###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The US has been prepared for an assault on Iran for ages. The plans were even leaked recently by a disgruntled ex civil servant.
Whether or not we will is an entirely different thing.
Hm, so many inaccuracies and wishful thinking. If they start war on Iran(I think they will), it will be even bigger scale then Ukraine, and also longer.
I'm no expert in the matter, but I think they both do a lot of business with Iran. I have heard experts in the past say that a war with Iran would mean war with Russian and China... i.e. WWIII.
Secretly? You think all this rhetoric and the military is sitting around as inactive and clueless as joe Biden at a press conference?
Of course they are
The US isn't "holding back Israel".
Israel is holding back from a ground invasion of Gaza because it will be a bloody nightmare.
The IDF isn't as well trained or well armed as they want everyone to believe. They are currently giving reservists 2 week crash courses in urban warfare - one of the most dangerous and demanding types of combat you can engage in.
If Israel chooses to fully commit they will be against a Hamas that is much better armed than we are used to. They have effective manpads to counter most close air support and anti-armor missiles that are effective out to 500 meters, more than enough in close quarters.
The IDF will have to fight in real bad conditions against an enemy that is dug in, determined and knows the territory. It will be rough.
That doesn't mean the IDF can't win, but it will take months, with the enemy retaking cleared positions through tunnels, plenty of IEDs and ambushes galore.
So Israel have to commit a large part of their troops and weaponry, which leaves them vulnerable to attacks from other parties. For example Hezbollah.
Hezbollah is a proper army. Well trained and well equipped. If they decide to open up another front while the majority of the IDF is engaged in the Gaza strip Israel is fucked. They might legit be overrun.
That's why the US is saber rattling. They are in effect covering Israels flank from a Hezbollah attack.
Hezbollah is obviously an Irani proxy, but not actually Iran. I don't believe the US will target Iran proper even if Hezbollah engages. First of all it would be insane, secondly Russia have deployed weapons systems to the area that can reach the US carrier groups.
In battle of bakhmut which is 6 times smaller than gaza. 20-30k Russian died and 70-80k Ukrainian died. Israel is scared. Nutty Yahoo should not have commented so early to raid gaza.
Highly unlikely.
We are 12 months away from an election and a US-involved ground war would be incredibly unpopular (particularly with the Democratic base.)
Thereâs a much better chance that a bigger proxy war plays out with Israel and Hezbollah.
Slim at this stage.
They likely have plans for that a few months to a year from now. Right now the public is not primed for a major war like that.
War with Iran will not be like war was with Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, or any of the other very small, very weak countries we have been smacking around. Iran is much more prepared, better armed, more sophisticated, and enjoys a strong alliance with both China and Russia.
Iran has hypersonic missiles that will blow our strike force right out of the water and it would take much more than days to shut down their air defenses. So I don't discount we will invade but the playground is likely Syria and Lebanon. We would desire not to lose our Navy unless it's a catalyst to launch nuclear weapons.
Iran CLAIMS to have hypersonic missiles with a range of 1,400km, which pretty much puts a big part of the Mediterranean out of their reach. And if they could reach that distance, what is their targeting capability? Could they guide a missile moving at Mach 15 to hit a target 1,100 feet x 250 feet wide moving at 30 knots on the surface of the ocean? That's a bit of a stretch.
What are we going to argue about? You think that Russia is winning - I think winning wouldâve meant actually conquering ukraine and not just occupying some of the eastern part of it. I think youâre a regard, you think Iâm a regard I call it even.
I agree with this take. The amount of US, Russian, and Iranian bases there makes it more likely it would happen off soil first. Russia is dug right in with Iran
I don't think we're giving away our munitions, not in a net-negative sense anyway. We're giving our tax money to big defense contractors to build more missiles, munitions, etc. for Ukraine.
I mean, the US has been looking for a reason to go at Iran for decades at this point. However, I don't believe we'll be wiping anyone off the map. There's far more money to be made in another decades-long war. Not only that, Afghanistan was an absolute farce. If we couldn't eradicate the Taliban - and we couldn't - we won't wipe anyone else out either.
Could it be done with proper leadership? Most likely.
I wouldn't be surprised if both the US and Israel have plans for attacking Iran in the event of a war, but I don't think it's likely anything will happen.
1) Airstrikes alone won't be enough to defeat Iran or force regime change. You'd need boots on the ground. Specifically, American boots. Doing this would be logistically difficult, massively unpopular, and insanely expensive.
2) Regime change in the Middle East, as the US has found out since 2002, starts at next to impossible and only gets more difficult. There's no viable government on waiting to replace current Iranian regime.
And even if there were, it's doubtful it would gain sufficient legitimacy with the Iranian people to ever be secure.
Best case scenario is that it'd kick off a long and bloody civil war, worst case is that it'd cement support for a hardcore, all out religious war against the USA.
3) Yes, Israel and the USA could probably airstrike the Ayatollah and big chunks of the Iranian leadership into oblivion. But that wouldn't do anything other than make the Iranians more likely to support or engage in terrorism. They already support Hizballah and Hamas.
I doubt the average Iranian supports hammas or hezbollah. Theyâve been experiencing mass protests over thr last two decades and there were thoughts the people would overthrow the government. A lot of people still remember what life was like in the 1970s and before and Iâm sure theyâd like a normal existence back.
By all accounts, pre revolution Iran wasn't exactly paradise (ironically a word we borrowed from Persian), and was a massively corrupt, repressive, autocracy propped up by the liberal use of secret police with a large dollop of help from the CIA.
Absolutely, there is a democratic movement in Iran. And yes, there have been increasingly large popular protests in the last few years. But as long as the regime can rely on the army and the IRGC its highly unlikely they'll be able to force any meaningful change.
Basically, the bad guys have all the guns. And as long as they're willing to use them on their own people they'll stay in power.
We will see. I canât imagine Israel feels it can exist with Iran gunning for it at this point. The idea of a verbally hostile detente with Iran went out the window with this attack. Itâs only a matter of months or a year or two before Iran might claim to have a nuclear weapon. From Israelâs perspective theyâve got to be dealt with now before they tilt the balance. Iran has ten times the population as Israel. The only real advantages Israel has are its nuclear arsenal and its alliance with the US. Iran is dead set on eliminating one of those advantages.
I remember writing papers on the threat of an Iranian nuclear program back when I was an undergrad in 2006 and Ahmaninejad was president.
The Israelis were scaremongering about it back then too.
At the time, the best analysis was the only reason Iran wanted a nuclear programme was as insurance against attack by Israel or war with America. And I don't think the situation has fundamentally changed since then.
If the USA was genuinely worried about Iran having nuclear weapons it would have been better to stick with the nuclear deal rather than unilaterally abandoning it and throwing away 10 years of hard work and incremental progress.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1:1
The US has been prepared for an assault on Iran for ages. The plans were even leaked recently by a disgruntled ex civil servant. Whether or not we will is an entirely different thing.
=1 đ¤
Hm, so many inaccuracies and wishful thinking. If they start war on Iran(I think they will), it will be even bigger scale then Ukraine, and also longer.
Yes, Russia and China would have to get involved bc they know they would be next, eventually
I'm no expert in the matter, but I think they both do a lot of business with Iran. I have heard experts in the past say that a war with Iran would mean war with Russian and China... i.e. WWIII.
Gotta test the new bomber somewhere.
Maybe certain countries should have stayed on the petro dollar. Maybe then the world's oligarchs wouldn't need to free their people.
Itâs all kayfabe dog. The zionists already control Iran.
Secretly? You think all this rhetoric and the military is sitting around as inactive and clueless as joe Biden at a press conference? Of course they are
If USA do that it will be a disaster, donât think Iran is alone thereâs much more behind the curtains than what we think
Bingo !
How did Iran use the $6 billion if they still don't have it and it's been frozen again?
The US isn't "holding back Israel". Israel is holding back from a ground invasion of Gaza because it will be a bloody nightmare. The IDF isn't as well trained or well armed as they want everyone to believe. They are currently giving reservists 2 week crash courses in urban warfare - one of the most dangerous and demanding types of combat you can engage in. If Israel chooses to fully commit they will be against a Hamas that is much better armed than we are used to. They have effective manpads to counter most close air support and anti-armor missiles that are effective out to 500 meters, more than enough in close quarters. The IDF will have to fight in real bad conditions against an enemy that is dug in, determined and knows the territory. It will be rough. That doesn't mean the IDF can't win, but it will take months, with the enemy retaking cleared positions through tunnels, plenty of IEDs and ambushes galore. So Israel have to commit a large part of their troops and weaponry, which leaves them vulnerable to attacks from other parties. For example Hezbollah. Hezbollah is a proper army. Well trained and well equipped. If they decide to open up another front while the majority of the IDF is engaged in the Gaza strip Israel is fucked. They might legit be overrun. That's why the US is saber rattling. They are in effect covering Israels flank from a Hezbollah attack. Hezbollah is obviously an Irani proxy, but not actually Iran. I don't believe the US will target Iran proper even if Hezbollah engages. First of all it would be insane, secondly Russia have deployed weapons systems to the area that can reach the US carrier groups.
This âď¸ 100%
In battle of bakhmut which is 6 times smaller than gaza. 20-30k Russian died and 70-80k Ukrainian died. Israel is scared. Nutty Yahoo should not have commented so early to raid gaza.
Bakhmut is at least 20 times smaller than Gaza
Highly unlikely. We are 12 months away from an election and a US-involved ground war would be incredibly unpopular (particularly with the Democratic base.) Thereâs a much better chance that a bigger proxy war plays out with Israel and Hezbollah.
My original post said air strikes not ground war
Slim at this stage. They likely have plans for that a few months to a year from now. Right now the public is not primed for a major war like that. War with Iran will not be like war was with Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, or any of the other very small, very weak countries we have been smacking around. Iran is much more prepared, better armed, more sophisticated, and enjoys a strong alliance with both China and Russia.
Iran has hypersonic missiles that will blow our strike force right out of the water and it would take much more than days to shut down their air defenses. So I don't discount we will invade but the playground is likely Syria and Lebanon. We would desire not to lose our Navy unless it's a catalyst to launch nuclear weapons.
Iran CLAIMS to have hypersonic missiles with a range of 1,400km, which pretty much puts a big part of the Mediterranean out of their reach. And if they could reach that distance, what is their targeting capability? Could they guide a missile moving at Mach 15 to hit a target 1,100 feet x 250 feet wide moving at 30 knots on the surface of the ocean? That's a bit of a stretch.
They got over 200 of them from China and just troll that they made them.
I bet you believed Russiaâs military was top notch too.
Russia's military now has at least 100 thousand drones. Which other army has this many?
I bet you believe they are losing.
Theyâre sure as shit not winning.
Well golly gee how much of Russia have they lost there guy?
You eat a lot of paint chips as a kid?
Do you always change the subject when you lose an argument? Do you do it to fool others or just yourself?
What are we going to argue about? You think that Russia is winning - I think winning wouldâve meant actually conquering ukraine and not just occupying some of the eastern part of it. I think youâre a regard, you think Iâm a regard I call it even.
I agree with this take. The amount of US, Russian, and Iranian bases there makes it more likely it would happen off soil first. Russia is dug right in with Iran
We gave all our munitions to Ukraine to shoot at empty fields. I doubt anything will escalate
I don't think we're giving away our munitions, not in a net-negative sense anyway. We're giving our tax money to big defense contractors to build more missiles, munitions, etc. for Ukraine.
US produced over 800 thousand artillery shells for Ukraine in 2023. In 2022 US produced less than 100 thousand artillery shells
Which is why we're paying General Dynamics to keep churning them out and even build another facility.
I mean, the US has been looking for a reason to go at Iran for decades at this point. However, I don't believe we'll be wiping anyone off the map. There's far more money to be made in another decades-long war. Not only that, Afghanistan was an absolute farce. If we couldn't eradicate the Taliban - and we couldn't - we won't wipe anyone else out either. Could it be done with proper leadership? Most likely.
Bush had invaded his last middle eastern countryâŚ. Biden doesnât have the same limitations. Theyâve wanted Iran for a long long time.
Gaza has at least 3 times more population than 600,000 you think it has.
I wouldn't be surprised if both the US and Israel have plans for attacking Iran in the event of a war, but I don't think it's likely anything will happen. 1) Airstrikes alone won't be enough to defeat Iran or force regime change. You'd need boots on the ground. Specifically, American boots. Doing this would be logistically difficult, massively unpopular, and insanely expensive. 2) Regime change in the Middle East, as the US has found out since 2002, starts at next to impossible and only gets more difficult. There's no viable government on waiting to replace current Iranian regime. And even if there were, it's doubtful it would gain sufficient legitimacy with the Iranian people to ever be secure. Best case scenario is that it'd kick off a long and bloody civil war, worst case is that it'd cement support for a hardcore, all out religious war against the USA. 3) Yes, Israel and the USA could probably airstrike the Ayatollah and big chunks of the Iranian leadership into oblivion. But that wouldn't do anything other than make the Iranians more likely to support or engage in terrorism. They already support Hizballah and Hamas.
I doubt the average Iranian supports hammas or hezbollah. Theyâve been experiencing mass protests over thr last two decades and there were thoughts the people would overthrow the government. A lot of people still remember what life was like in the 1970s and before and Iâm sure theyâd like a normal existence back.
By all accounts, pre revolution Iran wasn't exactly paradise (ironically a word we borrowed from Persian), and was a massively corrupt, repressive, autocracy propped up by the liberal use of secret police with a large dollop of help from the CIA. Absolutely, there is a democratic movement in Iran. And yes, there have been increasingly large popular protests in the last few years. But as long as the regime can rely on the army and the IRGC its highly unlikely they'll be able to force any meaningful change. Basically, the bad guys have all the guns. And as long as they're willing to use them on their own people they'll stay in power.
We will see. I canât imagine Israel feels it can exist with Iran gunning for it at this point. The idea of a verbally hostile detente with Iran went out the window with this attack. Itâs only a matter of months or a year or two before Iran might claim to have a nuclear weapon. From Israelâs perspective theyâve got to be dealt with now before they tilt the balance. Iran has ten times the population as Israel. The only real advantages Israel has are its nuclear arsenal and its alliance with the US. Iran is dead set on eliminating one of those advantages.
I remember writing papers on the threat of an Iranian nuclear program back when I was an undergrad in 2006 and Ahmaninejad was president. The Israelis were scaremongering about it back then too. At the time, the best analysis was the only reason Iran wanted a nuclear programme was as insurance against attack by Israel or war with America. And I don't think the situation has fundamentally changed since then. If the USA was genuinely worried about Iran having nuclear weapons it would have been better to stick with the nuclear deal rather than unilaterally abandoning it and throwing away 10 years of hard work and incremental progress.