Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. " I'm thinking Spartans(America)on a larger scale, history repeating itself. I'm betting 3/4 of the Iranian army are ready to down tools and run, alot of them don't want to be there, that's why they flee to UK to escape conscription, they are scared too. A choice of manky kebab or fresh McDonalds with special sauce could be the deciding factor. Personally Iran needs sorting out, it was a god awful mess before this war started. They would nuke the west without a second thought and then spit on the remains, that's what the pro-Iranian protesters in the UK fail to realise. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"the war was won weeks ago according to trump ..... these 3500 marines are clearly the catering corps, who will be serving a finger food buffet with jugs of pims at the victory party." 🤣 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. " Another shit show fuck up | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. " Nothing other than fill up body bags if they try an (even limited) invasion/incursion with that number.. He's trying to intimidate and look like he has a plan.. Out of his depth.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. " Maybe try to secure the islands but they would need many, many more troops, with different skill sets to move to set a buffer zone to minimise problems in the straights and then a massive logistic operations thereafter to keep it ongoing. If Iran does not take on landing troops directly, mainly due to lack of aircover, they may just bomb their neighbours hoping it will force their neighbours to put massive pressure on US. Who knows. He could just use troops as a negotiating tool, but Iran may not back down, using global financial instability as their biggest weapon. Trump may just get bored, blame his sidekick pretend tough guy or Israel for passing on duff intelligence and just stop bombing and move on to create other fuck ups around the world. Not many more years left for him. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. Nothing other than fill up body bags if they try an (even limited) invasion/incursion with that number.. He's trying to intimidate and look like he has a plan.. Out of his depth.." The question is: what is his military top brass thinking? If this isn't just theatre and a distraction, or a very, very limited action (e.g. Kharg island only), then his advisors need some serious scrutiny. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
Iran allegedly may still have the majority of its arms.
I assume that this volume of troops could largely be used to help to get ships though - but it won't be easy and they will likely lose many troops.
Trump is just bothered by the midterms, pump prices and the damage to the stock market. He'd obviously like a quick fix but it's not coming | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. " A token attempt to panic Iran, but Iran will know such low numbers cannot launch a full invasion. At most they can take islands or maybe take specific locations inside Iran temporarily but in both circumstances they will be sitting ducks. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. Nothing other than fill up body bags if they try an (even limited) invasion/incursion with that number.. He's trying to intimidate and look like he has a plan.. Out of his depth.. The question is: what is his military top brass thinking? If this isn't just theatre and a distraction, or a very, very limited action (e.g. Kharg island only), then his advisors need some serious scrutiny." He has created a culture as he did in his first term of those who are in such positions either keeping quiet or agreeing with the top people he has appointed.. He's already shown that he's ignored the accepted thinking of decades where it has been strongly thought that any such direct attacks would result in the Strait being closed.. That he was surprised by several accounts that Iran has targeted the other Gulf States which they said they would speaks to him ignoring what he's been briefed or people don't want to tell him .. Whatever the reason its not good.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The question is: what is his military top brass thinking?" Probably "How do we retain any credibility and autonomy when the CIC and the Defence Sec just tell us what to do?" . It's one thing to have balls of steel to have climbed that ladder through courage, bravery and heroism. . It's quite another to see if those balls of steel turn to jelly when facing up to the CIC and Defence Sec. . Then and only then do we see the true measure of these Chiefs of Staff. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" He has created a culture as he did in his first term of those who are in such positions either keeping quiet or agreeing with the top people he has appointed.. " Yes, but... It's a political decision WHAT to do, e.g. go to war with Iran. The military need to support that, it's their job. But HOW to do it is not his job. He CAN say "invade Iran". He can't (well, he can try) say "attempt a full-scale invasion with the Light Brigade, noble 600 mounted on horseback". The job of the military top brass is to make his policy a success. So what we're discussing here is the prima facie stupidity of invading anything meaningful with a handful of amphibious marines. They might not be able to stop him getting himself into a silly situation, but they must be able to stop it becoming an abject defeat. So either his top echelons are useless, in which case the world is screwed, or there's something else going on, either a distraction, a pinpoint operation or something very limited. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" He has created a culture as he did in his first term of those who are in such positions either keeping quiet or agreeing with the top people he has appointed.. Yes, but... It's a political decision WHAT to do, e.g. go to war with Iran. The military need to support that, it's their job. But HOW to do it is not his job. He CAN say "invade Iran". He can't (well, he can try) say "attempt a full-scale invasion with the Light Brigade, noble 600 mounted on horseback". The job of the military top brass is to make his policy a success. So what we're discussing here is the prima facie stupidity of invading anything meaningful with a handful of amphibious marines. They might not be able to stop him getting himself into a silly situation, but they must be able to stop it becoming an abject defeat. So either his top echelons are useless, in which case the world is screwed, or there's something else going on, either a distraction, a pinpoint operation or something very limited." The US and Israel have been at odds with Iran since 1979 and the prospect of multiple forms of conflict will have been worked through in detail at the highest levels, including how to respond to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. It may well be that the plans have been based on false assumptions or intelligence as often happens in war, but I've never thought it credible that this operation depends on Trump's daily social media posts. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Reported in an interview with the Financial Times, Trump says the US could "easily" take the Kharg island, adding a peace deal could be reached "fairly quickly" and ‘US president is considering a military operation with the goal of extracting 1,000 pounds of uranium from Iran, the Wall Street Journal reports’. " Yes it will be so easy, just like the movies. America, fuck yeah! No Israeli ground troops then? Iran are primarily their threat due to the proximity no? Also, I see the US Army have increased their enlistment age to 42. Nice one. I expect to see Eric Trump on the frontlines very shortly then. The US Army recruiters would probably achieve more success if they increased the acceptable BMI to 42. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" He has created a culture as he did in his first term of those who are in such positions either keeping quiet or agreeing with the top people he has appointed.. Yes, but... It's a political decision WHAT to do, e.g. go to war with Iran. The military need to support that, it's their job. But HOW to do it is not his job. He CAN say "invade Iran". He can't (well, he can try) say "attempt a full-scale invasion with the Light Brigade, noble 600 mounted on horseback". The job of the military top brass is to make his policy a success. So what we're discussing here is the prima facie stupidity of invading anything meaningful with a handful of amphibious marines. They might not be able to stop him getting himself into a silly situation, but they must be able to stop it becoming an abject defeat. So either his top echelons are useless, in which case the world is screwed, or there's something else going on, either a distraction, a pinpoint operation or something very limited." Whatever it is and of course it could be something from the back of the ideas cupboard, dusted off and reviewed but it could also simply be he is so entrenched in his position that he is going to try some sort of incursion to then be able to say 'we did x'.. Any attempt at taking Kharg would be a disaster ecologically and globally plus costly in lives, i'm not sure they will try that.. I simply cant conceive that level of risk being contemplated militarily or possibly allowed politically .. He's in a bit of a hole strategically despite what has been destroyed, and when your in a hole.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" He has created a culture as he did in his first term of those who are in such positions either keeping quiet or agreeing with the top people he has appointed.. Yes, but... It's a political decision WHAT to do, e.g. go to war with Iran. The military need to support that, it's their job. But HOW to do it is not his job. He CAN say "invade Iran". He can't (well, he can try) say "attempt a full-scale invasion with the Light Brigade, noble 600 mounted on horseback". The job of the military top brass is to make his policy a success. So what we're discussing here is the prima facie stupidity of invading anything meaningful with a handful of amphibious marines. They might not be able to stop him getting himself into a silly situation, but they must be able to stop it becoming an abject defeat. So either his top echelons are useless, in which case the world is screwed, or there's something else going on, either a distraction, a pinpoint operation or something very limited. The US and Israel have been at odds with Iran since 1979 and the prospect of multiple forms of conflict will have been worked through in detail at the highest levels, including how to respond to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. It may well be that the plans have been based on false assumptions or intelligence as often happens in war, but I've never thought it credible that this operation depends on Trump's daily social media posts." It would appear his plan was to scare the shit out of the Iranians and they would throw down their guns and run away. That's not working he types shit in capitals on his private social media channel Deluded cunt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" The US Army recruiters would probably achieve more success if they increased the acceptable BMI to 42. " 🤣👍 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Psychiatrist talking to Trump. "Mr President. These Iranians you are talking too, are they in the room with us right now?" "Even worse is that a few people actually believe him  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. " A roaring trade in widows' pensions? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. A roaring trade in widows' pensions?" Sadly possible | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Will this be enough or is it for show Iran is over six times larger than the UK and says its troops are ‘waiting’ Iranian army reported to be 610,000, Stormy Daniels won’t be able to blow them all in attempt to win them over. What can Trump achieve with 3500 ground troops. A roaring trade in widows' pensions?" US Iraq War Pension and Disability Costs Total Long-Term Cost: Projections indicate that disability benefits and healthcare for veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars will cost the United States nearly $500 billion through 2053. (Brown University) . Disabled Veterans: As of September 2012, approximately 671,299 veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan (OIF/OEF/OND) had been awarded service-connected disability compensation, with over 30,000 awarded a 100% disability rating. . Wartime Spending Shift: Disability claims for Iraq and Afghanistan veterans grew from $33 billion in 2011 to $134.7 billion by 2013, indicating a rapid rise in long-term care costs. . Cumulative Benefits Paid: From FY 2001 through FY 2012, the US spent $28.9 billion on disability benefits specifically for OEF/OIF/OND veterans. . Per-Veteran Cost: The high number of veterans filing for benefits—over 50% of those deployed—is partly due to better survival rates with complex injuries compared to previous wars. . UK Iraq War Pension and Support Costs Overall Cost: The net additional cost of the UK's military operations in Iraq was estimated at around £9.24bn ($14.32bn) by 2010, though this focused heavily on operational costs rather than long-term pension liabilities. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
