Trump says he bombed Iran

[andy06shake]

[quintessentone]

"Here’s what happened today

• The first day of the funeral procession for the late Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who died alongside family members at the beginning of the US-Israel war on Iran, has come to a close.
  
• UK and French leaders issued a joint statement regarding the Strait of Hormuz, describing it as “a vital artery for the global economy” and stressing that “restoring safe transit for ships of all nations through the strait is a matter of global concern”.
  
• Tehran pledged to deploy every available judicial and diplomatic channel to challenge what the Iranian president characterised as unlawful acts perpetrated against the country by the US and Israel.
  
• Israeli settlers stepped up their incursions and land seizures across the occupied West Bank, launching assaults that involved taking over or destroying Palestinian homes and vandalising critical infrastructure, including water springs, power lines and greenhouses.
  
• The Israeli military announced that it targeted approximately 10 “Hezbollah infrastructure sites” across southern Lebanon.
  
• Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held talks with US President Donald Trump, and the two leaders agreed to hold a meeting in the United States.
  
• According to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), upwards of 640,000 displaced individuals in Lebanon have gone back to their homes following a US-Tehran agreement signed last month that incorporated a ceasefire in Lebanon.
  
• Yemen’s Houthis warned they will target Saudi Arabian airports and critical infrastructure if Riyadh breaches their airspace or launches an attack, following accusations by the Iran-backed group that the kingdom committed an airspace violation."
  

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/liveb...i-khamenei

[govshill2]

[Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hNH2raSh044]

How many funerals will he get?              

[andy06shake]

How many funerals will he get?              

The straightforward answer would appear to be one. 

But i don't know how they mourn the dead over there.

[govshill2]

The straightforward answer would appear to be one. 

But i don't know how they mourn the dead over there.

Well for example, George Floyd’s family and community held three main funeral and memorial events in the week following his death on May 25, 2020.     

[andy06shake]

Well for example, George Floyd’s family and community held three main funeral and memorial events in the week following his death on May 25, 2020.     

They can only plant you once.

So i imagine the other events were more of the memorial sorts.

Unless they are digging the poor sods back up... 

I don't think George Floyd was Muslim or Iranian, all the same...

I mean one things not exactly the same as the other.

[worldstarcountry]

This sounds like a bad idea. How could anyone think that our military seizing this island would upend some secret colonial network that controls the world financial markets,.

!---Wall of text reply inbound--!

Well it is all outlined in that analysis, and is more like a final piece towards completing the puzzle. Has everyone forgotten the Panama papers? Part of the purpose of the weaponized algorithm is to destroy memory retention so I suppose nobody does remember. This helps to explain the Caribbean force posture and the Greenland situation when taking into account other aspects of that analysis.

I myself understand the tactical difficulty of holding a relatively small, open and flat chunk of land. However, anti-drone technology is making significant strides. Defense contracts are switching to a huge network of drone companies and the means to defend against them as well. I am making regular investments into a brand new lower cost drone and air mobility ETF, and if we love our country so should we. The more we invest into these companies the faster they can fulfill their obligations relating to national defense to deliver the right next generation systems to the DOD.

My preference would be to just destroy Kharg Island as well as domestic power generation capabilities, let them empty another chunk of their missile capacity in retaliation (Israel can and will likely take a good chunk of the hits) and then make the move towards Qeshm and Bandar Abbas. Without the oil revenue, what little power generation is left would have to be diverted towards what they can actually effectively produce leaving the population really in a bad place and can provide conditions for increased civil agitation. The degraded power generation capacity and inability to raise money will put their ticking clock much closer to doomsday. The infrastructure can be rebuilt over time anyways, but those asset managers really want that oil bad. 

National interests are multi-generational though, and after a good solid year the Persians will not be in a good place whereas our position will be stronger with systems and troop deployments on Qeshm, which actually has terrain favorable to obstructing surveillance on troop movements and interfering with targeting.

C-RAM's, THAAD, Patriots and newer anti-drone systems can be exponentially deployed throughout the year on the southern side of the island (Qeshm) while Iran desperately tries to maintain missile production, let alone power generation. This would provide an improved defensive tracking measure as missiles and drones have to travel upward to clear the central peak elevations before coming back down. By next year we should be seeing all sides deploying weaponized bipedal robots in formations to take the initial kinetic brunt on any land ops. This would be essential for entering the caverns in Qeshm to clear out the missile cities and allowing the droids to become 21st tunnel rats and absorb the initial booby trapped explosives. I believe the reason I could not buy my robot this year is they are stockpiling them in anticipation of impending ground ops. Men and women of the armed forces seem to be on board with this fight against Persia for some reason, so the best I can do is offer ideas in hopes to mitigate as many losses as possible. 

Civilizationaly speaking, it seems this war is set in stone no matter what we wish. I would rather offer ideas and solutions for our civilization to prevail as opposed to killing morale while still being realistic about asset losses and learning and adapting to the tactics and methods. The Financial rule of the existing paradigm has to finally end, may as well be here. The Europeans won't like it much, but their leaders should not have sold out to the Communists so there is that. And sure, it will just begin a new cycle in a new system with its own nuances, problems, and violence. But when has it ever been any different at any time in history?? We have to embrace change, and wish our men and women the best!

If the citizens would just divert their funds into the industrial mining, nuclear energy and defense sectors we can speed up the process significantly and earn income as well. There are a handful of Drone, Robotics and Nuclear energy ETF's that stand to do quite well in the next couple of years. We should remember that it is not a simple matter of numbers on paper/screen. It represents our companies and people and their ability to produce what our civilization needs to win. Like war bonds of old, investing in our domestic manufacturing is key to supporting our troops and our country. We must make sure to do due diligence with the ETF holdings so that we are not supporting Chinese companies and giving them the edge. There are some good individual companies to go for as well, but that is better for the more experienced and less emotional types.

[IDELB2006]

!---Wall of text reply inbound--!

Well it is all outlined in that analysis, and is more like a final piece towards completing the puzzle. Has everyone forgotten the Panama papers? Part of the purpose of the weaponized algorithm is to destroy memory retention so I suppose nobody does remember. This helps to explain the Caribbean force posture and the Greenland situation when taking into account other aspects of that analysis.

I myself understand the tactical difficulty of holding a relatively small, open and flat chunk of land. However, anti-drone technology is making significant strides. Defense contracts are switching to a huge network of drone companies and the means to defend against them as well. I am making regular investments into a brand new lower cost drone and air mobility ETF, and if we love our country so should we. The more we invest into these companies the faster they can fulfill their obligations relating to national defense to deliver the right next generation systems to the DOD.

My preference would be to just destroy Kharg Island as well as domestic power generation capabilities, let them empty another chunk of their missile capacity in retaliation (Israel can and will likely take a good chunk of the hits) and then make the move towards Qeshm and Bandar Abbas. Without the oil revenue, what little power generation is left would have to be diverted towards what they can actually effectively produce leaving the population really in a bad place and can provide conditions for increased civil agitation. The degraded power generation capacity and inability to raise money will put their ticking clock much closer to doomsday. The infrastructure can be rebuilt over time anyways, but those asset managers really want that oil bad. 

My understanding of why Kharg Island is not a target is due to Iran's threats of going after oil infrastructure of Saudi Arabia, and others in the ME. Basically bringing all ME oil output to near zero. The shortage that would create would be bad for everyone, including the US.
 

National interests are multi-generational though, and after a good solid year the Persians will not be in a good place whereas our position will be stronger with systems and troop deployments on Qeshm, which actually has terrain favorable to obstructing surveillance on troop movements and interfering with targeting.

C-RAM's, THAAD, Patriots and newer anti-drone systems can be exponentially deployed throughout the year on the southern side of the island (Qeshm) while Iran desperately tries to maintain missile production, let alone power generation. This would provide an improved defensive tracking measure as missiles and drones have to travel upward to clear the central peak elevations before coming back down. By next year we should be seeing all sides deploying weaponized bipedal robots in formations to take the initial kinetic brunt on any land ops. This would be essential for entering the caverns in Qeshm to clear out the missile cities and allowing the droids to become 21st tunnel rats and absorb the initial booby trapped explosives. I believe the reason I could not buy my robot this year is they are stockpiling them in anticipation of impending ground ops. Men and women of the armed forces seem to be on board with this fight against Persia for some reason, so the best I can do is offer ideas in hopes to mitigate as many losses as possible. 

Civilizationaly speaking, it seems this war is set in stone no matter what we wish. I would rather offer ideas and solutions for our civilization to prevail as opposed to killing morale while still being realistic about asset losses and learning and adapting to the tactics and methods. The Financial rule of the existing paradigm has to finally end, may as well be here. The Europeans won't like it much, but their leaders should not have sold out to the Communists so there is that. And sure, it will just begin a new cycle in a new system with its own nuances, problems, and violence. But when has it ever been any different at any time in history?? We have to embrace change, and wish our men and women the best!

If the citizens would just divert their funds into the industrial mining, nuclear energy and defense sectors we can speed up the process significantly and earn income as well. There are a handful of Drone, Robotics and Nuclear energy ETF's that stand to do quite well in the next couple of years. We should remember that it is not a simple matter of numbers on paper/screen. It represents our companies and people and their ability to produce what our civilization needs to win. Like war bonds of old, investing in our domestic manufacturing is key to supporting our troops and our country. We must make sure to do due diligence with the ETF holdings so that we are not supporting Chinese companies and giving them the edge. There are some good individual companies to go for as well, but that is better for the more experienced and less emotional types.

Iran is not just going away as a problem for the  US and Israel, but this war is essentially over. Trump has not shown any interest in committing the force necessary for an invasion. Our air defenses may be top notch, but they can be overwhelmed with cheap missiles.

I see the Marines have deployed autonomous vehicles, I had no idea robot armies were so close to being deployed. Considering that Trump was thinking about pulling our air defenses out of Korea to defend the ME from Iran, it makes me wonder if there is any budget left over for equipment. How has America become stretched so thin by one short term conflict with a regional power.

Its looking more like a bloated system for donating money to the MIC.

[EXETER]

......How has America become stretched so thin by one short term conflict with a regional power.

The US is stretched so thin because Trump and Hegseth chose to fight the war with a very high volume of long-range stand-off weapons.  These were sea-launched from the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean and air launched from B-52s at ranges well beyond Iran's ability to do anything about.  

The intended consequence of that was to limit US casualties to a bare minimum.  Which it did.  Something like a couple of dozen, all together.

The unintended consequences--which Trump and Hegseth were too stupid to think about--are many.  

First, the long-range war that they chose to fight without putting boots on the ground not only predictably failed to achieve any of the strategic goals that Trump blathered about during the course of the war--stealing Iran's oil, regime change, eliminating their nuclear threat, keeping the Strait of Hormuz open, eliminating their proxies like Hezbollah, etc., but it actually left us in a weaker position in the aftermath.

Second, by using up approximately half of our long-range standoff first-strike weapons they effectively eliminated the US ability to fight more than one war at a time. Based on our experience with WW2, it has been US policy ever since that time to maintain the ability to fight two major wars at a time  somewhere on the globe.  That's why we have as many aircraft carriers, submarines, long-range bombers, Marine Expeditionary Units, aerial refueling tankers, reconnaissance satellites, military personnel, and basing rights throughout the world as we do.  It's why we invented NATO and insisted on setting it up under US leadership. If the US wants to fight major wars somewhere other than on US soil, then we have to have that kind of global reach.  It's why we spend more on our military than the next 5 nations combined and why none of them have global reach. All of those high-tech offensive and defensive standoff weapons that Trump and Hegseth pissed away for no good reason will take 5 to 10 years to replace.  In the meantime, every nation all over the world--boh friend and ally--now realizes that for the foreseeable future, the US is now a one-war global power.  


So the question is, where would the US choose to fight that war?  Apparently Trump and Hegseth have decided that China is that place.  So, a few weeks ago Hegseth told NATO that in the event of a dustup in Europe, they could no longer count on certain kinds of US military support, including Carrier Battle Groups, aerial refueling tankers, satellite intelligence collection, etc.  That's because all the good stuff is going to be moved to the Indo-Pacific region to face off against China.  A few days ago, the US intelligence community quietly notified NATO that they have picked up intelligence that Russia is planning a small military incursion into Poland to test the NATO response.  So, the question will then be, what happens if Poland invokes Article 5 of the NATO treaty and the US doesn't show up? Or it shows up with too little, too late? The obvious consequence of that is that Russia will have decided that they can move on Poland (and probably other Baltic nations) and get away with it.

The same is happening in Southeast Asia with other allies who used to think their mutual defense agreements with the US were air-tight.

So, again predictably, many of the smaller nations that used to trust us are now moving to develop their own nuclear weapons.  Last week, Finland amended their Constitution and laws to specifically allow the production and ownership of nuclear weapons.  There are similar movements afoot in Sweden, Poland, Germany, Japan, and South Korea--to name a few.

So the probability of war in one or more high-value locations in the world has just gone up along with the probability that it might involve nuclear weapons, thanks to Beavis and Butthead.

[IDELB2006]

The US is stretched so thin because Trump and Hegseth chose to fight the war with a very high volume of long-range stand-off weapons.  These were sea-launched from the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean and air launched from B-52s at ranges well beyond Iran's ability to do anything about.  

The intended consequence of that was to limit US casualties to a bare minimum.  Which it did.  Something like a couple of dozen, all together.

The unintended consequences--which Trump and Hegseth were too stupid to think about--are many.  

First, the long-range war that they chose to fight without putting boots on the ground not only predictably failed to achieve any of the strategic goals that Trump blathered about during the course of the war--stealing Iran's oil, regime change, eliminating their nuclear threat, keeping the Strait of Hormuz open, eliminating their proxies like Hezbollah, etc., but it actually left us in a weaker position in the aftermath.

Second, by using up approximately half of our long-range standoff first-strike weapons they effectively eliminated the US ability to fight more than one war at a time. Based on our experience with WW2, it has been US policy ever since that time to maintain the ability to fight two major wars at a time  somewhere on the globe.  That's why we have as many aircraft carriers, submarines, long-range bombers, Marine Expeditionary Units, aerial refueling tankers, reconnaissance satellites, military personnel, and basing rights throughout the world as we do.  It's why we invented NATO and insisted on setting it up under US leadership. If the US wants to fight major wars somewhere other than on US soil, then we have to have that kind of global reach.  It's why we spend more on our military than the next 5 nations combined and why none of them have global reach. All of those high-tech offensive and defensive standoff weapons that Trump and Hegseth pissed away for no good reason will take 5 to 10 years to replace.  In the meantime, every nation all over the world--boh friend and ally--now realizes that for the foreseeable future, the US is now a one-war global power.  


So the question is, where would the US choose to fight that war?  Apparently Trump and Hegseth have decided that China is that place.  So, a few weeks ago Hegseth told NATO that in the event of a dustup in Europe, they could no longer count on certain kinds of US military support, including Carrier Battle Groups, aerial refueling tankers, satellite intelligence collection, etc.  That's because all the good stuff is going to be moved to the Indo-Pacific region to face off against China.  A few days ago, the US intelligence community quietly notified NATO that they have picked up intelligence that Russia is planning a small military incursion into Poland to test the NATO response.  So, the question will then be, what happens if Poland invokes Article 5 of the NATO treaty and the US doesn't show up? Or it shows up with too little, too late? The obvious consequence of that is that Russia will have decided that they can move on Poland (and probably other Baltic nations) and get away with it.

The same is happening in Southeast Asia with other allies who used to think their mutual defense agreements with the US were air-tight.

So, again predictably, many of the smaller nations that used to trust us are now moving to develop their own nuclear weapons.  Last week, Finland amended their Constitution and laws to specifically allow the production and ownership of nuclear weapons.  There are similar movements afoot in Sweden, Poland, Germany, Japan, and South Korea--to name a few.

So the probability of war in one or more high-value locations in the world has just gone up along with the probability that it might involve nuclear weapons, thanks to Beavis and Butthead.

I think the pivot to Asia is more a reaction to the European leaders open derision of Trump over the Iran war. Trump will just be picking up his toys and going home.

In reality, I doubt Trump would stand up to China if they decided to take Taiwan. I noticed the May meeting with Xi was less about trade, and more to do with Taiwan. I'm sure Xi let Trump know that his latest excursions into Venezuela, and Iran made China more interested in taking Taiwan, and there is little we could do about it.
Certainly since the China meeting Trump began pushing for a peace deal with Iran. That's how we ended up with such a horrible, one sided agreement that looks a lot like Trump gave in to Iran's original demands from February.

With the ongoing disaster in Iran, hopefully Cuba is off the table. Now that the world knows all they need to do is stand up to Trump, and he crumbles. There is no reason to take the chance of being embarrassed in our own backyard.