Iran strikes US bases in Iraq.

[TempestII 262]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2020/jan/07/trump-news-today-live-impeachment-articles-iran-latest-updates-democrats

 

Let's hope that Coalition casualties are at a minimum. 

I think it's fair to assume that the US response will be rapid. 

[dannavy85 26]

Agree.....our capabilities and avenues of flexible response are greatly underestimated by Iran.

[Skyviper 1,101]

This is when CombatACE starts to shine during moments like these. We have the press running passing incomplete reports, people Tweeting a fraction of those reports. CombatACE has some very knowledgeable veterans that's been there and done that, they can talk the talk because they've walked the walk. I can't wait to see these folks start weighing in on this subject.

[TempestII 262]

The latest reports suggest no Coalition Forces casualties. 

And Trump has just released this on the POTUS' twitter feed:

 

"All is well! Missiles launched from Iran at two military bases located in Iraq. Assessment of casualties & damages taking place now. So far, so good! We have the most powerful and well equipped military anywhere in the world, by far! I will be making a statement tomorrow morning."

 

 

[+GKABS 8,772]

From my experience this is the end of this scenario, Iran is not stupid they know that they can't stand a chance against the US.

this is what Iran foreign minister Javad Zarif tweeted

[kurdistan1 61]

its only a show. Believe me . I am Iranian and awfully I know our coward  murder regime that play like a clown...

[+Trotski 936]

Well to play Devils advocate, it is hardly surprising that Iran has retaliated, I would have been surprised if they had not done so, and they have done it in an open manner the same as the US did. I just hope that we dont get embroiled in an all out war with Iran, it will be messy and costly , also there is a risk of dragging the Chinese and Russians into any potential conflict. That being said, Iran is a very loose cannon with a very nasty CBRN capability, which I feel sure they would use, which is also an less than ideal situation, even if US & Brit forces are very well equipped to deal with it.

The whole situation with Iran needs to be sorted out, this is a true fact, however I am not sure open conflict is a good idea, worrying times indeed .

[+whiteknight06604 934]

that wasn't a retaliation it was a face saving provocation.they will continue their aggression until they are apeased,like in the past, or hit back hard. that is how they always have been.iran is an evil terror regime and in a perfect world their leadership would be eliminated.As it is now the West,mostly the US, has shown uncommon restraint in dealing with aggressive move after aggressive move from Iran. I think the time for turning the other check has ended and iran has to learn to join the civilised world or they will pay a huge price. i don't think there would be any sort of Iraq style ground invasion. Iran would be hit with crippling air and missile strikes designed to decapitate leadership and neutralize important infrastructure ,military and communications assets. It would be mostly a one sided affair with Iran's ability to resist being pretty much nill.

24 minutes ago, trotski00 said:

Well to play Devils advocate, it is hardly surprising that Iran has retaliated, I would have been surprised if they had not done so, and they have done it in an open manner the same as the US did. I just hope that we dont get embroiled in an all out war with Iran, it will be messy and costly , also there is a risk of dragging the Chinese and Russians into any potential conflict. That being said, Iran is a very loose cannon with a very nasty CBRN capability, which I feel sure they would use, which is also an less than ideal situation, even if US & Brit forces are very well equipped to deal with it.

The whole situation with Iran needs to be sorted out, this is a true fact, however I am not sure open conflict is a good idea, worrying times indeed .

 

[+Trotski 936]

I wasn't suggesting that Iran is the injured party, far from it, I merely stated I am not surprised that a retaliatory strike was instigated, in answer to an open and highly visible attack upon their territory . if you put the shoe on the other foot, Had Iran launched an open strike upon US military assets, then the US response would have been exactly the same. Face saving ? possibly, understandable and expected ? For sure. I totally agree the US and the West has shown great restraint, which maybe in hindsight is possibly an error on our behalf, the head should have been removed from this particular snake many many years ago, but that has not happened, and the Iranian leadership has been allowed to create terror , mayhem, and murder on a huge scale over the past 30 years or more, as for your suggestion that Iran could be brought to heel with airstrikes etc. That to some extent may be true, but I would also advise caution, due to the fact that China and Russia would almost certainly stink their fat noses in, and that may be a rather nasty situation, and could escalate the whole thing to a very bad situation indeed, also, airstrikes alone, do not win wars, there have to be boots on the ground, and US and British troops will be thrown into another insurgency ground operation, with IED's and extremist guerrilla warfare , this as has been proven in Iraq and even more so in Afghanistan, a very bad time for ground troops , and The Iranians will fight they have been indoctrinated since the 70's by Islamic extremist leadership, every man and his dog has a weapon, and they are not the Iraqi's . I dread to think what the butchers bill would be should this be the case. So in conclusion, I think your idea of airstrikes etc. is maybe not the way it would play out, it is of zero use taking out infrastructure and leadership, with out then "liberating" the ground with men carrying a rifle and bayonet, otherwise the remnants of the old guard will find a way to rise from the ashes, and still be a big headache.

[+yakarov79 11,082]

let us state some facts. Iran did not start any war or attack any country in a very long long time....unlike other 'civilized' countries. Iranian people are generally very friendly, open and peaceful people.  As far as I know some numbers of them. They just have shitty leadership. Just like some other countries. Starting war and removing current leaders will lead to a bigger mess - more parties would like to gain power there...without a single goal.

Considering the geographical issues...it would be very hard to land airstrikes just like that out of nowhere. This is not a country like Afghanistan (where air defenses were nearly not existing) or Iraq where everything was about to collapse anyway and the military was at the edge of existence. And as trotski said airforce is not winning wars.

Another thing is that whatever leaders think they still need to listen to military experts - and I believe that Trump was already informed of aftermatch of airstrikes...and his speech a few minutes ago shows that perfectly. 

[+whiteknight06604 934]

15 minutes ago, yakarov79 said:

let us state some facts. Iran did not start any war or attack any country in a very long long time....unlike other 'civilized' countries. Iranian people are generally very friendly, open and peaceful people.  As far as I know some numbers of them. They just have shitty leadership. Just like some other countries. Starting war and removing current leaders will lead to a bigger mess - more parties would like to gain power there...without a single goal.

Considering the geographical issues...it would be very hard to land airstrikes just like that out of nowhere. This is not a country like Afghanistan (where air defenses were nearly not existing) or Iraq where everything was about to collapse anyway and the military was at the edge of existence. And as trotski said airforce is not winning wars.

Another thing is that whatever leaders think they still need to listen to military experts - and I believe that Trump was already informed of aftermatch of airstrikes...and his speech a few minutes ago shows that perfectly. 

actually Iran has been launching aggressive attacks almost continuously. just in the last few months they have seized a british ship,attacked a saudi oil refinery ,killed US citizens in Iraq etc that is not even taking into account their clandestine attacks on US troops in iraq and their funding and directing their terrorist proxies in thousands of attacks on Israel and other western nations.iran has been a rogue terror state pretty much since 1979 and they have to a greater or lesser degree been in a continual state of violent aggression against the west.they literally have the blood of hundreds of thousands on their hands.I don't blame most of the Iranian people since they are as big a victim as the rest of the world. Iran is a brutal misogynistic ,homophobic and thoroughly racist regime.unfortunately because of European and Obama appeasement they thought they could test the west once again.things are different now.their aggression will not be tolerated like it was and the european countries that are more interested in Iranian money than their evil actions will find they are pushed out of the picture to their economic detriment.It's not going to be a war like Iraq if that is what Iran pushes for. It will be an overwhelming missile and airstrike to decapitate and paralyze. no one will be "going in' it will just destroy their leadership and ability to retaliate in any coordinated way. We won't be spending our treasure rebuilding. any new government that wants to take over can put the pieces back together. beyond emergency humanitarian aid of course. Iran isn't going to be any more of a threat than iraq was in the first gulf war. I remember all the dire warnings then too, of their air defences and air force and the dangers.....same here. on paper is much different than reality and Iran may have a few troubling assets but in the end they will not be used to their best effect and will be countered just like Iraq.

i

Edited January 8, 2020 by whiteknight06604

[+GKABS 8,772]

Iran has not stopped threatening the Middle East region since 1979, beginning with the Iran-Iraq war, bombing embassies in kuwait  (French and American) attempting to assassinate the late Emir of Kuwait, bombing the US Marines in Lebanon in 1983, hijacking airways, attacking oil tankers the Arabian gulf, and Hezbollah proxy wars for irant hat threatens the entire region.

The Revolutionary Guards intervention in Iraq, Syria and Yemen, killing many thousands civilian and supporting racist and terrorist governments such as the Bashar Al-Assad government in Syria and the list go on

Edited January 8, 2020 by GKABS

[+Trotski 936]

You must bear in mind that the Iranians are  not comparable to the Iraqi's Iraq fought a war with Iran for 8 years and achieved absolutely sweet sod all, granted the Iranians were fighting on their own home soil, so had a slight advantage there, but the Iraqi's used CBRN and still failed to defeat them, I feel a similar state of affairs would exist if ground forces were to be committed to any liberation of Iran, these chaps will fight , hard and long, yes eventually they will lose, but at huge cost. Another factor to consider is that the Iranian average fighting man, has known nothing other than the leadership of religious nutters who destroyed the country in 1979, so they are indoctrinated, and committed to the cause, because they know or understand no differently , they will fight using human wave tactics as they did in the Iran Iraq war, and will be driven by a religious zeal that we as Westerners cannot conceive or identify with. for the most part they are pretty well equipped, especially the Revolutionary Guard, or whatever they are called, and winning ( if you can call it that ) this type of war , will be hugely costly in manpower and tax dollars. If the Chinese and Russians get involved, which I think they would, then things could go shit shaped very swiftly. 

Unfortunately there is no easy answer to the Iran problem, however, it is a problem that needs to be resolved, sooner rather than later, and one that should have been resolved many years ago, but we all failed to do so, partly due to we were hoping Iraq would have been victorious maybe ? who knows, none of us work for Intel , or if they do , wont admit it of course. Scary and worrying times indeed.

[+yakarov79 11,082]

44 minutes ago, whiteknight06604 said:

actually Iran has been launching aggressive attacks almost continuously. just in the last few months they have seized a british ship,attacked a saudi oil refinery ,killed US citizens in Iraq etc that is not even taking into account their clandestine attacks on US troops in iraq and their funding and directing their terrorist proxies in thousands of attacks on Israel and other western nations

yes, you are right. But going that way. Which country is without sin? My country was supporting North Vietnam against the USA, Cuba,  middle eastern countries against Israel and gods only knows who else......maybe not directly but training pilots, crews etc etc...sending equipment. 

And hey am not defending Iran. I am just saying that the coin has two sides.

[Nesher 628]

My 2 cents, Iran just wanted to show its dominance in the region, in reality.. they don't have the ability to really strike the US and its allies other than ballistic missiles (what else? their Tomcats and Phantoms barely work..)

So they provoke the US but they don't really want to go into a conflict, that's why they have so many proxies doing their dirty work

I also believe Russia & China won't interfere directly if things do escalate... they have nothing to gain or profit from

I think this round is over, Iran will continue using its proxies to wreak havoc in the region

Eventually, I feel sorry for the people of Iran, since the days of the Shah, they lost their freedom to lunatics who run the country... I hope this will change soon.. perhaps I'll have the opportunity to visit the place my father was born and where my grandparents used to live before they came to Israel

 

BTW, got this article from Google suggestions

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/f-22-raptor-snuck-right-underneath-iranian-fighter-jet-111011

hahahahaha

 

[+Trotski 936]

I think we can all agree the people of Iran  are the losers, and are the poor buggers who suffer and deserve far far better, Iran was a relatively happy and prosperous nation before the Ayatollahs removed a bad Shah and replaced Him with their own brand of insanity, but the question that everyone here I think agrees on is that something must be done, they questions are what, how , and when. if the Iranians do manage to achieve entry into the nuclear club, then I think all may agree that this would be a terrible thing. and must be prevented at all costs. Religious zealotry is also a terrible weapon , no matter from where it comes , be it christian, Muslim, or any other one cares to mention,  I dislike religion, it causes more grief and suffering than almost any other thing, when folk are willing to die for their God entity, then we know everything has turned shit shaped !! Also, I am sorry to say this, but shouldn't the Arabs themselves be sorting this crap out, instead of expecting the US and Britain and France to solve their local issues ? I'm no politician, or strategist, I'm just and old ground pounding grunt, but from my particular slit trench, this situation looks shitty, and needs sorting without delay.

[TempestII 262]

Judging by the POTUS address earlier today, it looks like the US won't take any further action. 

However, it's interesting to note that the Ukrainian airliner that crashed just after take-off from Tehran was initially called an accident but that's now been rescinded. Of course, one theory is that the Iranians accidentally shot the airliner down thinking it was a US military aircraft. This would obviously be a major f**k-up if so as I can't see why an airliner wouldn't be transmitting the correct modes / codes. 

Interestingly, the Iranians are currently refusing to hand the black boxes over.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/01/08/iran-plane-crash-170-passengers-feared-dead-ukraine-boeing-737/

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/01/08/iran-plane-crash-analysis-happened-mid-air-has-black-box/

 

https://www.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/iran-plane-crash-live-intl-hnk/index.html

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by TempestII

[dannavy85 26]

I just want to point out our (America's) history of bad blood with Iran came about only because of British lust to control Iranian oil and American's own fears that the Prime Minister we overthrew was a mentally inept moron who would easily fall into the Soviet orbit....

So we replaced him with a bastard, bad move on our part.

Iran today is a casualty of the Cold War and let's be honest...the guy we did overthrow in the 1950's would have eventually been toppled by the Mullahs so the Islamic Republic would have come about by 1960....it just took another 18 years.

 

[+Erik 1,812]

21 hours ago, dannavy85 said:

I just want to point out our (America's) history of bad blood with Iran came about only because of British lust to control Iranian oil and American's own fears that the Prime Minister we overthrew was a mentally inept moron who would easily fall into the Soviet orbit....

So we replaced him with a bastard, bad move on our part.

Iran today is a casualty of the Cold War and let's be honest...the guy we did overthrow in the 1950's would have eventually been toppled by the Mullahs so the Islamic Republic would have come about by 1960....it just took another 18 years.

 

This is inflammatory at best and not accurate. The CIA and MI6 orchestrated a coup against Mosaddegh’s government because of the failing economics of the country where both the US and UK were dependent on Iranian oil. They saw and opportunity to collapse a corrupt regime and replace it but it didn't have the effect the US and UK wanted. It's been a cluster f*ck ever since the US and UK got involved to protect our interests in the region for fear we might be replaced with Russian interests. To try and pin this on UK is a fearful retelling of history. It wasn't the US's brightest moment and we should own it. Our foreign policy since the late 70s and possibly before that has been utter shit but never as disgraceful as it is today.  

[Nesher 628]

7 hours ago, Erik said:

This is inflammatory at best and not accurate. The CIA and MI6 orchestrated a coup against Mosaddegh’s government because of the failing economics of the country where both the US and UK were dependent on Iranian oil. They saw and opportunity to collapse a corrupt regime and replace it but it didn't have the effect the US and UK wanted. It's been a cluster f*ck ever since the US and UK got involved to protect our interests in the region for fear we might be replaced with Russian interests. To try and pin this on UK is a fearful retelling of history. It wasn't the US's brightest moment and we should own it. Our foreign policy since the late 70s and possibly before that has been utter shit but never as disgraceful as it is today.  

Are you sure about that last part? Obama's money given to the Iranian regime probably paid for the ballistic missiles fired at US bases in Iraq or some of the more recent aggression performed by them or their proxies..

[+Erik 1,812]

12 hours ago, Nesher said:

Are you sure about that last part? Obama's money given to the Iranian regime probably paid for the ballistic missiles fired at US bases in Iraq or some of the more recent aggression performed by them or their proxies..

No disrespect Hen, but that's just a bad talking point with extorted facts. I no longer support any politician foreign or domestic so this isn't about party. Obama had issues with that deal namely he didn't run it through our congress as he claimed it wasn't a treaty so congress had no jurisdiction and wasn't involved. That pissed off a lot of people who thought they should be the final voice on the agreement. 

The Iranian nuclear agreement included China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union, so Obama didn’t carry out any part of it on his own. The deal did lift some sanctions on Iran, which when lifted also lifted the freeze on Iran’s assets that were held largely in foreign, not U.S., banks. And, to be clear, the money that was unfrozen belonged to Iran. It had only been made inaccessible by sanctions aimed at crippling the country’s nuclear program.

Secondly, $150 billion is what is being echoed from this administration and that is a high-end estimate of the total that was freed up after some sanctions were lifted. U.S. Treasury Department estimates put the number at about $50 billion in “usable liquid assets,” according to 2015 testimony from Adam Szubin, acting under secretary of treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence. So again no Obama money, only money that belonged to Iran and mostly held outside the United States.

 

[Nesher 628]

I wasn't talking about the $150B... I was talking about the $400M that Obama gave, in cash

https://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/us-sends-plane-iran-400-million-cash/index.html

[+Erik 1,812]

18 hours ago, Nesher said:

I wasn't talking about the $150B... I was talking about the $400M that Obama gave, in cash

https://edition.cnn.com/2016/08/03/politics/us-sends-plane-iran-400-million-cash/index.html

It's all part of the same Iran Agreement and was what the US had seized from Iran of the 150B in assets back in the 70's. The 400M was Iran's money to begin with and these were all terms set forth by the agreement. I quote from the article you shared, "The $400 million was Iran's to start with, placed into a US-based trust fund to support American military equipment purchases in the 1970s. When the Shah was ousted by a 1979 popular uprising that led to the creation of the Islamic Republic, the US froze the trust fund. Iran has been fighting for a return of the funds through international courts since 1981." Cash, wire transfer, travelers checks, gift cards, gold, digital currency it really doesn't matter, what people complain about is that the treaty partners gave the money back at all.

[+whiteknight06604 934]

2 hours ago, Erik said:

It's all part of the same Iran Agreement and was what the US had seized from Iran of the 150B in assets back in the 70's. The 400M was Iran's money to begin with and these were all terms set forth by the agreement. I quote from the article you shared, "The $400 million was Iran's to start with, placed into a US-based trust fund to support American military equipment purchases in the 1970s. When the Shah was ousted by a 1979 popular uprising that led to the creation of the Islamic Republic, the US froze the trust fund. Iran has been fighting for a return of the funds through international courts since 1981." Cash, wire transfer, travelers checks, gift cards, gold, digital currency it really doesn't matter, what people complain about is that the treaty partners gave the money back at all.

we should never have given the money back. iran is sued by victims of their terrorism almost daily...they owe and most likely will continue to owe the victims millions upon millions. iran never pays these lawsuits so the victims only way to collect is out of these frozen funds. also it was just a bad bargaining chip,freeing that money was supposed to be a leveraging point in the deal negotiations but all it got was a shitty deal. 

[+russouk2004 6,958]

Iran Beware...as Yamamoto said during WW2  " I fear,All we have done is woken a sleeping bear"