anime Illegal said:
This is because they are inbred pedophiles who think they will get 72 virgin children when they die.
Click to expand...
They are insane, yes, but its also an actual advantage that keeps pissing people raised in western cultures off, like the people in this thread, because you can't really plan around a "cultural mentality".

We keep making fun of them for losing so many people compared to us but they simply just don't care about that, they are just that willing to accept that much amount of casualties.

They would have surrendered a long time ago if that they had the exact same mentality as us.
 
If anyone posted the Shah's speech, I missed in the waves of autismal rage from *qarius (who is very clearly not at all mad)

I will try to save you all time: Absolute nothing burger.
I could find, allah forgive me, only jews talking about it.

The speech (filtered through jews)
I know that news of the two-week ceasefire between the Islamic Republic, America, and Israel has disheartened many of you But today is not a time for despair, it is a time for even greater belief in victory.

The blows dealt to the Islamic Republic in a mere 40 days have been unprecedented, and for this regime, irreparable.

the killing of supreme leader Ali Khamenei in itself is a historic achievement for our nation and senior commanders and principal figures within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Basij, and the regime’s intelligence services have also been removed.

The regime’s command-and-control structure have collapsed and that the military infrastructure built not for the defense of Iran, but for the export of terrorism and instability has been annihilated.

This regime has suffered a devastating defeat in reality, yet by severing Internet access for 90 million Iranians and through its machinery of lies, still pretends victory and issues hollow threats.

Those who had once vowed never to accept a ceasefire have now lost their leader and their commanders, lost the war, accepted the ceasefire, and been dragged to the negotiating table for their complete capitulation.

The regime, though badly weakened, still retained enough coercive power to carry out further repression.

My singular objective is to ensure that any final move against the regime comes at the lowest possible cost to human life.

I therefore ask that you remain patient, protect yourselves and, with faith in victory and full readiness, await the decisive moment. Outside military pressure alone will not be enough to topple the regime, and that the final blow will have to come from within Iran.

We knew from the outset... that the Islamic Republic would not fall solely through the elimination of its command structure and the degradation of its repressive apparatus by aerial strikes. It is we, the Iranian nation, who must deliver the final blow to this weakened regime and bring about its ultimate end.

The blows against the regime were in line with the demands you have made after laying down your lives in the streets of Iran. The regime has no path of escape and no chance of survival this time and its downfall will come at the mighty hands of you, the great nation of Iran.
Click to expand...


The article I plagarized.
Iran’s Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi told Iranians on Wednesday night not to view the newly imposed ceasefire between Iran and the United States and Israel as a defeat. Instead, he portrayed the truce as evidence that the Islamic Republic had suffered a historic blow and was nearing collapse.

In an address broadcast into Iran by satellite and radio, Pahlavi sought to rally opposition supporters disappointed by the two-week pause in hostilities, arguing that the regime had been forced into a position of weakness after weeks of war and the destruction of much of its military and repressive infrastructure.

“I know that news of the two-week ceasefire between the Islamic Republic, America, and Israel has disheartened many of you,” Pahlavi said. “But today is not a time for despair, it is a time for even greater belief in victory.”

His remarks came as US President Donald Trump signaled that Washington intended to move quickly into talks with Tehran under the fragile truce. Trump said on Wednesday that the United States would work with Iran after what he described as a “very productive regime change,” while also insisting there would be no uranium enrichment and warning that any country supplying military weapons to Iran would face immediate 50% tariffs.

He also told ABC News that Washington was considering working jointly with Iran to secure the Strait of Hormuz, while Vice President JD Vance warned that if Tehran failed to engage “in good faith,” there would be consequences.

Pahlavi says Islamic Republic defeated because of ceasefire
Against that backdrop, Pahlavi cast the ceasefire not as a reprieve for the regime, but as proof that it had already suffered a major defeat.

“The blows dealt to the Islamic Republic in a mere 40 days have been unprecedented, and for this regime, irreparable,” he said.

He described the killing of supreme leader Ali Khamenei as “in itself a historic achievement for our nation,” and said that senior commanders and principal figures within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Basij, and the regime’s intelligence services had also been removed.

Pahlavi further claimed that the regime’s command-and-control structure had collapsed and that the military infrastructure built “not for the defense of Iran, but for the export of terrorism and instability,” had been annihilated.

He also accused the Islamic Republic of attempting to hide the scale of the damage through propaganda and Internet restrictions.

“This regime has suffered a devastating defeat in reality, yet by severing Internet access for 90 million Iranians and through its machinery of lies, still pretends victory and issues hollow threats,” the prince said.

Those who had once vowed never to accept a ceasefire, he added, had now “lost their leader and their commanders, lost the war, accepted the ceasefire, and been dragged to the negotiating table for their complete capitulation.”

However, Pahlavi stopped short of calling for immediate mass action, saying that the regime, though badly weakened, still retained enough coercive power to carry out further repression.

He said his “singular objective” was to ensure that any final move against the regime came “at the lowest possible cost to human life.”

“I therefore ask that you remain patient, protect yourselves and, with faith in victory and full readiness, await the decisive moment.”

The crown prince also repeated his longstanding argument that outside military pressure alone would not be enough to topple the regime, and that the final blow would have to come from within Iran.

“We knew from the outset... that the Islamic Republic would not fall solely through the elimination of its command structure and the degradation of its repressive apparatus by aerial strikes,” he said. “It is we, the Iranian nation, who must deliver the final blow to this weakened regime and bring about its ultimate end.”

He linked the current moment to recent anti-regime demonstrations and opposition mobilization, saying the international blows against Tehran were in line with the demands Iranians had made “after laying down their lives in the streets of Iran,” and later echoed during February’s Global Day of Action.

The speech ended with Pahlavi declaring that the Islamic Republic had “no path of escape and no chance of survival this time,” and that its downfall would come “at the mighty hands of you, the great nation of Iran.”
Click to expand...
 
Großmann said:
I remember seeing /pol/fags back in the day talk about how the US ran a naval exercise (Millennium Challenge 2002) that simulated a conflict with Iran where we were DECIMATED, showing how much of a paper tiger the US was supposed to be against Iran. BRIC-ers loved to speculate about Iran because it was one of those hypotheticals that was never actually supposed to be tested — which meant that they could shitpost about how the US would be defeated if they ever went against a REAL COUNTRY like Iran.
Click to expand...
That's because of the leadership of Marine Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper. It's a legendary moment in war-gaming but it shows what American leadership with real combat experience can do, even in an assymetric fight.

The foreigner cannot produce similar results. The idea they would look at the Mona Lisa of war-gaming and think "yeah I could match one of the most decorated marines of all time", is just pure silliness. It's a very important moment for war gamers and it's exactly what DC wants from civilian war gamer, and yes this is something you can get licensed to actually do, but the idea that any of these guys could output similar results is beyond optimistic.

There are civilians who play war games professionally on behalf of Uncle Sam, and all they do is try to game Red Team in an assymetric fight, and even those professional war game players do not put out results like Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper did.

Also it was 24 years ago and they've spent a lot of time evolving from the lessons learned back then.
 
Persona Grata said:
That's because of the leadership of Marine Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper. It's a legendary moment in war-gaming but it shows what American leadership with real combat experience can do, even in an assymetric fight.

The Thirdworlder cannot produce similar results. The idea they would look at the Mona Lisa of war-gaming and think "yeah I could match one of the most decorated marines of all time", is just pure silliness. It's a very important moment for war gamers and it's exactly what DC wants from civilian war gamer, and yes this is something you can get licensed to actually do, but the idea that any of these guys could output similar results is beyond optimistic.

There are civilians who play war games professionally on behalf of Uncle Sam, and all they do is try to game Red Team in an assymetric fight, and even those professional war game players do not put out results like Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper did.

Also it was 24 years ago and they've spent a lot of time evolving from the lessons learned back then.
Click to expand...
I genuinely can't understand people who point to wargames as a serious point on how effective or ineffective a military is, war is not a carefully controlled setting where you can tinker around with the variables and add or discard background factors, war is an extremely chaotic affair where shit just happens outside of anyone's control, yeah, you can influence the battlefield , but that's all you can really do at most, it's up to the games of chance to decide what would happen.

Actual wargames are just theoretical exercises generals do in their spare time to test certain conditions or strategies, it's a "simulation" that doesn't actually match what real warfare looks like.
 
Ghostse said:
So nothing to do with Iran?
Click to expand...
Tangentially related in that Strait of Hormuz being closed is driving up the cost of diesel and fertilizer being part of why the strikes are happening, where closures can cause disruptions downstream in the US. If the protests escalate or MSM outlets start pushing the story, it could be bad for optics on continuing to fight.
1775708892392.png
 
BigJoey41X said:
I genuinely can't understand people who point to wargames as a serious point on how effective or ineffective a military is, war is not a carefully controlled setting where you can tinker around with the variables and add or discard background factors, war is an extremely chaotic affair where shit just happens outside of anyone's control, yeah, you can influence the battlefield , but that's all you can really do at most, it's up to the games of chance to decide what would happen.

Actual wargames are just theoretical exercises generals do in their spare time to test certain conditions or strategies, it's a "simulation" that doesn't actually match what real warfare looks like.
Click to expand...
Because they were played by Prussian military generals and in the Royal Prussian Military Academy for most of modernity. It's something the West has always done.

And honestly I'd argue that the war gaming we do today is probably more informative than games like Kriegsspiel were back then. You need a special license for the full version of Command: Modern Operations for a reason. While it leaves a lot to be desired on the scale of a firefight, it's decent at modeling weapons platforms like the Arleigh Burke.

But it's something we've done for a long time so I suspect it has actual value in application, otherwise the US military wouldn't fuck with it. (Personally I just think it's cool.)
 
JambledUpWords said:
Hey everyone, the reason why we actually didn’t have Bridge and Powerplant Day, according to Reddit, is due to protection spells:
View attachment 8828403View attachment 8828404View attachment 8828405View attachment 8828407View attachment 8828408
Link (Archive)
Click to expand...
Try and announce that you believe in witchcraft in Iran and see how fast you get stoned to death by an angry mob or arrested and put to death if by chance you were formerly a Muslim. That's always the best part about these tree hugging multicultural wiccan larpers, they're always the most ignorant of people.
Großmann said:
I remember seeing /pol/fags back in the day talk about how the US ran a naval exercise (Millennium Challenge 2002) that simulated a conflict with Iran where we were DECIMATED, showing how much of a paper tiger the US was supposed to be against Iran. BRIC-ers loved to speculate about Iran because it was one of those hypotheticals that was never actually supposed to be tested — which meant that they could shitpost about how the US would be defeated if they ever went against a REAL COUNTRY like Iran.
Click to expand...
I remember when /sg/ started out as a general about Syria in early 2010's specifically over concern of the Christians in Syria and wanting stability to avoid another incident like Iraq had where the Christian population diminished, but that general quickly spiraled into this weird ass worshipping of Iran as the war went on.
 
Gar For Archer said:
lol, is that the one where the opposition team exploited technicalities in the rule definitions to win using what are basically video game exploits that would never work in a real war?
Click to expand...
Motorbike couriers traveling at the speed of light and fast boats carrying missiles that were twice their size. As I've said before, anyone using US wargames as an accurate representation of the US military's capabilities (especially the ones where OPFOR was intentionally trying to bend/break as many rules as physically possible) is a mouth breathing retard of gargantuan proportions.
 
Persona Grata said:
That's because of the leadership of Marine Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper. It's a legendary moment in war-gaming but it shows what American leadership with real combat experience can do, even in an assymetric fight.

The foreigner cannot produce similar results. The idea they would look at the Mona Lisa of war-gaming and think "yeah I could match one of the most decorated marines of all time", is just pure silliness. It's a very important moment for war gamers and it's exactly what DC wants from civilian war gamer, and yes this is something you can get licensed to actually do, but the idea that any of these guys could output similar results is beyond optimistic.

There are civilians who play war games professionally on behalf of Uncle Sam, and all they do is try to game Red Team in an assymetric fight, and even those professional war game players do not put out results like Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper did.

Also it was 24 years ago and they've spent a lot of time evolving from the lessons learned back then.
Click to expand...
Also remember that Van Ripper "cheated" because his goal was to show the war game system was deeply flawed and because he had a personal grudge against the guy running the war game.

I've posted on this before:
-If the first, aborted run, the General of the US side attempted to also "game the system" by practically beaching his fleet on the landing beaches to reduce the time it would take to land his forces. If it had worked as intended he would have gained several hours against the Iranian commander.
So when people say "tHeY wOuLdN't LeT hIm UsE sPeEdBoAtS" they ignore that sort of horseshit wasn't what they wanted to simulate, they wanted to simulate an Iranian response to a landing, and that the US commander was likewise prevented from parking his troop transports on the beach.

- Van Riper knew the game rules treated all communication methods the same. Thus his plan to use "motorcycle courriers" had his motorcycle messengers traveling at the speed of light and ignoring terrain, and they were immune to being killed or intercepted. The game rules were updated to handle "physical messaging" after this. We can see, in Iran's 'mosaic defense' why motorbike courrier has serious flaws. But Van Riper having magically unjammable communications for the exercise is why all of his clever plans worked.

BigJoey41X said:
Actual wargames are just theoretical exercises generals do in their spare time to test certain conditions or strategies, it's a "simulation" that doesn't actually match what real warfare looks like.
Click to expand...
Exactly this. MC2K2 was supposed to just simulate the logistics and strategies of a US invasion of Iran - US forces landing was just supposed to be happening a designated beach which why the speedboat waves weren't anticipated, or why motorcycle couriers weren't considered.

However, US war games have had real results. In WWII they had a war game simulating Uboats hunting convoys, using basically little booths with slits to simulate the SONAR views. As a part of these war games, the allies made changed to how convoys were organized, which including putting escorts with the merchant ships not just outside, which caused a drop in Uboat effectiveness.
 
Russell Coight said:
What's this "we" shit?

View attachment 8828761
Click to expand...
I still can't believe the Brits elected this absolute tool. He has probably the least charisma of any politician I have ever seen. Michael Dukakis and Mitt Romney look manly by comparison. His whole demeanor oozes with slimy coward energy. He's like a real life Arnold Rimmer, but with less charisma. Seriously, how the fuck did this guy get elected?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom