GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   The Coming Iran War? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=975671)

mayabong 06-29-2010 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 17288678)
evacuation of the news? i was thinking, it was actually dropped even earlier, the sunday morning news shows reported the news about it but it was not a roundtable topic- a clear sign the interest is waning, imo.

Reflections by comrade Fidel, nice! never been sent a link like that, heheh. i had a hard time reading it though, basically shit will hit the fan before the 2nd phase of the world cup soccer finals? is that the gist of it?

I don't know I had a hard time reading it too lol:1orglaugh

dyna mo 06-29-2010 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayabong (Post 17288683)
No, evacuation of the coast crazy ass. Some of my friends and family are already leaving.

:1orglaugh doh, i'm loaded up on caffeine&thc! :1orglaugh

Rochard 06-29-2010 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 17288314)
the u.s won't be a real part of it, our commanders in charge are smart enough to know not to engage in 3 wars at the same time, also, the resources simply are not there.

Lies. Lies lies lies lies.

Do the math. Figure out how many men (and women) we have in Iraq and Afghanistan. It sounds like a staggering number.

There's currently less than 100k in Iraq. There is 94k in Afighanistan. So figure like 200k troops total.

Then figure the US Marines, the smallest branch, has some 400k members. Do the math. If we need to deploy two hundred thousand troops into Iran, we can. Not to mention we already have the infrastructure - Iran is surrounded by GASP Iraq and Afghanistan.... And all of our troops there.

Trust me, if we needed to.... We could place millions of troops into another country if given enough time.

mayabong 06-29-2010 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 17288711)
Lies. Lies lies lies lies.

Do the math. Figure out how many men (and women) we have in Iraq and Afghanistan. It sounds like a staggering number.

There's currently less than 100k in Iraq. There is 94k in Afighanistan. So figure like 200k troops total.

Then figure the US Marines, the smallest branch, has some 400k members. Do the math. If we need to deploy two hundred thousand troops into Iran, we can. Not to mention we already have the infrastructure - Iran is surrounded by GASP Iraq and Afghanistan.... And all of our troops there.

Trust me, if we needed to.... We could place millions of troops into another country if given enough time.

America is in every single country surrounding iran from what I see.

JFK 06-29-2010 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 17288346)
Iraqananistan.

:1orglaugh:thumbsup

mayabong 06-29-2010 12:23 PM

No matter what you think about iran, this war will shoot gas prices sky high in the US

GregE 06-29-2010 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IllTestYourGirls (Post 17288559)
On what fucking grounds are we going to march in on Iran?

Fear of potential Iranian nuclear blackmail in the region methinks.

Of course, this might well be a more compelling reason.

As I recall, Shrub didn't take too kindly to Saddam pulling the same stunt back in '03.

dyna mo 06-29-2010 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 17288711)
Lies. Lies lies lies lies.

Do the math. Figure out how many men (and women) we have in Iraq and Afghanistan. It sounds like a staggering number.

There's currently less than 100k in Iraq. There is 94k in Afighanistan. So figure like 200k troops total.

Then figure the US Marines, the smallest branch, has some 400k members. Do the math. If we need to deploy two hundred thousand troops into Iran, we can. Not to mention we already have the infrastructure - Iran is surrounded by GASP Iraq and Afghanistan.... And all of our troops there.

Trust me, if we needed to.... We could place millions of troops into another country if given enough time.

if you want to boil troop deployment statistics down to # of troop deployed compared to total troops, you begin by oversimplifying the statistics. dwell ratios, european deployments, homeland security deployments, deployment time used, cooks, supply chain resources, adminstrative staff,etc are all MAJOR factors. i won't sit here and claim i understand it, but to say it's as simple as you describe is way off.

:error

BFT3K 06-29-2010 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregE (Post 17288756)
Fear of potential Iranian nuclear blackmail in the region methinks.

Of course, this might well be a more compelling reason.

As I recall, Shrub didn't take too kindly to Saddam pulling the same stunt back in '03.

Interesting stuff right there.

BFT3K 06-29-2010 12:31 PM

Everyone loves a good War Thread!

Do you believe we will live through WWIII?

Sly 06-29-2010 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 17288780)
Everyone loves a good War Thread!

Do you believe we will live through WWIII?

I envision World War III to be more like the Cold War than a war like World War II.

Quagmire 06-29-2010 12:44 PM

There's going to be a war with Iran? when did this happen? why wasn't i informed?

BFT3K 06-29-2010 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quagmire (Post 17288827)
There's going to be a war with Iran? when did this happen? why wasn't i informed?

I think they just sent the letters out today.

theking 06-29-2010 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 17288769)
if you want to boil troop deployment statistics down to # of troop deployed compared to total troops, you begin by oversimplifying the statistics. dwell ratios, european deployments, homeland security deployments, deployment time used, cooks, supply chain resources, adminstrative staff,etc are all MAJOR factors. i won't sit here and claim i understand it, but to say it's as simple as you describe is way off.

:error

It can be done...but instead of a tour of 12-15 months...it would probably have to be for duration...like it was during the Second World War...or they could reinstitue the draft in short order as the draft boards are still active and all eighteen year olds have to still register for the draft.

I doubt that a land war is necessary as we have tremendous air power capability as well as Naval power. Air strikes and a Naval blockade of the Gulf would bring Iran to its knees in a reasonably short period of time. When all is said and done Iran's military capabilities compared to ours is insignificant.

Quagmire 06-29-2010 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 17288840)
I think they just sent the letters out today.

Do you really think its going to be a full blown war, or just another Iraq and then decade+ of mess?

dyna mo 06-29-2010 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GregE (Post 17288756)
Fear of potential Iranian nuclear blackmail in the region methinks.

Of course, this might well be a more compelling reason.

As I recall, Shrub didn't take too kindly to Saddam pulling the same stunt back in '03.

i wonder what part that does play.

BFT3K 06-29-2010 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quagmire (Post 17288855)
Do you really think its going to be a full blown war, or just another Iraq and then decade+ of mess?

I just posted the article, but IF we REALLY DID go to war with Iran, then I think all bets are off.

I do not believe it will be "like" any other war to date, and I have no idea why we would allow ourselves to be dragged into it.

In my opinion, it would be the dumbest war we could ever get involved in. :2 cents:

dyna mo 06-29-2010 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking (Post 17288852)
It can be done...but instead of a tour of 12-15 months...it would probably have to be for duration...like it was during the Second World War...or they could reinstitue the draft in short order as the draft boards are still active and all eighteen year olds have to still register for the draft.

I doubt that a land war is necessary as we have tremendous air power capability as well as Naval power. Air strikes and a Naval blockade of the Gulf would bring Iran to its knees in a reasonably short period of time. When all is said and done Iran's military capabilities compared to ours is insignificant.

i'm not sure what the # is but there is a large % of troops who've been re-re-re-deployed, right? the military has even recently considered lowering deployment to 8 months.

but i hear what you are saying and agree, if shit hit the fan and we needed to we could increase troop #s etc. but seriously, i can't discount how much these guys weigh history, 2 long protracted wars + 1 is truly against the odds of history. maybe i'm giving too much credit to the top brass but usually those guys are the smartest guys in the room and they look for winnable outcomes/goals.

theking 06-29-2010 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 17288885)
i'm not sure what the # is but there is a large % of troops who've been re-re-re-deployed, right? the military has even recently considered lowering deployment to 8 months.

but i hear what you are saying and agree, if shit hit the fan and we needed to we could increase troop #s etc. but seriously, i can't discount how much these guys weigh history, 2 long protracted wars + 1 is truly against the odds of history. maybe i'm giving too much credit to the top brass but usually those guys are the smartest guys in the room and they look for winnable outcomes/goals.

Yes...I know people that are on their fifth deployment and most have been deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan. One...a helicopter pilot...was just redeployed this month for his third tour in Iraq...and has served two tours in Afghanistan. His 20 years will be in before he finishes the current tour in Iraq and he as yet to decide if he is going to retire at 20 or go for 30.

Iraq and Afganistan did not need to be prolonged...our politicians for whatever their reasons decided to occupy the two countries and do nation building In both countries the military and governments were defeated in a matter of weeks...and victory should have been declared and our forces withdrawn.

There would be no need to engage in a land war in Iran...or to occupy the country...or to nation build. With air strikes and a Naval blockade they can be brought to thier knees in short thrift. That is not to say that our politicians...for whatever their reasons...would not once again engage in a prolonged affair.

DavieVegas 06-29-2010 01:48 PM

After they bomb Iran in November we are looking at WW 3 unfortunately.

mayabong 06-29-2010 01:51 PM

Quote:

When all is said and done Iran's military capabilities compared to ours is insignificant.
LOL the taliban control 70% of Afganistan after 9 years. Our military capabilities are AWESOME!

theking 06-29-2010 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayabong (Post 17289011)
LOL the taliban control 70% of Afganistan after 9 years. Our military capabilities are AWESOME!

Whatever percentage they do...or do not control...is the fault of politicians micro managing the military...not the fault of the military.

BFT3K 06-29-2010 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking (Post 17289042)
Whatever percentage they do...or do not control...is the fault of politicians micro managing the military...not the fault of the military.

Was Rumsfeld a politician, or part of the military, when he said Iraq would cost no more than $2 billion, and last maybe around 6 days?

Don Pueblo 06-29-2010 02:05 PM

just let me know when i can start tearing up ohio.

theking 06-29-2010 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 17289047)
Was Rumsfeld a politician, or part of the military, when he said Iraq would cost no more than $2 billion, and last maybe around 6 days?

Rumsfeld was a civilian/politician...and part of the civilian micro management of the military...in addition to not being the sharpest knive in the drawer.

BTW...we defeated the Iraqi military and overthrew the government in 24 days...mission accomplished by our military...but for whatever the reasons the politicians decided to occupy the country and do nation building.

marketsmart 06-29-2010 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 17288869)
I just posted the article, but IF we REALLY DID go to war with Iran, then I think all bets are off.

I do not believe it will be "like" any other war to date, and I have no idea why we would allow ourselves to be dragged into it.

In my opinion, it would be the dumbest war we could ever get involved in. :2 cents:


iran and iraq war lasted 10-11 years with a stalemate and you see what we did to iraq in short order...

our technology is far superior to any nation out there, but i dont think we would want a quick war..


.

cykoe6 06-29-2010 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 17288233)
Today we learn that the Israeli Air Force have set up base at a Saudi airfield near Tabuk in north-west Saudi Arabia despite earlier denials from the Saudi government that it had given the Israelis permission to use its airspace to attack Iran.


It is an interesting development if true. If true it shows just how serious the Saudis are about stopping Iran from going nuclear...... as allowing Israel to stage an attack form their soil would be unprecedented...... to say the least. :2 cents:

mayabong 06-29-2010 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ (Post 17289055)
Don't kid yourself it's a military contractors and developers wet dream. It's like Vietnam all over again because the government does not want to leave. We are developing weapons systems and strategies that's pushing us far ahead then the rest of the world.

If we truly wanted to win we would have done what the Russians did. Kill them all. :2 cents:

The russians lost.

Sly 06-29-2010 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DavieVegas (Post 17289000)
After they bomb Iran in November we are looking at WW 3 unfortunately.

November? For the mid-terms? LOL, I'll give them a little more credit than that.

mayabong 06-29-2010 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by marketsmart (Post 17289082)
iran and iraq war lasted 10-11 years with a stalemate and you see what we did to iraq in short order...

our technology is far superior to any nation out there, but i dont think we would want a quick war..


.

Don't know how that makes much sense. Iraq was fighting iran with our weapons.

2012 06-29-2010 02:24 PM

can't wait, let's get everyone trained on how to use an automatic weapon ASAP ... mom too !

theking 06-29-2010 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayabong (Post 17289095)
Don't know how that makes much sense. Iraq was fighting iran with our weapons.

They were primarily fighting with soviet weapons...some French and...I think...some German weapons. With any military one has to have training/discipline/the will to fight...or the weapons are basically useless.

BFT3K 06-29-2010 02:37 PM

What do you believe? What is true, what is propaganda?

How can anyone believe ANYTHING anymore?

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

marketsmart 06-29-2010 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayabong (Post 17289095)
Don't know how that makes much sense. Iraq was fighting iran with our weapons.

i dont think they were given any kind of our latest technology..

also, that was a long time ago and our weaponry has grown leaps and bounds...

the US would decimate iran in a war just like we did in iraq...

and just like iraq, we will be stuck there playing police force for the next hundred years..





.

PenisFace 06-29-2010 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly (Post 17288346)
Iraqananistan.

I would take a vacation at this place.

crazytrini85 06-29-2010 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mayabong (Post 17289011)
LOL the taliban control 70% of Afganistan after 9 years. Our military capabilities are AWESOME!

This is greatly offensive.

You have to understand two things about the American military.

1) ALL rules of engagement, policies and movement are determined by their civilian leaders. The military is only as good as the politicians allow them to be. Right now their hands are tied and unable to complete the task at hand. This has NOTHING to do with the ability of these brave men and women soldiers.

2) The US military is capable of handling any job. They are brave, well trained, willing and able. Any short comings come from politicians, not those in uniform.

You must understand the system. You can not point fingers at soldiers who's job is to OBEY ORDERS. However if you give them an order or a task, they will complete it with success so long as their hands are not tied, as they are now.

MetaMan 06-29-2010 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ (Post 17289055)
If we truly wanted to win we would have done what the Russians did. Kill them all. :2 cents:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesus H Christ (Post 17289137)
Because we supplied the Afgans weapons... if not, they were well on their way to winning. :2 cents:

:1orglaugh nice backtrack.

how do you plan on killing guys who bunker in some of the most treacherous land on the planet? make a giant bulldozer and run over mountains?

you can drop 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000x bombs and it wont make a dent in the landscape of these mountains.

MetaMan 06-30-2010 12:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazytrini85 (Post 17290115)
This is greatly offensive.

You have to understand two things about the American military.

1) ALL rules of engagement, policies and movement are determined by their civilian leaders. The military is only as good as the politicians allow them to be. Right now their hands are tied and unable to complete the task at hand. This has NOTHING to do with the ability of these brave men and women soldiers.

2) The US military is capable of handling any job. They are brave, well trained, willing and able. Any short comings come from politicians, not those in uniform.

You must understand the system. You can not point fingers at soldiers who's job is to OBEY ORDERS. However if you give them an order or a task, they will complete it with success so long as their hands are not tied, as they are now.

the military is funded BY CIVILIANS, thus why you have civilian leaders directing it. without tax payer dollars you have no military. YOU must understand the system.

what if the job is not meant to be completed? how do you have a successful task that is not meant to be finished in the first place?

theking 06-30-2010 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazytrini85 (Post 17290115)
This is greatly offensive.

You have to understand two things about the American military.

1) ALL rules of engagement, policies and movement are determined by their civilian leaders. The military is only as good as the politicians allow them to be. Right now their hands are tied and unable to complete the task at hand. This has NOTHING to do with the ability of these brave men and women soldiers.

2) The US military is capable of handling any job. They are brave, well trained, willing and able. Any short comings come from politicians, not those in uniform.

You must understand the system. You can not point fingers at soldiers who's job is to OBEY ORDERS. However if you give them an order or a task, they will complete it with success so long as their hands are not tied, as they are now.

Excellent critique.

MetaMan 06-30-2010 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theking (Post 17290135)
Excellent critique.

ya great critique!

military should have power over itself.

we all know how great military dictatorship turns out.

:1orglaugh


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc