yyetttt
BANNED
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2011
- Messages
- 1,507
- Reaction score
- 0
So how many moving/maneuvering sea targets has Iran successfully hit?
We know. We are in the ISI/CIA.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So how many moving/maneuvering sea targets has Iran successfully hit?
So the US would mistake an Iranian ballistic missile used as anti-ship for a nuclear attack.... hmm..... something wrong with the logic here.
Did you power these? Amazing!
How can you mistake a ballistic missile in an anti-ship role for an Iranian nuclear missile when you know that if the Iranians really had a nuclear missile, Tel Aviv would be gone by now?Oh whats wrong with this logic. In your words we don't know Iran's true capabilities and they may in fact have ballistic missiles equipped with nukes already. Think before you speak.
That is because Islamists took over in Turkey, putting Islam above their country.
Or so it seems ... it might be just rhetoric.
I am not saying it is bad to have regional solidarity.
It would be great for all countries of Middle East to stand together against those that wish them ill.
However, in practice, we have seen that when Iran became anti-Israel, no one followed Iran.
In fact, regional countries took advantage of that to stab Iran in the back (Iraq, Saudi Arabia).
Maybe Iran went badly about it ...
I don't know ...
But since there is no solidarity among countries in the middle east
(it might take a few decades for them to develop the kind of solidarity Europeans have)
Iran should take care of its own first, and not care for any other country in the region.
Because every other country in the region is only going to take advantage of that to gain superiority over Iran, by sucking up to US or others outside the region.
Now my guess is that Turkey is just playing games.
They are positioning themselves as a model for Arabs to follow ...
a model suggested by US to counter IRan
Israel and US both know that Turkey is playing along and not serious ...
Turkey is doing this to attract sunni Arabs on their side
In order to weaken Iran
Again, it supports my point of view
Everyone to themselves
Iran should not care about anyone but Iran
Because everyone in the region is a backstabber
Turkey has done a much better job than Iran
In that it cares only about Turkey and no one else
Nationalists they are, and they dont give a damn about ideology
That is why their country has made tremendous progress
Now, they are not ideological yet, I dont believe it
It is just a game to weaken Iran
As I said Iran should take care of itself
Or else Turkey and Arabs will take good care of Iran
By watching Iran slide down into hell and laughing all the way
How does this change things in the rest of the world if Iran wins the battle? Remember the US for all intents and purposes lost South Vietnam to North Vietnam, that didn't change the greater affairs of things. Come to think of it, winning that war was predicated on the same domino effect idea that you give, that if Iran falls next will be Russia, then China. The thing is I don't see the Chinese or Russians saying this.
As of October 2008, China,[1] India[2] and North Korea[3] have publicly declared their commitment to no first use of nuclear weapons.
NATO has repeatedly rejected calls for adopting NFU policy,[4] arguing that preemptive nuclear strike is a key option. In 1993, Russia dropped a pledge given by the former Soviet Union not to use nuclear weapons first. In 2000, a Russian military doctrine stated that Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons "in response to a large-scale conventional aggression".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_first_use
I became Secretary of State, they were trying to basically appease the Pakistani Taliban who were attacking them. So they were trying to draw a distinction between the good terrorists and the bad terrorists, because we had funded the good terrorists together.
Referring to the support US provided to these insurgent groups during the fight against the Russians in Afghanistan, Clinton said when she meets Pakistani officials, they rightly say, "You're the ones who told us to cooperate with these people. You're the ones who funded them.
http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/...-terror-groups-against-india-us/1/153324.html
Iran is a country with valuable resources and lots of money. so incase of a war it can finance itself, the bigger question is, can USA do the same ?It will be foolish for Iran to attack the US Fleet. Japan made that mistake and did win the first round of the battle at Pearl Harbor, but then US finished the last round.
US Naval Fleet is very powerful and Iran's Forces will be no match for a long term conflict.
You mean the resources of the native indians ?^ USA has more resources than Iran, buddy.
How does this change things in the rest of the world if Iran wins the battle? Remember the US for all intents and purposes lost South Vietnam to North Vietnam, that didn't change the greater affairs of things. Come to think of it, winning that war was predicated on the same domino effect idea that you give, that if Iran falls next will be Russia, then China. The thing is I don't see the Chinese or Russians saying this.
^^ with what money ? you are broken, in debt