• Iran digging graves for US troops if they attack
    89 replies, posted
Iran is going to get those fucking words shoved down their throat if we ever invade. Because if the US invades, we are bringing all of our friends as well. So pretty much Iran is going to get its ass kicked.
Mahmoud is hilarious, he should get a timeslot on comedy central [editline]12:06AM[/editline] if Iran got invaded there would be more death from eachother rather than the invading force you've got the Shi'ite wanting this, the Sunni wanting that, all these other groups wanting different things. they'd be more likely to kill eachother and try to take power than unite against an invader Iran isn't going to do anything, and if they do they'd be gone in a day, people need to stop acting like they're a serious threat
Iran is a good country. The citizens hate their crazy ass leader and we shouldn't attack.
If America attacks Iran than we are looking at another large scale war, and they have nukes. Which can destroy a lot of American citizens. It wont be 9/11 anymore, guys. It will be on a whole new level of destruction.
Oh look! Iran's saving the US some time. How thoughtful! [QUOTE=Afgman;23979894]If America attacks Iran than we are looking at another large scale war, and they have nukes. Which can destroy a lot of American citizens. It wont be 9/11 anymore, guys. It will be on a whole new level of destruction.[/QUOTE] Iran has nearly no delivery systems what so ever. Even if they did, the US still has the best anti ICBM systems in the world. And about two hundred times the nuclear arsenal.
Using Nuclear weapons against the US is probably the worst thing they can possibly do. It escalates the conflict and gives the US a justifiable reason to Nuke the hell out of Iran. Even if they don't use Nukes in retaliation, it pretty much guarantees Irans destruction due to the enormous interntaional support the US would have against them.
[QUOTE=abcpea;23960082]i dont understand what invading iran would achieve[/QUOTE] CUZ THEY BOMBED NYC TEH GREATEST PLACE ON ERTH/igrnorant-teabagger In all seriousness it would achieve absolutely nothing
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;23979912]Oh look! Iran's saving the US some time. How thoughtful! Iran has nearly no delivery systems what so ever. Even if they did, the US still has the best anti ICBM systems in the world. And about two hundred times the nuclear arsenal.[/QUOTE] Missiles don't count as delivery systems? If that's so then they might as well throw nuclear warheads by hand. [editline]11:06PM[/editline] Besides, Iran has no plans of actually making a missile that would reach the US, it would go against their strategic posture of keeping the balance with Israel.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23980155]Missiles don't count as delivery systems? If that's so then they might as well throw nuclear warheads by hand.[/QUOTE] Well, they don't have any long range delivery systems, if I remember, the furthest shooting missile they have can only reach slightly past Israel. So our little buddy there might have a problem if Iraq's leader is stupider than we think he is. But nuclear usage in this case has a very low possibility, it would only screw Iran even more. Not that the US invading them is a smart idea either. [QUOTE=Tac Error;23980155]Besides, Iran has no plans of actually making a missile that would reach the US, it would go against their strategic posture of keeping the balance with Israel.[/QUOTE] This is true.
[QUOTE=Afgman;23979894]If America attacks Iran than we are looking at another large scale war, and they have nukes. Which can destroy a lot of American citizens. It wont be 9/11 anymore, guys. It will be on a whole new level of destruction.[/QUOTE] they dont have nukes
The US can't beat anyone. Who's dumb enough to think they can?
I think invading Iran would be generally considered a bad move. If anything we should get out of the middle east completely and let the place rot by itself. Eventually they'll end up killing themselves and we wont have to worry about a thing,(except the terrorists). I think America has lost the momentum and support from the general public to continue the war. It's just becoming another Vietnam. Should've done more when we had the popular opinion back in '01-'02 Also at the above user. Put America 1 on 1 with any military in the world in a straight fight and I'm almost completely positive that we would win.(Except for maybe Britain or Germany, but since we're allies not much to worry about there.) -woops fixed-
[QUOTE=Slacker101;23980723]I think invading Iraq would be generally considered a bad move. If anything we should get out of the middle east completely and let the place rot by itself. Eventually they'll end up killing themselves and we wont have to worry about a thing,(except the terrorists). I think America has lost the momentum and support from the general public to continue the war. It's just becoming another Vietnam. Should've done more when we had the popular opinion back in '01-'02 Also at the above user. Put America 1 on 1 with any military in the world in a straight fight and I'm almost completely positive that we would win.[/QUOTE] We already invaded Iraq, this is Iran we are talking about here.
[QUOTE=Slacker101;23980723] Also at the above user. Put America 1 on 1 with any military in the world in a straight fight and I'm almost completely positive that we would win.(Except for maybe Britain or Germany, but since we're allies not much to worry about there.)[/QUOTE] There's no such thing as a "straight fight".
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23980778]There's no such thing as a "straight fight".[/QUOTE] WW2 = Strait fight Vietnam = geurilla tactics Unless I'm missing something here. Basing it off the fact WW2 was the last major war we won.
[QUOTE=Slacker101;23980796]WW2 = Strait fight Vietnam = geurilla tactics Unless I'm missing something here. Basing it off the fact WW2 was the last major war we won.[/QUOTE] Maybe if you use the term "conventional warfare" instead it would be more understandable. WWII's participants were never evenly matched that a "straight fight" could happen. Even then, the US military hasn't fought a high intensity war for a long time, with the last being Korea. Its actions in the Middle East is an unreliable indicator on how it would actually perform in an imaginary future conventional conflict. Don't let the victory disease creep up on you.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23980866]Maybe if you use the term "conventional warfare" instead it would be more understandable. WWII's participants were never evenly matched that a "straight fight" could happen.[/QUOTE] Sorry but its 3 am where i am. And for some reason I've got images of olde-time boxing fights stuck in my head. Ok so in "conventional warfare" America would win almost everytime.
ITT everyone is an expert on military combat and knows exactly who would win and would have the advantage.
[QUOTE=PvtCupcakes;23980311]The US can't beat anyone. Who's dumb enough to think they can?[/QUOTE] I'm pretty amazed the US hasn't developed a suitable anti-insurgency/anti-guerrilla military doctrine.
Too bad they wont have a single body placed in them. Cause' we will seriously run their shit into the ground. [editline]08:51AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Slacker101;23980796]WW2 = Strait fight Vietnam = geurilla tactics Unless I'm missing something here. Basing it off the fact WW2 was the last major war we won.[/QUOTE] Are you a fucking idiot? Even in the Civil War/Revolutionary war guerrilla tactics were evolving. World War 2 [i]especially[/i] wasn't a straight forward fight. Modern Camo was already developed then and it was pretty much the same exact thing now. World War 2 will be the worst modern war to occur for the next century or two. Thing is we still won it.. Do you realize how many troops we killed in Vietnam? Hey, maybe we politically just picked up and left because of the fact we had no support at home, but we killed more than double the amount of troops that we had to die. Are we losing Afganistan/Iraq? Hell no.. I'd say 5000 deaths a year to the enemy's 70,000 is pretty damn solid that we are winning. That said I am pretty sure the United States could challenge any country and succeed if they put enough of our power into it.
[QUOTE=Slacker101;23980723]I think invading Iran would be generally considered a bad move. If anything we should get out of the middle east completely and let the place rot by itself. Eventually they'll end up killing themselves and we wont have to worry about a thing,(except the terrorists). I think America has lost the momentum and support from the general public to continue the war. It's just becoming another Vietnam. Should've done more when we had the popular opinion back in '01-'02 Also at the above user. Put America 1 on 1 with any military in the world in a straight fight and I'm almost completely positive that we would win.(Except for maybe Britain or Germany, but since we're allies not much to worry about there.) -woops fixed-[/QUOTE] Uhh... The UK only has about 435 000 soldiers in total while the US has 3,385 000 soldiers and Germany has 683 000 soldiers. How could the US not win in conventional warfare against them?
[QUOTE=kaven;23982231]Uhh... The UK only has about 435 000 soldiers in total while the US has 3,385 000 soldiers and Germany has 683 000 soldiers. How could the US not win in conventional warfare against them?[/QUOTE] Yes, if you put them all on a flat field and gave them all rifles, then the US would win by sheer manpower.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;23982451]Yes, if you put them all on a flat field and gave them all rifles, then the US would win by sheer manpower.[/QUOTE] Yeah well my point is that he could have chosen better examples, like China.
[QUOTE=GunFox;23960493]Well I didn't want to invade Iran before. Now I kinda do, just to bury their own soldiers in the graves. Perhaps that is taking it a bit too far for a good ironic end to this though. :P[/QUOTE] Okay so it has been brought to my attention that people apparently took this post seriously. It was a joke. As it stands, we were once allies with Iran and well liked by its people. There is a good chance that can be the case again if their current government is ever overthrown. But invading would utterly and completely crush any chance of that. So as much as I might like for someone to smack their leaders in the face with a sledgehammer for oppressing the nation, I am under no illusion that an invasion would in any way be helpful for the people or for our relation with them. Thanks go to Starpluck for pointing out that people took the post seriously.
and as always US trying to liberate another country. Is this really news ? I mean, its preeettttyyy obvious US is gonna take over some country within the next 3 years...Mostly a "Taliban" country.
US uses tanks Iran uses donkeys be very afraid USA,be very afraid.
[QUOTE=SilverDragon619;23982523]US uses tanks Iran uses donkeys be very afraid USA,be very afraid.[/QUOTE] This is basically gonna be Germany attacking Poland. See, history repeats itself
[QUOTE=bravehat;23961034]HAHAAH AHAHA [B]AHAHA!!![/B] You actually think a war with Iran would be easy? It would be a massive war of attrition, then when you started winning they'd go to ground. Just like the Vietcong, just like the Taliban and Al Queda. You would lose again in the long run.[/QUOTE] Because armies don't change their tactics and learn from previous defeats. Plus, casualties from the Taliban and Al Queda aren't nearly as bad as casualties from the Vietcong.. Guys, did you hear the news? Britain still fights in line formation :downs:
[QUOTE=iusehax;23959553]lolwut [editline]01:16PM[/editline] Wouldn't it be scary if it turned out Iran was actually really good at fighting wars?[/QUOTE] Likewise with North Korea. I kind of hope, for their sake, that they are, just so they aren't written down as the most embarrassing warmongerers in history. [editline]12:04PM[/editline] [QUOTE=abcpea;23960082]i dont understand what invading iran would achieve[/QUOTE] We'd finally see if they had nukes. If they didn't, whoops. v:v:v Though, to be honest, I don't see what the big deal is. Every country that's anti-nuke will most likely declare war on anyone that launches any nuclear missile intentionally, but Iran, if they are developing nuclear weapons, haven't shown any intention of launching one.
[QUOTE=Asswipe;23981896]Too bad they wont have a single body placed in them. Cause' we will seriously run their shit into the ground. [editline]08:51AM[/editline] Are you a fucking idiot? Even in the Civil War/Revolutionary war guerrilla tactics were evolving. World War 2 [I]especially[/I] wasn't a straight forward fight. Modern Camo was already developed then and it was pretty much the same exact thing now. World War 2 will be the worst modern war to occur for the next century or two. Thing is we still won it.. Do you realize how many troops we killed in Vietnam? Hey, maybe we politically just picked up and left because of the fact we had no support at home, but we killed more than double the amount of troops that we had to die. Are we losing Afganistan/Iraq? Hell no.. I'd say 5000 deaths a year to the enemy's 70,000 is pretty damn solid that we are winning. That said I am pretty sure the United States could challenge any country and succeed if they put enough of our power into it.[/QUOTE] I love these discussions. You have the "Americuh is invincible and we will show those terrorist" side (Hint Alamo Vietnam etc). And of-course those who really debate it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.