Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Invisusira's playground

Moderators: Aergis, Invisusira

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Fivelives » Tue Feb 11, 2014 4:55 pm

So, Iran. I read today that they announced the successful test of two missiles, one ICBM and one an upgrade to one of their already existing platforms that's essentially equivalent to a cruise missile. Between that, and them moving warships toward the Atlantic for the first time in, well, pretty much forever, should we be concerned, or is this just diplomatic saber rattling because of the upcoming and ongoing negotiations over their nuclear program?
- I'm not Jesus, but I can turn water into Kool-Aid.
- A Sergeant in motion outranks an officer who doesn't know what the hell is going on.
- A demolitions specialist at a flat run outranks everybody.
User avatar
Fivelives
 
Posts: 3113
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 7:55 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:47 pm

Fivelives wrote:So, Iran. I read today that they announced the successful test of two missiles, one ICBM and one an upgrade to one of their already existing platforms that's essentially equivalent to a cruise missile. Between that, and them moving warships toward the Atlantic for the first time in, well, pretty much forever, should we be concerned, or is this just diplomatic saber rattling because of the upcoming and ongoing negotiations over their nuclear program?


The US spends $682 Billion per year on their military. Iran spends $6 billion. I rate your chances of winning.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:55 pm

Seems its just some saber rattling, just to appease the hardliners, after all the new Iranian president seems pretty moderate.

That said, i'd not be surprised if Israel manages to send Mossad agents to kill scientists in retaliation.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11259
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Tue Feb 11, 2014 6:57 pm

Koatanga wrote:
Fivelives wrote:So, Iran. I read today that they announced the successful test of two missiles, one ICBM and one an upgrade to one of their already existing platforms that's essentially equivalent to a cruise missile. Between that, and them moving warships toward the Atlantic for the first time in, well, pretty much forever, should we be concerned, or is this just diplomatic saber rattling because of the upcoming and ongoing negotiations over their nuclear program?


The US spends $682 Billion per year on their military. Iran spends $6 billion. I rate your chances of winning.


that said, Iran doesnt spend 400 bucks on a hammer, or millions of dollars on planes that get sent straight to the junkyard or tanks that the army doesnt want. >.>
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11259
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Tue Feb 11, 2014 7:14 pm

Klaudandus wrote:
Koatanga wrote:
Fivelives wrote:So, Iran. I read today that they announced the successful test of two missiles, one ICBM and one an upgrade to one of their already existing platforms that's essentially equivalent to a cruise missile. Between that, and them moving warships toward the Atlantic for the first time in, well, pretty much forever, should we be concerned, or is this just diplomatic saber rattling because of the upcoming and ongoing negotiations over their nuclear program?


The US spends $682 Billion per year on their military. Iran spends $6 billion. I rate your chances of winning.


that said, Iran doesnt spend 400 bucks on a hammer, or millions of dollars on planes that get sent straight to the junkyard or tanks that the army doesnt want. >.>

That said, your best fighter jets aren't old enough to have been "flown" by Tom Cruise and Val Kilmer in Top Gun.

Actually Iran's Tomcats are from between 1974 and 1979, so they even predate the personal computer. Christina Ricci and Kim Kardashian weren't even born.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Tue Feb 11, 2014 7:26 pm

Oh, I know that, my snark was aimed at wasteful spending in the military. =P
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11259
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Tue Feb 11, 2014 7:45 pm

Klaudandus wrote:Oh, I know that, my snark was aimed at wasteful spending in the military. =P

Yeah, but the crap you throw away is better than the crap they use.

We should talk - New Zealand doesn't even have any fighters, and the only jets in our Air Force are 2 757-200s.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Klaudandus » Tue Feb 11, 2014 8:26 pm

who would want to attack new zealand? plus, they got the eye of sauron
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11259
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Tue Feb 11, 2014 8:48 pm

Klaudandus wrote:who would want to attack new zealand? plus, they got the eye of sauron

We're trying very hard to be an object lesson. Our entire military is based around intelligence-gathering and rendering aid. We're generous in natural disasters, and pretty much keep our noses in our own business unless we're supporting the UN.

As a result, no one wants to kill us.

And we have the eye of Sauron.

And Smaug.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Shoju » Wed Feb 12, 2014 12:50 pm

Klaudandus wrote:
Koatanga wrote:
Fivelives wrote:So, Iran. I read today that they announced the successful test of two missiles, one ICBM and one an upgrade to one of their already existing platforms that's essentially equivalent to a cruise missile. Between that, and them moving warships toward the Atlantic for the first time in, well, pretty much forever, should we be concerned, or is this just diplomatic saber rattling because of the upcoming and ongoing negotiations over their nuclear program?


The US spends $682 Billion per year on their military. Iran spends $6 billion. I rate your chances of winning.


that said, Iran doesnt spend 400 bucks on a hammer, or millions of dollars on planes that get sent straight to the junkyard or tanks that the army doesnt want. >.>


THey also don't sell off items as surplus for pennies on the dollar, only to buy it back from the same people a couple of years down the road. Not that I would have any first hand knowledge of that.
User avatar
Shoju
 
Posts: 6396
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 7:15 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Io.Draco » Thu Feb 13, 2014 7:17 am

If a war were to ever start between Iran and the US it wouldn't end well for either of them.

That said the Persians have been there for thousands of years, they will remain there for thousands more to come. The notion that some American cowboys have that they can invade and just topple the entire regime there easily is laughable. One should just a long hard look at the war between Iran and Iraq and see the tactics they implemented.

Also Iran is a bloody mountain. Have fun invading THAT against an army that is well prepared, well equipped and has been specifically trained to counter your military. America might win, but it would be a bloody cost.
User avatar
Io.Draco
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:33 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Thu Feb 13, 2014 12:28 pm

Io.Draco wrote:If a war were to ever start between Iran and the US it wouldn't end well for either of them.

That said the Persians have been there for thousands of years, they will remain there for thousands more to come. The notion that some American cowboys have that they can invade and just topple the entire regime there easily is laughable. One should just a long hard look at the war between Iran and Iraq and see the tactics they implemented.

Also Iran is a bloody mountain. Have fun invading THAT against an army that is well prepared, well equipped and has been specifically trained to counter your military. America might win, but it would be a bloody cost.

The US would have air superiority on the first day and could bomb the hell out of Iran at leisure until Iran submits. Terrain and such is not so much the issue. The amount of ordinance the US could deliver to any potential target is truly impressive, and all that is through non-nuclear means. Should Iran initiate a successful nuke strike, the counter-strike would have Iran glowing for centuries. I don't know that there's ever been a more vindictive nation than the US.

The issue is similar to that with Iraq - once you conquer the existing regime, there are several other factions that will fight to control the region. The US would have to prop up its puppet government for years in hopes that when they pull out it won't be instantly mowed down by one of the factions. It would take a military commitment of decades, which would be incredibly unpopular domestically.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Io.Draco » Thu Feb 13, 2014 1:21 pm

I think that you are a bit mistaken if you think the US could just bomb Iran into submission, or even get air superiority in 1 day. Tehran does have some decent, and I mean decent not good, AA defenses that would inflict casualties on US jet fighters. Of course not talking of F-22s here, but F-18s? After all they do have a few S-300s and are about to receive more from Russia.

Name me on war were bombing a country into submission has won it. The regime won't fall due to your bombs, just like Gaddafi's regime didn't fall simply due to bombs when the entire western world unleashed their mighty combined air forces on him, and Gaddafi's air defenses were anihilated by the bombardment of NATO ships, since they were concentrated on the coast. That won't work in Iran.

It will take a ground assault and the American army in Iran would face a bloody long road to capture Tehran, if they even captured it. Don't assume the Iranian Army will be break like the Iraqi one.
User avatar
Io.Draco
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:33 am

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Koatanga » Thu Feb 13, 2014 1:57 pm

Io.Draco wrote:I think that you are a bit mistaken if you think the US could just bomb Iran into submission, or even get air superiority in 1 day. Tehran does have some decent, and I mean decent not good, AA defenses that would inflict casualties on US jet fighters. Of course not talking of F-22s here, but F-18s? After all they do have a few S-300s and are about to receive more from Russia.

Name me on war were bombing a country into submission has won it. The regime won't fall due to your bombs, just like Gaddafi's regime didn't fall simply due to bombs when the entire western world unleashed their mighty combined air forces on him, and Gaddafi's air defenses were anihilated by the bombardment of NATO ships, since they were concentrated on the coast. That won't work in Iran.

It will take a ground assault and the American army in Iran would face a bloody long road to capture Tehran, if they even captured it. Don't assume the Iranian Army will be break like the Iraqi one.

We're talking about a potential ICBM attack against the US. Retaliation for such an attack would be extreme. The full might of the US military would descend on Iran like a hammer, and the gloves would be off. No pussyfooting around UN diplomacy or playing hide-and-seek with a terrorist organisation. This would be a justified action the entire nation would be behind, pretty much regardless of whatever force was brought to bear against governmental, military, or even civilian targets.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 2025
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Politics (formerly Election 2012)

Postby Io.Draco » Thu Feb 13, 2014 2:10 pm

Everything short of a nuclear attack would result in a long and costly war against Iran, even if Israel got involved to help you out. Although taking the gloves want means what that the US no longer gives a damn about the Geneva convention. Oh that would never have major political repercussions against the country.

Also that ICBM attack, not going to happen. For all the BS that's in the media that the US is under threat by Iran and North Korea those countries aren't going to launch ICBMs against the US. What would be the gain?
User avatar
Io.Draco
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2007 1:33 am

PreviousNext

Return to Arkham Asylum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest