Iran Warns US to Stay Out of Persian Gulf, or Else.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You have a totally awesome ignorance of military topics.

[Santa_Claus]

You have a totally awesome ignorance of military topics.

Never worn a uniform (shit money and you never know who is shooting at ya) and I've never been involved in any armed conflict where I had aircover. So have always had to use smarts........I'm still here ....but the folks on the ground only as good as the leadership allows - the USA has retards at the top, therefore the military is doomed to fail (ok, short term lots of bangs on TV, yeehas and George Bush style victories )....but that not the same as winning.

The USA is a failing state that has outlived it's purpose. In 20 years will probably need UN peacekeepers.......

Time will tell.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'm a military historian, and a veteran. I have a source of information that would scare most people. I'm watching this with no little

[Coito ergo sum]

The Iranians have drones (and not just the American ones!). And submarines. and shore based missiles that can reach the sea, even if fired from inland. Have the missiles to launch Dirty bombs on Israel, or simply to flatten a couple of Nuke Power stations to do same job - and probably could come up with a Nuke within a year.

The US can afford to lose a few ships militarily - but not politically.........and cutting off China's oil would have much the same effect as if China cut off the USA's oil from Saudi......they may even start exploring for oil off Taiwan. or on it.

Iran might not be able to cope in a head to head conflict with the USA, but I doubt if the Americans have the balls to go ashore - so most likely outcome would be the current Iranian nutjobs being replaced by others.....who still won't like the USA.

So, the USA would (yet again) be a loser in the Middle East as would show that not only does the Emperor have no clothes - has no underpants either.

This is a staggeringly idiotic post. No offense.

With respect to "iran might not be able to cope in a head to head conflict with the USA," I mean - "might" not? "Might?" That is, you assess Iran's military capabilities as potentially having the ability to cope with the US in head to head conflict? Just want to get that straight...

You doubt if the Americans have the "balls" to go ashore. The US had the balls to go to Afghanistan, had the balls to go to Iraq, but we don't have the balls with respect to Iran?

The US would "yet again" be a loser in the Middle East? I mean - what the fuck, dude? We SUCCEEDED in Iraq. We SUCCEEDED in Afghanistan (which is technically central Asia, but whatever). What fucking definition of the words "win" and "lose" are you using? Overwhelming victory in two theaters of conflict is somehow "losing?"

[Coito ergo sum]

You have a totally awesome ignorance of military topics.

Never worn a uniform (shit money and you never know who is shooting at ya) and I've never been involved in any armed conflict where I had aircover. So have always had to use smarts........I'm still here ....but the folks on the ground only as good as the leadership allows - the USA has retards at the top, therefore the military is doomed to fail (ok, short term lots of bangs on TV, yeehas and George Bush style victories )....but that not the same as winning.

The USA is a failing state that has outlived it's purpose. In 20 years will probably need UN peacekeepers.......

Time will tell.

Military doomed to fail.

List of US military defeats in the past 40 years.

Vietnam (arguably).

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Vietnam was not a military defeat.

[Horwood Beer-Master]

Vietnam was not a military defeat.

It was a hell of a waste of bombs...

[Coito ergo sum]

Vietnam was not a military defeat.

Precisely why I added the parenthetical.

The last major blunder was, I think, Bay of Pigs, half a century ago. Unless maybe you can think of another.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Vietnam was not a military defeat.

It was a hell of a waste of bombs...

Me: Can you hit square B2?

Air: No, we can hit B2 and a square on either side, depending on the direction you want us to carpet.

[Gawd]

I'm a military historian, and a veteran. I have a source of information that would scare most people. I'm watching this with no little

I have more insight, I'm a terrorist according to you.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I'm a military historian, and a veteran. I have a source of information that would scare most people. I'm watching this with no little

I have more insight, I'm a terrorist according to you.

No, you're advocate of mass murder. Rat ass crazy thinking going on there.

[Gawd]

I'm a military historian, and a veteran. I have a source of information that would scare most people. I'm watching this with no little

I have more insight, I'm a terrorist according to you.

No, you're advocate of mass murder. Rat ass crazy thinking going on there.

I advocate karma blow up your American asses.

[Azathoth]

Vietnam was not a military defeat.

I will agree with you there. The political point was made. At the cost of a few lives but acceptable to the powers that be.

[Coito ergo sum]

Vietnam was not a military defeat.

I will agree with you there. The political point was made. At the cost of a few lives but acceptable to the powers that be.

A few? 4,000 lost in Iraq is considered a devastating loss, by some folks. 55,000 were killed in Vietnam.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Vietnam was not a military defeat.

I will agree with you there. The political point was made. At the cost of a few lives but acceptable to the powers that be.

Including fifteen of my friends up front and four more later on. Not acceptable to me.