Wut the hell did I just read here?3. This puts the EU in an IMPOSSIBLE position where they might honestly have to back Iran during a military conflict with the US if this is seen as completely unprovoked.
I know this is supposed to be a serious situation but these memes have me cracking up man
I know this is supposed to be a serious situation but these memes have me cracking up man
damn straightWell it's a good thing our mainstream media is so trustworthy. And trusted.
doesn't US need Iraq as an ally to be able to do anything to Iran? the militias that attacked the US embassy only got that far because Iraq let them.1. Israel and the U.S can bomb Iran from the air, enough to disrupt Iranian nuclear enrichment if it comes to that.
2. Israel is quite hawkish on Iran and Hezbollah, the opportunity to be attacked by them would be welcomed to have the moral hand to destroy Hezbollah's base in Lebanon.
3. Backing militarily? You mean diplomatically? Thing is, Soleimani is a Iranian general, but Quds Force has been well established as a funder of terrorist activities, its not gonna be that unprovoked for his death.
4. Yes, Americans will be dying in some fashion in Iraq and Syria.
Edit: Probably throughout the Middle East.
5. It won't be a ground invasion, the U.S does not have nor needs to invade Iran, just bomb it from the air that damage Iran. Iran's ground military can't be deployed to Iraq, there's not really a U.S presence to force out that can't evacuated, attacking U.S bases in Kuwait is, general war but again Iran loses there as well.
Drone bump for Trump? How Donald Trump could edge out Bernie Sanders in anti-terrorist swing states.Well it's a good thing our mainstream media is so trustworthy. And trusted.
I'm curious to see how far they'll go. The US can quite easily bomb Iran into submission, I the aftermath that's the problem.
1. Israel and the U.S can bomb Iran from the air, enough to disrupt Iranian nuclear enrichment if it comes to that.
2. Israel is quite hawkish on Iran and Hezbollah, the opportunity to be attacked by them would be welcomed to have the moral hand to destroy Hezbollah's base in Lebanon.
I mean, it's an honest question. The EU has a lot more diplomatic relationship with Iran than the US does. (Not a hard threshold to achieve, granted.) But if conflict escalates between the US and Iran, is it unreasonable to question what side of everything that the EU comes down on? Especially during a Trump Presidency?
Is the assumption that Iran can't bomb back? At some point they might simply decide that the repercussions are worth it. Leaders have made irrational decisions before, especially when power is very centralized.1. Israel and the U.S can bomb Iran from the air, enough to disrupt Iranian nuclear enrichment if it comes to that.
2. Israel is quite hawkish on Iran and Hezbollah, the opportunity to be attacked by them would be welcomed to have the moral hand to destroy Hezbollah's base in Lebanon.
3. Backing militarily? You mean diplomatically? Thing is, Soleimani is a Iranian general, but Quds Force has been well established as a funder of terrorist activities, its not gonna be that unprovoked for his death.
4. Yes, Americans will be dying in some fashion in Iraq and Syria.
Edit: Probably throughout the Middle East.
5. It won't be a ground invasion, the U.S does not have nor needs to invade Iran, just bomb it from the air that damage Iran. Iran's ground military can't be deployed to Iraq, there's not really a U.S presence to force out that can't evacuated, attacking U.S bases in Kuwait is, general war but again Iran loses there as well.
Or am I drastically giving the EU too much credit for not falling in line with stereotypical US posturing?
I'm curious to see how far they'll go. The US can quite easily bomb Iran into submission, I the aftermath that's the problem.
Does it really need to be explained to you who is more important to the EU between the US and Iran?I mean, it's an honest question. The EU has a lot more diplomatic relationship with Iran than the US does. (Not a hard threshold to achieve, granted.) But if conflict escalates between the US and Iran, is it unreasonable to question what side of everything that the EU comes down on? Especially during a Trump Presidency?
Or am I drastically giving the EU too much credit for not falling in line with stereotypical US posturing?
doesn't US need Iraq as an ally to be able to do anything to Iran? the militias that attacked the US embassy only got that far because Iraq let them.
Oh, he was saving this shit for the last year in case since we reached the big election yearThis is the thing we all feared Trumps would do, but here I was hoping that since he managed three years without starting a war, he could somehow manage to finish his term without doing so.
oh how naive we were
Iran won't move directly against the US or its allies. They will use Hezbollah or other proxies which will trigger retaliation and civilian casualties. Expect to see a wave of violence through the Middle East as a result of this.
Is the assumption that Iran can't bomb back? At some point they might simply decide that the repercussions are worth it. Leaders have made irrational decisions before, especially when power is very centralized.
How? ICBMs? Or after years of extended strikes, taking down the entire air defense, and moving in tens of thousands of troops?
Wasn't the Iranian Revolutionary Guard considered terrorists because of their funding organizations and what not? The US better have all the proof in the world that this embassy attack was done in the Iranan Commanders direction. Doing a fucking airstrike in a Iraqi airport is insane imo