US-Iran standoff 2019-

@Tsavolion

If the point of all these religious ruling and ambiguity and uranium stock piling  is to buy time . Then it makes sense . They may not be ready . But if they really aimed to make a nuke deterrent,  then this tactic of giving ultimatums and warning of increased enrichment does not make sense . Since it invites attack . And gives  time for attacker to mass troops .

For many years now , the Iranian atomic agency has used language that is indicative of a code , to be understood by a  government agency or scientist . For example , they say :  we have enriched uranium to 20 percent  .....they know what this means ! Or they say we have installed twenty IR6  centrifuges ......they know what this means !

This brings the idea , that nuclear deal was infact a nuclear arms limitation . And  a collapse of the deal , can merely mean increased warhead production . Hence their apparent carelessness in giving ultimatums and dead lines .

If this is the case , then they should display the nuke arsenal . To deter  a direct  hot war . While increasing pressures on them via liberation forces . Stopping a few oil tankers for inspection , not a bad idea either....

INTELLIPUS
‏ @intellipus
4h4 hours ago

Finished with a second #Iran kmz showing both land-based cruise and anti-ship missile ranges. Actual weapon placement is based on strategic location and not known deployments. Not every location is expected to be used in every scenario. just some options.

Isos wrote:https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-30/russia-rejected-iran-s-400-missiles-request-amid-gulf-tension?srnd=politics-vp

Iran wants S-400 but russians don't want to sell it to them. But they want to sell it to saudi arabia and Quatar. They even sold it to China and India.

Meh, it's Bloomberg so i gotta take this with a pinch of salt.

IMO Iran should focus on getting more S-300s with the S-400 components, like the Search and Targeting radars, it's still technically an "S-300".

As well as better networking and Command/Control equipment, in order to upgrade their entire Air-Defense network.

I would also focus on getting Licensing to produce S-300, Tor, Buk and Pantsir missiles, maybe even the APSDF, HEFRAG munitions for their Tanks.

And of course, do whatever they can to upgrade their Air-Fleet as much as possible.

Maybe even invite the Serbs for Joint exercises.

I suspect that Iranian ships can visit Florida . God knows what they can carry ? Why stay local ? They have been to Atlantic before . No S400 , no problem . If ICBM comes our way . Then  cruise missile  goes their way .

https://www.google.com/amp/s/uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUKKCN1OY0SU

Well, well, well. Change of plan or just setting the scene for a 'can't be us because we just said we want peace' false flag event?

In perhaps the best sign thus far that a potential US war with Iran has been averted (at least for the near term), given the possibility that both heightened saber-rattling and the potential for an "accidental" deadly encounter between IRGC forces and the recent build-up of American deployments could have led to a major conflict, White House National Security Adviser John Bolton himself appears to now be fast climbing down the escalation ladder.

According to Reuters on Thursday Bolton is singing a different tune compared to the war rhetoric of the past weeks since the crisis began: "The threat from Iran is not over but quick action from the United States has helped deter it." This echoes a prior Pentagon statement essentially saying the "clear" Iran threat intelligence against US forces was accurate but that the US carrier and other extra force deployments to the Persian Gulf region thwarted Iran's intentions.

“I don’t think this threat is over, but I do think you can make at least a conditional claim that the quick response and the deployment and other steps that we took did serve as a deterrent,” Bolton told reporters during a visit to London on Thursday.

When pressed over whether he was at odds with President Trump who has repeatedly stated the US is not looking for regime change in Tehran, Bolton responded: “The policy we’re pursuing is not a policy of regime change. That’s the fact and everybody should understand it that way.”

Bolton even seemed to have backed away from prior statements of defense officials which accused Iran's leaders of having "ordered" attacks on oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz as well as a Saudi oil pipeline in the past weeks. Late last week an official Pentagon statement said "the leadership of Iran at the highest level" ordered a spate of disruptive attacks.

But now Bolton seems have have introduced more ambiguity, identifying Iran's "surrogates" - and stopping short of prior direct and more aggressive "top leadership" accusations - as possibly behind the attacks. Per Reuters:

Bolton said there was some prospect that evidence Iran was behind attacks this month on oil tankers in the Gulf would be presented to the United Nations Security Council next week.  “I don’t think anybody who is familiar with the situation in the region, whether they have examined the evidence or not, has come to any conclusion other than that these attacks were carried out by Iran or their surrogates,” he said.

Over the past week, following Trump's extended hand for Iran's leaders to "call me," we've seen a consistent deescalation following weeks of dangerous escalation, including threats and counter-threats of military action by both sides.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani reportedly said this week that the "road is not closed" on talks with the US if Washington drops the sanctions and returns to upholding the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) - something not at all likely to happen.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-30/bolton-finally-backs-iran-escalation-not-over-us-deterred-threat

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

crod wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:Even if Bibi does lose, he will be replaced by someone with the same exact foreign policy views. It will change nothing.

Perhaps, perhaps not as bad, israel has political options that can take a more moderate approach but at the very least we won’t have to look at the cunts smug face and that’s a win for sure.

If you consider replacing one smug face with another a win, I would say you should aim higher.

meh, if he's gone so is the Trump/Kushner pending disaster plan - that's a win worth aiming for. i have a little more faith in the israeli people to eventually take a different path.

@ JohninMK

The yanks must learn that blockade is just declaration of war . And that they can not hit and run . They can be reached in the region and also yank soil can be reached . And they will also loose big time .

Take for example an Iranian ship in Atlantic . Seems harmless or easy target . Right ! Sure to be taken out before or during an attack by yank on Iran . But what if this ship dropped a submergible payload nearby ? Coming to surface now and again ? And if no signal . Then launch.  Kind of like a missile tube in a sub , but without the sub .

No good hitting ship . No signal .You doom the east coast of USA ! No need for sub or ICBM . Just a ship and modified missile , sitting in Atlantic . No need to play goal keeper . We play striker .

Isos wrote:https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-30/russia-rejected-iran-s-400-missiles-request-amid-gulf-tension?srnd=politics-vp

Iran wants S-400 but russians don't want to sell it to them. But they want to sell it to saudi arabia and Quatar. They even sold it to China and India.

Russia even sells S-400 to Turkey, a country that deeply hates Russia loves to kill Russians hated by all of its neighbors. At least Iran got S-300PM2 which should suffice for now especially when Iran reverse engineers it.

nomadski wrote:@ JohninMK

The yanks must learn that blockade is just declaration of war . And that they can not hit and run . They can be reached in the region and also yank soil can be reached . And they will also loose  big time .

Take for example an Iranian ship in Atlantic . Seems harmless or easy target . Right ! Sure to be taken out before or during an attack by yank on Iran . But what if this ship dropped a submergible payload nearby ? Coming to surface now and again ? And if no signal . Then launch.  Kind of like a missile tube in a sub , but without the sub .

No good hitting ship . No signal .You doom the east coast of USA ! No need for sub or ICBM . Just a ship and modified missile , sitting in Atlantic . No need to play goal keeper . We play striker .

If Iran launches a Nuke, we will launch 20x what they do.

Dropping a few nukes won't stop what would be a death sentence to Iran because everyone would go in on Iran then and Russia and China would drop ALL support for them at that point

You are crazy if you think dropping an Atomic is going to help them no it's only going to unite others to utterly destroy them.

Good think people with your mentality do not have access to warheads, you'd get millions killed thinking it was a good idea.

I believe Iran won't buy any AD system, especially S-300...they developed their own (Bavar) and they are probably producing it like there is no tomorrow.

There is another issue I'm interested in...their mid-range ballistic and cruise missiles. Do they have enough of them in case of real war breaks up?

littlerabbit wrote:I believe Iran won't buy any AD system, especially S-300...they developed their own (Bavar) and they are probably producing it like there is no tomorrow.

There is another issue I'm interested in...their mid-range ballistic and cruise missiles. Do they have enough of them in case of real war breaks up?  

We aren't going to war with Iran, the US isn't going to even TRY and get in their alone, the only time we would really considering it is IF every ANTO country joined in plus, SA and others which ISN'T happening.

There will be no major war, there would at best be a minor exchange.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

nomadski wrote:@ JohninMK

The yanks must learn that blockade is just declaration of war . And that they can not hit and run . They can be reached in the region and also yank soil can be reached . And they will also loose  big time .

Take for example an Iranian ship in Atlantic . Seems harmless or easy target . Right ! Sure to be taken out before or during an attack by yank on Iran . But what if this ship dropped a submergible payload nearby ? Coming to surface now and again ? And if no signal . Then launch.  Kind of like a missile tube in a sub , but without the sub .

No good hitting ship . No signal .You doom the east coast of USA ! No need for sub or ICBM . Just a ship and modified missile , sitting in Atlantic . No need to play goal keeper . We play striker .

If Iran launches a Nuke, we will launch 20x what they do.

Dropping a few nukes won't stop what would be a death sentence to Iran because everyone would go in on Iran then and Russia and China would drop ALL support for them at that point

You are crazy if you think dropping an Atomic is going to help them no it's only going to unite others to utterly destroy them.

Good think people with your mentality do not have access to warheads, you'd get millions killed thinking it was a good idea.

Don't want Iran to drop nuke? Then don't invade Iran. Simple. That's why it's called nuclear deterrent. That would have been many world wars since WW2 had it not been nuclear deterrent.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

littlerabbit wrote:I believe Iran won't buy any AD system, especially S-300...they developed their own (Bavar) and they are probably producing it like there is no tomorrow.

There is another issue I'm interested in...their mid-range ballistic and cruise missiles. Do they have enough of them in case of real war breaks up?  

We aren't going to war with Iran, the US isn't going to even TRY and get in their alone, the only time we would really considering it is IF every ANTO country joined in plus, SA and others which ISN'T happening.

There will be no major war, there would at best be a minor exchange.

Chicken. China kicked Vietnam butt in the 1970s. America can't even beat Vietnam let alone Iran.

ultimatewarrior wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

littlerabbit wrote:I believe Iran won't buy any AD system, especially S-300...they developed their own (Bavar) and they are probably producing it like there is no tomorrow.

There is another issue I'm interested in...their mid-range ballistic and cruise missiles. Do they have enough of them in case of real war breaks up?  

We aren't going to war with Iran, the US isn't going to even TRY and get in their alone, the only time we would really considering it is IF every ANTO country joined in plus, SA and others which ISN'T happening.

There will be no major war, there would at best be a minor exchange.

Chicken. China kicked Vietnam butt in the 1970s. America can't even beat Vietnam let alone Iran.

Chicken? again we can beat Iran in a conventional war, the problem is the occupation.

Being smart and realizing what is do-able verse what would be dumb decision isn't chicken it's called critical thinking skills.

By your logic refusing run at the enemy with just a sword makes you chicken, if your going to say dumb shit to me. Don't talk me.

ultimatewarrior wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

nomadski wrote:@ JohninMK

The yanks must learn that blockade is just declaration of war . And that they can not hit and run . They can be reached in the region and also yank soil can be reached . And they will also loose  big time .

Take for example an Iranian ship in Atlantic . Seems harmless or easy target . Right ! Sure to be taken out before or during an attack by yank on Iran . But what if this ship dropped a submergible payload nearby ? Coming to surface now and again ? And if no signal . Then launch.  Kind of like a missile tube in a sub , but without the sub .

No good hitting ship . No signal .You doom the east coast of USA ! No need for sub or ICBM . Just a ship and modified missile , sitting in Atlantic . No need to play goal keeper . We play striker .

If Iran launches a Nuke, we will launch 20x what they do.

Dropping a few nukes won't stop what would be a death sentence to Iran because everyone would go in on Iran then and Russia and China would drop ALL support for them at that point

You are crazy if you think dropping an Atomic is going to help them no it's only going to unite others to utterly destroy them.

Good think people with your mentality do not have access to warheads, you'd get millions killed thinking it was a good idea.

Don't want Iran to drop nuke? Then don't invade Iran. Simple. That's why it's called nuclear deterrent. That would have been many world wars since WW2 had it not been nuclear deterrent.

No one is invading, but if we did and they dropped a nuke they signed their death warrant at the same time, at that point no one will help them and they will be ganged up on.

Um No ebola is very hard to spread around in mass the way you are talking this isn't like in the movies where it gets airborne and that's it. You don't know anything about Biological weapons to say that. Stop watching so much TV or reading absurd articles online.

Iran may have no intention but if we did invade and march on their capital what are they not going to oppose us?. All you are doing Iso is parroting what I said, the conventional fight will be easy it will be bloody and costly sure, the issue becomes. After conventional fighting is done. Yes, there would be cells and that kinda stuff sure and they will try their best to hurt us in the process and for sure we couldn't occupy them forever.

But none of that will stop us from defeating them in a straight up fight.

A Simple flu omg.....The devastation! but again it's beyond hard to weaponize the flu and spread it over a great distance like you are claiming AGAIN stop talking Hollywood BS.

To even understand how to do that would take over a decade of hard ass research and simple weather conditions could ruin such a plan in a snap. They tried in the past to weaponize that stuff, it doesn't work, it's expensive and it really provides no benefit.

You realllllly should go work in a viral research lab because you don't know what you're talking about again.


Ebola is has a home in Africa due to specific reasons EVEN then it's within very very very shit parts of Africa it isn't some widespread epidemic.

You do know...HOW someone gets infected with Ebola right? Imma give you a hint you can breathe the same air has someone with Ebola and you WON'T get it.

...If you are going to insult me, dude, at least use google before doing so.

You do not get Ebola by touching someone, only by fluid exchange, I could go and hold someone's hand with Ebola and it wouldn't affect me one bit. You expect me to take this seriously if you don't even know that, ugh.

They are some man-made Bio weapons that do trigger on skin contact but getting enough and spreading it enough is way harder then you can imagine and they don't always work, it's a very hit or miss thing.

What you are preaching on is nothing by Hollywood myth with no real backing to it, I don't understand why you are trying to defend this silly point.

Weaponized viruses are shit and have never worked even in tests they did jack shit.

Playing too many games or something Isos.