[Werthead]

Direct ballistic missile hits in central Tel Aviv, at least one significant explosion right in the city centre. Clearly Israel failed to wipe out all of Iran's launch capability.

[Tiste Simeon]

Werthead, on 13 June 2025 - 06:13 PM, said:

Direct ballistic missile hits in central Tel Aviv, at least one significant explosion right in the city centre. Clearly Israel failed to wipe out all of Iran's launch capability.

Nah that explosion came from a Hamas soldier that's definitely hiding behind all those kids cowering in that hospital, better firebomb it for 12 hours to make sure.

[Werthead]

Second wave of missile strikes. Israeli air defences engaging. This looks less heavy.

Unconfirmed report that two Israeli jets have been shot down by Iran.

Some claiming the building hit in Tel Aviv and now partially on fire is the Israeli Defense Ministry headquarters in HaKirya.

This post has been edited by Werthead: 13 June 2025 - 06:52 PM

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Quote

Iran's senior leaders had been planning for more than a week for an Israeli attack should nuclear talks with the United States fail. But they made one enormous miscalculation.

They never expected Israel to strike before another round of talks that had been scheduled for this coming Sunday [...] They dismissed reports that an attack was imminent as Israeli propaganda meant to pressure Iran to make concessions on its nuclear program in those talks.

Perhaps because of that complacency, precautions that had been planned were ignored, the officials said.

[...] the night of Israel's attack, senior military commanders did not shelter in safe houses and instead stayed in their own homes, a fateful decision. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the Revolutionary Guards' aerospace unit, and his senior staff ignored a directive against congregating in one location. They held an emergency war meeting at a military base in Tehran and were killed when Israel struck the base.

https://www.nytimes....?smid=url-share

[QuickTidal]

Trump left the G7 early and told Tehran to evacuate.

So...that's not good.

[Cause]

QuickTidal, on 17 June 2025 - 12:08 PM, said:

Trump left the G7 early and told Tehran to evacuate.

So...that's not good.

Honestly he might have just been bored and upset his bro Putin wasn’t there.

With Trump it’s impossible to know. He took a jab at Macron for some reason and said he didn’t leave to work on a cease fire. That could mean he is about to have the US join in on air strikes or it could mean he is about to announce new tarrifs on china.

I suspect the remaining G6 are using the opportunity to all be in a room right now and talking ways to win the trade wars.

This post has been edited by Cause: 17 June 2025 - 03:13 PM

[QuickTidal]

Cause, on 17 June 2025 - 03:11 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 17 June 2025 - 12:08 PM, said:

Trump left the G7 early and told Tehran to evacuate.

So...that's not good.

Honestly he might have just been bored and upset his bro Putin wasn’t there.

With Trump it’s impossible to know. He took a jab at Macron for some reason and said he didn’t leave to work on a cease fire. That could mean he is about to have the US join in on air strikes or it could mean he is about to announce new tarrifs on china.

I suspect the remaining G6 are using the opportunity to all be in a room right now and talking ways to win the trade wars.

On social media it sounds like military personal (mostly army) were all given Lobster and steak and this supposedly historically indicates they are preparing to go to war....

But I hope you're right and this is nothing, and the US doesn't get involved.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Tbh I'm not sure whether I'd support a war for regime change. There's a strong case for it.

(For either of them actually... but it seems more practical in the case of Iran.)

[HoosierDaddy]

Firmly against. No more middle-east intervention. Let Israel do it if they want it. See how well that goes for them.

Fucking more treasury to an eternal sink-hole of treasure... No. Nope. Fuck that noise.

Aren't we already responsible for enough innocent civilian deaths? Is there no end to that rapacious greed either?

This post has been edited by HoosierDaddy: 17 June 2025 - 05:33 PM

[QuickTidal]

Azath Vitr (D, on 17 June 2025 - 04:27 PM, said:

Tbh I'm not sure whether I'd support a war for regime change. There's a strong case for it.

(For either of them actually... but it seems more practical in the case of Iran.)

Yeah, except almost every time the USA has "regime changed" anyone else, it's always been for the worse (in some cases unseating a democratically elected govt for a dictatorial one)...so I'm not sure anyone should support more of the "US acting as Empire" shenanigans in 2025.

[Mentalist]

Iraq and Afghanistan both had just under 25 million people in 2003

Iran has 90

Any occupation to force a regime change would be a colossal resource sink, and the quantity of resistance is going to be significantly worse than what the US faced before.

This post has been edited by Mentalist: 17 June 2025 - 05:36 PM

[HoosierDaddy]

Mentalist, on 17 June 2025 - 05:35 PM, said:

Iraq and Afghanistan both had just under 25 million people in 2003

Iran has 90

Any occupation to force a regime change would be a colossal resource sink, and the quantity of resistance is going to be significantly worse than what the US faced before.

As always (with some degree of truth), someone will be whispering that the people will support it and "you'll be greeted as liberators."

Ain't nobody want Americans or Israelis (edited to not Jews... but they really don't like Israeli jews lol) coming to their house in the name of freedom. AMERICANS don't want Americans coming to their house in the name of freedom.

This post has been edited by HoosierDaddy: 17 June 2025 - 06:10 PM

[Werthead]

The current briefing is that Trump has decided to offer more direct support to Israel in order to pressure Iran into reaching a deal.

The first option on the table are using American tankers (possibly with US fighter escort) to refuel Israeli aircraft over Iraqi and possibly even Iranian soil. This would allow Israeli aircraft to remain in the air a lot longer and engage Iranian targets of opposition continuously. The second option would be a multi-stage direct strike by B-2 aircraft using bunker-busters to totally annihilate the two main Iranian nuclear sites, to render them beyond any reasonable use. The second option is being very fiercely opposed by MAGA loyalists.

Iran has warned residents of Haifa and Tel Aviv to evacuate, telling the residents that so far they have only used demonstrations but are now minded to unleashed a "punitive" strike.

[HoosierDaddy]

I can't think of a group I'd less like making these sort of decisions then the ones currently sitting in that situation room. It's a tightrope and these people have the grace of a shit-flinging monkey greased up on meth and bud light.

[QuickTidal]

Werthead, on 17 June 2025 - 06:04 PM, said:

The current briefing is that Trump has decided to offer more direct support to Israel in order to pressure Iran into reaching a deal.

The first option on the table are using American tankers (possibly with US fighter escort) to refuel Israeli aircraft over Iraqi and possibly even Iranian soil. This would allow Israeli aircraft to remain in the air a lot longer and engage Iranian targets of opposition continuously. The second option would be a multi-stage direct strike by B-2 aircraft using bunker-busters to totally annihilate the two main Iranian nuclear sites, to render them beyond any reasonable use. The second option is being very fiercely opposed by MAGA loyalists.

Iran has warned residents of Haifa and Tel Aviv to evacuate, telling the residents that so far they have only used demonstrations but are now minded to unleashed a "punitive" strike.

The second option is fucking stupid anyways. We are literally talking Cold War mentality shit here...Iran does not have nuclear weapons. They have investment in nuclear energy that is ramping to a point where they COULD have the capability to have one...but they do not have one. The assumption, and that's all it is, that they do and or would create one (or more) is EXACTLY what happened in the Cold War between the USA and Soviets. The US was CONVINCED that the USSR was making as many weapons as they were and the only way to stay safe was to try to make way more and preemptively usurp that "We have more, don't threaten us" status on the world stage...and in the end this proved to be based on assumptions that proved entirely wrong, the Soviets were WAY WAY behind the US on building weapons of that kind.

Annihilating nuclear sites is deliberately provoking a reaction from Iran's leadership for "guessing". Not to mention that Israel (moreso Netanyahu) has been harping on this shit for like 2 decades now and hoping to get the US to back them in unseating Iran and there are literally superclips of him that exist with the same refrain "If we get rid of _______, we will destroy terrorism!"....and into that blank he has shoved any number of countries and factions over that 20 years...and none of them have ever panned out as he's claimed. But he still claims it. We are watching a man who cannot stop his obsessions ever. Let's also not pretend that Israel's continued refusal to admit to what nuclear weapons they do have and what state they are in ect. is a deliberate slap in the face to anyone else being held accountable for their armament. Israel is not special, they should be forced to reveal their status if ANYONE else is to be held to that standard... the fact that no one has ever seriously demanded that they do should bother every county that is asked to.

Going to the table and getting the parties to that table is and always will be the ONLY sane option when we are talking about Nuclear energy and armament. There is literally no other way to view it...becuase if any other options existed, the planet is fucked. So both sides can calm the fuck down and anyone who doesn't act to help calm them down, or worse exacerbates the tension is a fucking evil POS....so I would not put it past someone like Trump. I just hope saner heads prevail, not that there are many of them in power at the moment...And someone needs to reign Netanyahu the fuck in.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 17 June 2025 - 06:25 PM

[Cause]

No one will put troops on the ground Im quite confident. This will stay strictly bombardment. Israel cant reach Iran and the US wont go in alone and doesn't need to either I don't think.

I would say its obvious that deal or no deal, Iran is trying to ride the fence of a nuclear weapon. They have the program and the facilities to enrich uranium. They have the delivery mechanism. They have Uranium enriched to 80% the only purpose of which is to lead to the bomb. Going from 80% to weapons grade is the matter of a couple weeks. The inspectors also claim they have enough uranium to potentially make 12 warheads. You really only need 1 to change the game.

I have no idea if Trump tearing up the Iran agreement in his first term was the seed for all of this, I have no idea if Irans plan hope was to sit on its current threshold which is already a strategic lever they could play without having to cross over the line. Iran getting the bomb would change the region permanately though. Iran is no idle player, it supports Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis and Jihadists in Syria. The bomb would allow it to continue this strategy but immune from any retaliation. This entire situation is only possible because these proxies were activated the last two years and they were degraded enough that they could not respond in concert. I also cant say for sure but I think Iran getting the bomb would lead to Saudia Arabia following suit. Pakistan could be the source for them.

Best case scenario is this ends up with a real deal on the table I would think.

It is fucking crazy that when Tulsi Gabard was nominated for DNI she squeaked through and their were serious doubts about her qualifications but trump backed her. Now Trump has said to an entire press core he doesnt care about her opinion. The US government is just run on vibes and feelings now. Pete Hegseth also cosplaying as a crusader is disquieting.

Werthead, on 17 June 2025 - 06:04 PM, said:

The current briefing is that Trump has decided to offer more direct support to Israel in order to pressure Iran into reaching a deal.

The first option on the table are using American tankers (possibly with US fighter escort) to refuel Israeli aircraft over Iraqi and possibly even Iranian soil. This would allow Israeli aircraft to remain in the air a lot longer and engage Iranian targets of opposition continuously. The second option would be a multi-stage direct strike by B-2 aircraft using bunker-busters to totally annihilate the two main Iranian nuclear sites, to render them beyond any reasonable use. The second option is being very fiercely opposed by MAGA loyalists.

I do not really see the difference. You are either involved or you are not. I do not think people will make the distinction between escorting Israeli fighters into Iran but not dropping ordinance directly? The whole thing apparently comes down to that only the USA has the bunker buster ordinance to take out one of the nuclear enrichment sites with is possibly 100 meteres underground. Wonder if Tom Cruise is available?

Werthead, on 17 June 2025 - 06:04 PM, said:

Iran has warned residents of Haifa and Tel Aviv to evacuate, telling the residents that so far they have only used demonstrations but are now minded to unleashed a "punitive" strike.

I think this rhetoric is just that. Iran has launched several salvos already, why would they have held back? Their proxies are sitting out and are presumably looking for a show of a strength. Israel has apparently killed the chief of staff of the Iranian army, the head of the Republican Guard and several other very high up military commanders. What would Iran be waiting for before getting serious?

This post has been edited by Cause: 17 June 2025 - 06:51 PM

[Cause]

QuickTidal, on 17 June 2025 - 06:24 PM, said:

The second option is fucking stupid anyways. We are literally talking Cold War mentality shit here...Iran does not have nuclear weapons. They have investment in nuclear energy that is ramping to a point where they COULD have the capability to have one...but they do not have one. The assumption, and that's all it is, that they do and or would create one (or more) is EXACTLY what happened in the Cold War between the USA and Soviets. The US was CONVINCED that the USSR was making as many weapons as they were and the only way to stay safe was to try to make way more and preemptively usurp that "We have more, don't threaten us" status on the world stage...and in the end this proved to be based on assumptions that proved entirely wrong, the Soviets were WAY WAY behind the US on building weapons of that kind.

What the USA thought they needed over 45000 nukes for I will never know. Not sure it really gives an advantage over the soviets ~30,000. Dead is dead.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Mentalist, on 17 June 2025 - 05:35 PM, said:

Iraq and Afghanistan both had just under 25 million people in 2003

Iran has 90

Any occupation to force a regime change would be a colossal resource sink, and the quantity of resistance is going to be significantly worse than what the US faced before.

Iraq and Afghanistan had heavily armed tribal warlords... and the division between the wealthy Sunni minority and the Shiite majority had Iraq poised for civil war without Saddam. Iran is almost all Shiite.

Most of the Afghan people were apparently not very motivated to resist the Taliban (with exceptions of course)---there seems to be much more of a pro-democratic resistance in Iran. And Iran was a democracy for much longer than Afghanistan was.

But has the Iranian regime prepared for a possible occupation by digging tunnels and getting ready for protracted urban warfare? As Shiites they don't believe in suicide bombings (not doing them themselves, at least), but they certainly believe in martyrdom.

If it's not already, within five years the vast majority of the occupation might be feasible via drones and other robots. Combined with AI surveillance.

An occupation would be still be expensive though. Could Israel buy enough drones and other robots to pull it off themselves? What if they provided the nascent Iranian government, as it transitions to democracy, with an army of killer robots and surveillance systems? A substantial portion of them could be Iranian-made killer robots, financed by Israel....

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 17 June 2025 - 07:08 PM

[Tiste Simeon]

I've seen both Tucker Carson and MTG opposing the idea of going to war with Iran and I've got to tell you it feels weird to agree with those two lying hatemongers!

[QuickTidal]

Tiste Simeon, on 17 June 2025 - 07:48 PM, said:

I've seen both Tucker Carson and MTG opposing the idea of going to war with Iran and I've got to tell you it feels weird to agree with those two lying hatemongers!

Same.

Oh and sidebar, watching Tucker Carlson catch Ted Cruz out in a lie/BS yesterday was...also strange. But it was "Watch them fight"satisfying to watch.