White House Reviews Military Plans against Iran

[Indus Pakistan]

I don't know, but somehow I have a feeling that US wouldn't go for a direct attack on Iran. Most of the Iranian posters on PDF also appear to entertain same view.

The reason is simple. Americans might seem but are not warmongers. They tend to go that route when they think they can win. The American experiance with Third World countries is they appear to be strong and make lots of noises but they don't have the stamina or unity to fight bloody wars. Iraq proved this and is a case study in how the country dis-united when it came under US attack and even now has not recovered from the cracks that opened up. However Vietnam and Iran have proven to be differant.

That is why despite significant talk after the provocation by Iran from 1979, for instance the US Embasy attack and hostages USA did not launch a full scale war because victory would come at very high cost in American lives. You can see the example of Iranian ability to fight and suffer crippling losses in Iraq/Iran war where Iranians would send waves of 10s of thousands in suicidal infantry attacks against Iraqi defences but even after these human waves would get mowed down by Iraqi MG fire, more waves would follow until literally the defences were swamped. The cost in blood was astronomical. Entire generation of Iranian males were wiped out.

This sort of dedication has only been observed in Vietnam and the PLA attack against US/UN forces in the Korean War in 1952. In the latter the Chinese tidal wave of infantry threw US forces back and only a overwhelming air support that decimated the PLA human waves brought some order in US Army lines.

The Americans know this and for this reason will attack every other ME country but Iran. Instead they will try to strangle it or maybe carry out precision air strikes. As we see happening.

@Beast @Viet

 

[SIPRA]

The reason is simple. Americans might seem but are not warmongers. They tend to go that route when they think they can win. The American experiance with Third World countries is they appear to be strong and make lots of noises but they don't have the stamina or unity to fight bloody wars. Iraq proved this and is a case study in how the country dis-united when it came under US attack and even now has not recovered from the cracks that opened up. However Vietnam and Iran have proven to be differant.

That is why despite significant talk after the provocation by Iran from 1979, for instance the US Embasy attack and hostages USA did not launch a full scale war because victory would come at very high cost in American lives. You can see the example of Iranian ability to fight and suffer crippling losses in Iraq/Iran war where Iranians would send waves of 10s of thousands in suicidal infantry attacks against Iraqi defences but even after these human waves would get mowed down by Iraqi MG fire, more waves would follow until literally the defences were swamped. The cost in blood was astronomical. Entire generation of Iranian males were wiped out.

This sort of dedication has only been observed in Vietnam and the PLA attack against US/UN forces in the Korean War in 1952. In the latter the Chinese tidal wave of infantry threw US forces back and only a overwhelming air support that decimated the PLA human waves brought some order in US Army lines.

The Americans know this and for this reason will attack every other ME country but Iran. Instead they will try to strangle it or maybe carry out precision air strikes. As we see happening.

@Beast @Viet

Agree. That appears to be the case.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Agree

The reason is most Muslm countries are 'soft states' despite on the face of it appearing as strong and with impressive militaries. I would include Pakistan in this caegory and exlude Turkey and Iran ~ both of which have proven track record of having unity and stamina in face of long and bloody wars.

The problem is just underneath the surface these countries are just cobbled up bunch of ethnic groups, sects, religious denominations, tribal groups etc and are riven by fractures/cracks. In any war when these countries come under sustained pressure [I mean wars that are protracted with heavy losses in lives] they begin to crack as groups start turning on each other. Then they crack up along the divisions that pre-existed. Without going into detail you already know where the fracture lines are in Pakistan and where cracks would appear in any long lasting war.

This has not happened thus war because Pakistan has never been inany protracted war. Instead these are weeks long affairs. Like 'fast food' wars which do not have the tme for pressure to build up that might begin to cause cracks to appear.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Yes it is but the Iranians have time again shown that unlike Arabs when they come under pressure the unite ~ a trait shared with Turks. More the threat and more they will rally around and ignore their differances. The previous 40 years have amply demonstrated that.

That's why I think Iran can sustain pressure f liu r some time they need to distract the Americans perhaps call up buddy Maduro in Caracas to stir something up lol
. I am praying that somehow Iran can avert this conflict and can make some level of reconciliation with this orange colored baboon.[/QUOTE]

It's not orange baboon fault tho I pin it mostly on Pompeo and Bolton if Trump can meet with Kim Jong Un and the North Koreans he can met the Mullahs in Tehran the question is how much he can avoid listening to folks like Pompeo,Bolton and all those Evangelical Christian doofus the mestazize his administration and vote base

 

[Hack-Hook]

There is a difference between to stop work on the nuclear program and accelerating it.. which means enriching Uranium more than for civilian use..Allowed by UN sanctions..

UN sanction ,don't allow any enrichment but they were scrapped .