Iran Crisis & the 2026 War between Iran and the United States, Gulf States, and Israel - Please focus on news and coverage, not argumentation.

[AnOminous]

Some idiot then spent a full day flooding my notifications whining about how it's "physically impossible to stop radiation with a missile" and that I'm a "science-illiterate Magat" or something.

What a dipshit. The "radiation" isn't nuclear radiation, it's RF.

 

[mindlessobserver]

I feel like we conveintly forget that part when rice farmers shot down the invincible Buff 13 times with soviet era mark 1 eyeball guided missles


the b52s shot down over Hanoi never got rebuilt, the Vietnamese keep the wreckage around as decoration
View attachment 8659068View attachment 8659069View attachment 8659070View attachment 8659073View attachment 8659079

Oh no. The USA had casualties in a war. Turd world apologists keep doing this. The Germans did it too. Why does everyone in the old world assume the USA is casualty averse? Just because we dont like losing soldiers and go through ritualistic mourning for our war dead does not mean we stop just because our soldiers die.

 

[AN/ALR56]

They weren’t rebuilt because the b-1 mark 1 was supposed to replace them until Carter canceled the program. They also flew predictable patterns because no one until Nixon trusted the on the ground leadership.

Carter cancelled it because he saw firsthand the B-2 and f-117 projects and authorized them, when Reagan called him weak because he cancelled the b-1 he was forced to to reveal the stealth bomber and buy 100 b-1s against his will.

Another side effect was that the B-1 turbine was transformed into the core of the 737 engine and exported globally by the 80s, including china, where it was reverse engineered and became the core of the fighter jet engine program.

Basically Reagan forced the air force to buy a plane that does nothing better than a b-52 at much higher cost and which it's cancellation and then reinstatement meant that it's high performance engine was allowed to be exported and ended in Chinese hands.

 

[namelesstacotruck]

Isnt Iran having a massive water crisis? Anyone taking over now is setting themselves up for failure and to get blamed for that fuckup no?

 

[StudMccool]

these niggers are using encoded messages to communicate via public youtube videos

 

[kobebyarlant]

I was told that i'd be dead for israel by now. where is it?

I was told the ass is in the ass, soon the whole world will see, Iraq 2.0 etc when Maduro got churro'd and that was two whole months ago. Surely they weren't just... wrong?

 

[WhiskeyJack]

I feel like we conveintly forget that part when rice farmers shot down the invincible Buff 13 times with soviet era mark 1 eyeball guided missles


the b52s shot down over Hanoi never got rebuilt, the Vietnamese keep the wreckage around as decoration
View attachment 8659068View attachment 8659069View attachment 8659070View attachment 8659073View attachment 8659079

The Big Ugly Fat Fucker has a lot of names, but "Invincible" isn't among them. They're fat, slow, and old as all hell. It's just a giant ugly people-deleter. They don't even have tail turret anymore.

Though considering it hasn't been shot down since 1972, some 53 years and change, maybe we should call it "Ol' Reliable", at least.

 

[Boney]

I feel like we conveintly forget that part when rice farmers shot down the invincible Buff 13 times with soviet era mark 1 eyeball guided missles


the b52s shot down over Hanoi never got rebuilt, the Vietnamese keep the wreckage around as decoration

You keep making this fundamental mistake by thinking everyone else is as stupid as you and will somehow find this shit convincing or thought provoking.

 

[themanwhowalks]

At the time of writing, 6 American soldiers have died because the President launched military strikes against Iran. At least 6 families are grieving. When do we, the American people, get a say in how our lives are spent in pursuit of military operations? We haven’t had a say since 1941.

Joining the military is a completely voluntary act that comes with risk of death, even in peacetime. I never deployed to a combat zone but I know people who died during training. Do you know how few times the US has actually been in war declared by congress? I'm exhausted by retards with no connection to the military trying to launder sympathy for soldiers or veterans into political points.

 

[The Incredible Gassy]

They should've snapped that retarded faggots neck instead of breaking his hand. You could tell he's was a brown worshipping commie faggot because he was shrieking his fucking head off and shouting slogans instead of making a coherent argument. The combination of retarded aids-juice that all marines are injected with and mind raping from his mudslime "wife" completely soul-raped him. Nothing more than a subhuman gibbering animal.

 

[Mr. Racewar1488]

Iran has once again struck the U.S. Ali Al-Salem Air Base in Kuwait.

US/Israeli airstrikes on Isfahan, central Iran.


The Saudis shot down three missiles.

Exclusive footage of how US rockets work:

 

[Clanner Scum]

The Big Ugly Fat Fucker has a lot of names, but "Invincible" isn't among them. They're fat, slow, and old as all hell. It's just a giant ugly people-deleter. They don't even have tail turret anymore.

Though considering it hasn't been shot down since 1972, some 53 years and change, maybe we should call it "Ol' Reliable", at least.

We're going to retrofit the bastards with hyperdrives and use them to bomb illiterate sand aliens in Operation Earth Fuckyeah (2137).

 

[draggs]

Any other rights and powers we should give up only because technology has advanced? 1A? 2A?

At the time of writing, 6 American soldiers have died because the President launched military strikes against Iran. At least 6 families are grieving. When do we, the American people, get a say in how our lives are spent in pursuit of military operations? We haven’t had a say since 1941.

You did just get a say. The American people got their say, their elected representatives in both chambers of congress voted against ending the war. If you don't like it, vote for candidates for your congressional district and Senate who promise they will vote against military operations if and when the opportunity arises

Children demand to always get what they want, and cry that they were treated unfairly when they don't. Crying you didn't get a say when you did is the kind of whine a child would do

 

[mindlessobserver]

You keep making this fundamental mistake by thinking everyone else is as stupid as you and will somehow find this shit convincing or thought provoking.

More importantly, these idiots assume Americans are mindless cattle. We have known a war with Iran was possible for decades now. The judgement of the American people is not on the necessity of this war. The war is upon us. Therefore it is necessary.

Our judgement will be based solely on whether or not we win. The Groypers, noticers, and /pol/tards with midwit isolationist lolberts are getting slammed in this thread for a simple reason.

They are carrying water for an enemy during a time of war.

Recrimination can come later. But now is not the time. Certain people have shown their true colors by undermining the war effort in the first hours of the conflict

 

[The Big A]

I love this guy.

He had an article written about this campaign right before it started. Let's see how his predictions are holding up a week in:

https://substack.com/home/post/p-189376582

The Operational Art of War
Let's Bomb Iran.
On Anticipated US Action in the Persian Gulf

The Operational Art of War
In this article I will refer to the use of long-range missiles, airpower and special forces as air campaigns, or air only campaigns. There are more precise military terms, but they are not universally agreed-upon from country to country and certainly are not in circulation with the general public.

I will believe that a conventional war against Iran is being prepared once I see multiple divisions of US troops and at least one Corps headquarters deployed to the Persian Gulf. Even then, the buildup to an invasion of Iran by conventional forces would take 2 to 4 months.

Therefore, what is occurring in the Persian Gulf is not really preparation for war with Iran, but preparation for an air only campaign against Iran.

So far so good, a week in and I haven't heard of any ground forces being moved in yet.

The Operational Art of War
Current US and Israeli assets in theatre1 are as follows:

I would put up Iran’s air force as well, but there isn’t much of a point. Iran’s air force has 122 combat aircraft, all of which are 4th generation. Less than half of them have received enough upgrades to be considered competitive with US and Israeli 4th generation aircraft.

The Kuwaiti air force has been more of a threat to the USAF than Iran, so good call there.

It's not much of a surprise that the United States would quickly gain air supremacy over Iran. The major threat would not from the Air Force, but from the Iran's air defences. It is a bit harder to predict the effect of the Iranian Air Defence network.

During the June 2025 Twelve day war neither Israel or the United States lost any manned aircraft. However, Israel began the war with a coordinated surprise attack that heavily undermined Iran's response. Iran will not be caught at unawares this time around.

I haven't noticed much of an increase in efficacy from June to today, but that may be because the initial strike was much heavier.

Israel claims to have destroyed almost the entirety of Iran's air defences during 2024 and 2025, making the remaining Iranian air defence threat a nonissue. I am sceptical of these claims because of the general inaccuracy of battle damage assessments from airpower campaigns. This will be discussed in the next section.

It appears the Jews were mostly right, in that Iranian air defense won't be downing US and Israeli aircraft left and right, but I haven't seen any visual conformation of hostile aircraft being seen flying deep into Iranian territory, so I presume air defense is still enough of a threat that interior targets must be hit with long range missiles.

During the June 2025 campaign there were only five Israeli and one American flight missions into Iranian Air Force, though these did total about 1,500 sorties. These five strikes were carefully planned, supported by extensive suppression of Iran’s air defence and directed at a limited scope of targets. If a broader bombing campaigns undertaken there would likely be aircraft losses, particularly to the 4th and 4.5th generation aircraft. However, even if Iran has done an incredible job at recalibrating it's air defence network since June US aircraft losses would destroy a significant proportion of the US air fleet. The goal of the air defence system would be twofold:

1. Destroy enough aircraft to cause political problems in an already unpopular war; and more importantly
2. Limit America's ability to strike at will at the assets Iran needs for its asymmetric retaliation strategy.

Iran seems to be failing hard at both goals.

Air Campaigns as Geopolitical Failures:​

To begin with, here is a comprehensive list of every historical example of airpower alone (with no boots on the ground) forcing a surrender or significant diplomatic concessions:

---

The internet: Wait, you didn’t get around to making the list.

Me: Yes I did.

---

There are a few edge cases:

• In the 1920s the British suppressed a tribal revolt with bombers, but this is considered a policing action and there were ground troops in the region that would have moved in on the tribal militia next.
• In 1999 Slobodan Milosevic withdrew from Kosovo after a bombing campaign, but it's generally acknowledged the decisive factor in his decision to withdraw was an enormous NATO ground invasion force on his border about to attack.
• Until recently the June 2025 Twelve Day War was cited as an example of virtually destroying Iran's nuclear capacity from the air. However, the same sources who claimed total destruction in June 2025 are now claiming Iran is a few weeks away from assembling a nuclear bomb.
• On the other hand, here is a list of countries the West has conducted air only campaigns against since the end of the cold war, where the campaign’s geopolitical objectives were ultimately not met:
  • Iraq (several times)
  • Syria
  • Yemen (several times)
  • Somalia (several times)
  • Iran (several times)
  • Pakistan
  • Libya
  • Nigeria
  • the Philippines
  • Mali
  • Central African Republic
  • Chad
  • Niger
  • Sudan
  • Rwanda
  • Djibouti
• The pattern for these airpower only campaigns has been quite consistent. Either the Western power puts boots on the ground (at which point it may have a success or be dragged into a long counterinsurgency) or the air campaign is indecisive and eventually results in that Western power withdrawing from the area having failed its broader geopolitical goals for the region.

Can't argue with him there.

The Overestimation of Air Power:​

Since World War 2 the effect of airpower has always been overstated.

During World War II after Operation Goodwood and the repulsing of the German Counterattack at Mortain, operational research teams were able to do in-depth examination of a battlefield. They compared the number of tanks aircrew claimed to have destroyed against the number of tank wrecks on the battlefield showing signs of destruction by airpower.

Both studies found about 4% of claimed kills were accurate. These are the two most in-depth studies of tactical airpower effectiveness during World War II, but their findings are consistent with hundreds of other less detailed studies.

Since WW2 improvement for the claimed versus actual losses by airpower has been minimal. I could bombard you with examples, but the best recent example with good data is the 1999 NATO bombings of Kosovo. During that air campaign NATO provided an initial estimate of Serbian equipment losses. These estimates were adjusted down words somewhat in September. After NATO gained control of the battle space they discovered there kill claims were 28-20% accurate for tanks and 12-4% accurate for everything else.

Even for the poster child of successful air campaigns, the 1991 Gulf War, the impact of airpower versus ground manoeuvre units is highly exaggerated. To quote one Iraqi tank battalion commander:

After 42 days of being bombed by the coalition Air Force I had 31 of my 33 tanks. After two hours of fighting the American army I had none.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!U4zw!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https://substack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/6a572af2-deda-4497-ae38-98d19d9dd032_741x463.jpeg
This is why am sceptical of the claims that Israel destroyed almost all of Iran's air defence network in 2024 – 25. It is also why am sceptical that a further air campaign could visit the kind of destruction on Iran’s war making capabilities that most people envision.

Fair enough, I don't have any reason to suspect that the Regime's power to put down unrest has severely diminished. As of now, if the "all clear" were given to overthrow the Mullahs, you'd see the same massacres that happened a month ago.

The Escalation Problem​

But as part 2 of the Let’s Invade Iran series laid out, Iran’s defence strategy assumes it’s air force would be quickly wiped out.

Instead they have an asymmetric defensive strategy is based on air defences, precision missile strikes, drone swarms, cyberwarfare, naval mines and terrorist attacks.

Part of the argument for America starting an air only campaign is that there isn't much at risk to be lost.2 Major American casualties and expenses would only come as a result of a ground invasion, which America can just choose not to undertake. In fact, even if America wanted to conduct a ground invasion take them at least two months to build up the ground troops needed for such invasion.

This fails to account for both the military and diplomatic aphorism that is stood the test of time for a reason:

Military: The enemy gets a vote.

Diplomatic: You can unilaterally choose how to start a war, but not how it ends.

As discussed in my Iran series, Iran has the capability to close the Straits of Hormuz through a mind laying operation. If this occurs all of the oil production for the Persian Gulf states will be effectively cut off from the world economy. This would not only shut off Iranian production, but Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, the UAE and to a lesser extent Saudi Arabia cannot export a meaningful portion of their oil production without tankers transiting the Straits of Hormuz. This would economically devastate Iran, but it will also cause a global economic crisis. Think of it as a geopolitical murder-suicide pact.

The only way to resolve this economic crisis (besides capitulating to Iran) is for America to force open the Straits of Hormuz. This is probably the naval operation the U.S. Navy is least well suited to, as they are caught in the middle of a failed mine-sweeping capability project. Although a full invasion would not be necessary to reopen the Straits of Hormuz, significant US ground troops would be needed to clear several islands in the Persian Gulf.

There is also the risk of escalation through strikes on other gulf countries, particularly on US military bases, or a successful attack on a US carrier battle group. You shouldn’t believe the hyperbolic reports of US carriers being sitting ducks due to being defenceless from hypersonic missiles. The U.S. Navy certainly has defences against hypersonic missiles.

As of now, the Straits remain closed. Considering that a barrel of Oil in East Asia is now worth north of $100, this is going to cripple most oil importers if this isn't resolved soon. I have not heard of a single USN vessel trying to force the strait, or of any vessel operating deep in the Persian Gulf right next to Iran. A week in and it seems like Iran's unconventional fleet is still mostly intact. So far, the "hypersonic missile" threat has been overblown, or nullified by carriers being very far away.

However, this is an area of warfare where there is so little real combat experience that predictions rely on comparing promises about capabilities from the manufacturers of the missiles to the promises from the manufacturers of the missile defence systems. In practice, neither the missiles nor the missile defence systems have operated as the manufacturers promised. So the outcome of a swarm of Iranian antiship missiles being launched against a US carrier battle group is highly unpredictable.

US super carriers are extremely hard to sink. It's possible, but very unlikely, Iran would accomplish this. However, I would not be surprised if Iran successfully sank 1-3 escort vessels or damaged a US carrier.

TBD.

The United States also has a lot of bases in the Persian Gulf (see above) that will be much easier targets than a carrier strike group. The United States apparently has around seven patriot missile batteries protecting their bases in the Persian Gulf, and another for protecting their bases in Jordan and Israel.

They also have short range missile defences called Centurion C-RAM, which is a ground based CIWS 20mm gatling gun.

It is hard to estimate the effectiveness of these systems against a drone and missile swarm. Again there are very limited historical examples of this type of warfare. By the end of the June 2025 Twelve Day War Israel was running out of interceptor missiles and starting to take serious damage.

I have a series of questions that would give some idea of how this kind of drone and missile swarm attritional warfare would play out. However, all of those questions are either unanswerable in till we see a dozen or so of these attacks, or the answers are highly classified.

Not great, not terrible. Iran has been able to land a few hits on American bases in the area, and has killed a few servicemembers, but not enough to do any real damage before running out of launchers. It looks like both Tel Aviv and Washington are actuely aware of the interceptor problem (you don't end a war after 12 days if you're on the verge of victory), and has committed to taking out launchers. Whether Iran can keep up the drone swarms is TBD.

Iran also has the ‘nuclear option’ (if you’ll pardon the expression) of going after the much softer targets of the Gulf states that host US military bases. This would widen the war and cut off Iran from several potential allies, but it could create pressure for countries like Saudi Arabia or the UAE to expel American forces from their countries.

This has had the opposite effect, just like every other terror bombing campaign in history, it just hardened the resolve of the locals against the perpetrator, at least so far.

All of this is to say that an air campaign creates the potential of significant US casualties at Persian Gulf basis, U.S. Navy ships being sunk, the world economy being thrown in crisis by a shutdown of the Straits of Hormuz, or an Iranian missile campaign against US friendly Persian Gulf states. Call it a coin toss whether any of these things come to pass. However, if they do the US government may quickly find itself in a position where it's politically impossible not to escalate the war.

No, Not yet, Probably, Yes. An escalation would be catastrophic for the current government in Washington, If Iran goes full hermit kingdom, then not much gets accomplished and we'll be back at this again in 15 years.

Currently the United States is not preparing for war with Iran in the conventional sense. They are preparing for an air campaign without boots on the ground.

If the air campaign is launched the United States will quickly gain total air supremacy and bombard Iran with devastating amounts of firepower. It is unlikely that United States air assets will suffer significant casualties in doing this, though I generally believe the destruction of Iranian air defence systems has been overstated.

However, this does not make an air campaign against Iran a low risk option. There are zero historical examples of air only campaigns achieving their long-term geopolitical goals, despite this being the go to Western military option since the end of the Cold War. This is because the effect of air power is generally overstated, both at the tactical level of how much equipment is destroyed, at the operational level of how much it destroys the enemy’s military capacity to resist and the political level of forcing concessions from even weak states.

Iran has a defensive strategy that assumes they will lose command of the air and come under heavy US bombardment. Their strategy is to force an escalation into a ground war. They have several tools to do this but they all involve inflicting significant enough loss of life or economic damage to make it politically impossible for America not to escalate.

I do not know whether any of Iran’s escalation strategies will succeed. No one knows.

It will probably be fine, and with some disruption, the world economy and America's status as the global superpower will continue onward.

Probably……….

I am certain that an air only campaign will not create a lasting geopolitical solution, because they never do.

Correct.
They did not take significant casualties. Maybe the destruction of air defense in the interior, but not on the borders/coast.
The IRGC is still intact against any internal threats against the regime, unless defections start happening then the Mullahs will keep power.
This is exactly what happened, Iran is currently operating without any chain of command at all, and resistance is still ongoing.
TBD.
Depends on how long the straits are blocked, agreed that America's status is mostly unthreatened.
TBD.

 

[Exegesis]

They can't solve the problem, so they opted out for tried-and-true method of "kicking the can down the road" until the problem somehow solves itself or becomes someone else's. Putin is free to threaten them with nuclear weapons, and at the same time they get a perfect excuse for not doing more.
There's presently no solution to nuclear blackmail.

And it's entirely self inflicted. Nobody forced Europe to deindustrialize and not be well armed to act as a counterweight to Russia; they did this dumb shit because their immense hubris made them unable to fathom the idea that exporting your major industries to foreign countries as a way of saving money in the short term is a completely retarded idea as it makes you vulnerable and overly reliant upon international trade to function. In a world that is gradually shifting towards multipolarity, that's a massive weakness because the Chinese or some other foreign power could completely block trade between you and the countries you get cheap goods from. Why else do you think the chinks are so invested in third world nations?
If only the rest of western Europe acted more like France and actually valued strategic autonomy.

 

[Ghostse]

This points to the station being a Mossad/CIA operation to communicate with assets inside Iran.

Fuck. That's crushing.
I thought that was proof that Iran had gotten into the "Autistic Numbers station" game. It still just the anglos and the soviets. Sigh.

---

Dispersing their ships around at least give them a chance

Lol. Nigger do you even know what satellite imagery is? It isn't WWII anymore.

Fair enough, but I think as they are now that this is it, they will either survive or collapse, fuck leverage, there will be no negotiations at this time.

That's the way it seems to be going NOW, but at the start it might hve just been another 12-days war situation.

Better to try to control a weak Syria than to waste hezbollah's dwindling resources in trying to open a second front against Israel and triggering a lebanese army intervention

Again, they know that now. But they need to keep hitting the jews to show their own people and retarded muslims near by they are still fighting the good fight.

I don't think so, after venezuela fell, Iran became one of China's critical oil suppliers.

China does not want other countries to have nukes. The CCP is about global stability, that is why their locust hordes put up with them.

---

I seriously doubt the new leaders in Iran will align with the West, the remaining figures are mostly IRGC.

I don't think many IRGC folks are going to survive the angry mob. But its arabs so you never know.
But I think if they don't allign with the west they get bombed and yeeted until one who does emerges.

Anyway, post hands.

Same thing with Israel but worse because they hate Jews more than Christians.

From the Iraqis I talked to, the calculus was no Jew could be trusted as long the Zionist Entity was allowed to exist (see: Kaffir conquering Muslims as mucho haram) because they might be working for or funding Zionist actions. Once Israel was dealt with and all the Evil Jews exterminated, the rest of the Jews could obviously be allowed to be jews in peace once they pledged support for the caliphate.

Nato spokesperson Martin O'Donnell (US) condemns the Iranian targeting of Turkey
contracting Turkish claims the missile was actually targeting Cyprus

See previous post about E-dog doing everything in his power to NOT have to respond to the Persians attacking him with Chemical weapons. He knows exactly what role (boots on the ground) he is being fitted for.

You're being disingenuous. The mullahs were desperately striving to attain nuclear capability, efforts that were stymied over the years by Israeli and (supposedly) US intelligence agencies. Obama thought buying the mullahs off would work. Dumbass fooled himself into believing pallets of cash could work because that's what always worked in Chicago and Washington. But it didn't work. It couldn't. It never would. True believers in an apocalyptic vision to use The Bomb to destroy the Great Satan and bring about the coming of the 13th Imam don't give a shit about money.

YOu're going too far. Obama was deep cover Muslim agent intent on destroying America.

Do we really think the mullahs are as suicidally impulsive as the average muslim foot soldier? Or do they view attaining a nuke as the way to secure sovereignty that no amount of cash ever will?

Yes.
It is both. Iran wants to be able to MAD the entire middle east, and then use proxies like Hezbollah to slowly kill their adversaries. The mullahs see themselves as inheritors of the mantle of the Caliphate from the line of Muhammed. Muslim philosophy, developed by retarded inbred camel fuckers, views time as sort of this flat unchanging plane and unbroken family lines. If it takes 1500 years to conquer the rest of the middle east, so be it.

View attachment 8657292

If you kill your enemies, they win.

For example Khamenei is forced to give Satan in hell blowjobs for all eternity.

Why would Khamenei be given what he wants the most? Its hell.

The Syrian civil war was cold in 2023-it restarted in November 2024. Assad had most of the territory back except Idlib and Deir Ezzor. Hezbollah had more than enough soldiers in Lebanon to join in. They didn’t die to domestic Lebanese politics. Namely their Shia constituents in southern Lebanon didn’t want them too, and their political position in the government was already shaky.

It was not cold. Government forces were being pressured constantly, and internal dissent was omnipresent.
I have no idea how you lost your pink triangle.

Someone better fix this soon, although I'm sure someone is raking in bank for Crude trading at just under $80 a barrel. I remember when Russia attacked Ukraine and gas prices spiked. People got real mad at the president for gas being near / over $4.00 per gallon. There was this whole back and forth about blaming the president for global conditions that cause gas prices to spike.

I'm curious if that debate will start again but this time with the sides reversed.


View attachment 8656555

Its oil futures that have gone nuts. If Hormuz is opened in a week, the price hikes should be readjusted within a month. How high and how long prices go is going to depend on how long the strait isn't navigated, which is why Trump is offering Trump Golden Insurance or whatever name he'll come up with and then thank us for our attention.

 

[Astro Galactic Megalul]

Oh no. The USA had casualties in a war. Turd world apologists keep doing this. The Germans did it too. Why does everyone in the old world assume the USA is casualty averse? Just because we dont like losing soldiers and go through ritualistic mourning for our war dead does not mean we stop just because our soldiers die.

Having thought about it a bit, it could be because US is held to much higher standards than anyone else, being strongest military and all that. And I doubt any other force on this planet cares as much about preserving their personnel as America does - soldiers are only allowed to die to their own burn pits.
Usually losses are a given, it's only a big deal with it happens to US, regardless of how disproportional in their favor it is. America's detractors are just that desperate for flaws to point at.

And it's entirely self inflicted. Nobody forced Europe to deindustrialize and not be well armed to act as a counterweight to Russia; they did this dumb shit because their immense hubris made them unable to fathom the idea that exporting your major industries to foreign countries as a way of saving money in the short term is a completely retarded idea as it makes you vulnerable and overly reliant upon international trade to function. In a world that is gradually shifting towards multipolarity, that's a massive weakness because the Chinese or some other foreign power could completely block trade between you and the countries you get cheap goods from. Why else do you think the chinks are so invested in third world nations?
If only the rest of western Europe acted more like France and actually valued strategic autonomy.

Much like how Russia could've adopted China's strategy, but Putin was too damn inept for that and wanted the shiny glory of conquest. So we find ourselves here now.

 

[Chuckwagon]

In the flushes of victory id like to share 3 battles from ww2 history just for some context.

The Battle of Białystok–Minsk - 400,000 KIA/MIA 77k WIA
The Battle of Smolensk - 700,000 KIA/MIA or captured with a further 275,000 WIA
The Battle of Kiev (1941) - 700,000 kIA/MIA or captured 84k WIA

View attachment 8659037

Im not saying Iran is at all an analogous comparison to the soviet union but it shows what a people can do when faced with overwhelming odds.

Iran has 90 million people, thats about 60% of what the soviets had and they are far more concentrated.

Not trying to use this to needlessly doom but to just illustrate how powerful the human spirit to not be conquered can be .

Lmao and we though Afghanistans pullout was bad
View attachment 8659047

WW2's Eastern Front was a unique circumstance in that if literally any other, even slightly more reasonable regime than Nazi Germany had invaded Stalin's USSR and enjoyed the success of Barbarossa's early stage, the Soviets would have been finished. The Germans captured nearly 3 million prisoners and if they hadn't been run by retards overdosing on meth & racism, they would have recruited a whole new White Army out of said POWs to bury Stalin with, if that particular pedophile & pedophile-enabler had been popular he wouldn't have been embarking on his mass purges & totalitarianism in the first place.

Unfortunately because we don't live in the ideal timeline, the Nazis killed their prisoners (whether with straightforward executions, working them to death in slavery conditions, etc. - contrary to the Clean Wehrmacht myth, it's long since been concluded that random German footsoldiers would indeed execute surrendering Soviets for the lulz early on out of their own volition and even without orders from on high) and raped, burned & pillaged their way through one Russian town after another instead, turning what could have been the world's #1 anti-communist crusade into a war of survival for the Slavic peoples. No shit no more Reds were going to surrender if they'd just be murdered anyway and Stalin had been turned from their oppressor into 'better the devil we know'. It's proof positive that you can absolutely have too much of a good thing, like racism.

Meanwhile as I have recorded in this very thread, the USAF/IAF has generally been pretty good about not striking Iranian civilians (that one girls' school next to an IRGC base, possibly, notwithstanding) and the orders from Trump & Pahlavi both to anti-Islamist Iranians to take shelter & wait until after the bombs stop dropping in such quantities before they try to topple the IR again still stand as of this writing. This has resulted in Iranian civvies being so bold as to film and cheer for the bombings from their windows & rooftops. I'm sure you can tell the difference between that and the Eastern Front of WW2 even with whatever drugs & booze you've got pumping through your system today.

 

[draggs]

During the June 2025 Twelve day war neither Israel or the United States lost any manned aircraft. However, Israel began the war with a coordinated surprise attack that heavily undermined Iran's response. Iran will not be caught at unawares this time around.

Well this was a big old wrong. I do not understand making excuses for an air defense system if it gets destroyed from the air almost immediately, whether in a surprise attack or not. If only I hadn't lost I would've won! energy

Both studies found about 4% of claimed kills were accurate. These are the two most in-depth studies of tactical airpower effectiveness during World War II, but their findings are consistent with hundreds of other less detailed studies.

This is insanely bad analysis. Tactical air power effectiveness was not in close air support on the front line, but in destroying large-scale maneuver, reinforcement, and logistics. Any German general who fought on the 1944-45 Western Front would laugh at this downplaying of how effective tactical airpower was. German inability to move formations for counterattacks, reinforcements, and supply its front line units in general because of Allied tactical air power was a critical factor in its strategic failures. If tactical airpower was such a small consideration, they wouldn't have waited until there was a forecast of at least a week of snow and low clouds to launch the battle of the Bulge