US & Israel attack Iran

you-maniacs-you-blew-it-up-planet-of-the-apes-statue-of-liberty-taylor-you-maniacs-you-blew-it-up.gif
 
argyle said:
I think our government is thinking that he'll only be in power for another 3 years and thinks will return to normal afterwards.

We've strategically aligned our security with the US which isn't as easy to undo as some might suggest. That will take time if it's to happen.

I'm in agreement, I'd like us closer to Europe but that will get the right and the far-right up in arms about things.

It's a real shit situation and no matter what the government does they'll be pissing people off.
Click to expand...
Siding with the US was always a strategic mistake as they've always been too gung ho about invading or bombing other countries. Even if in an alternate reality Trump hadn't been elected, sooner or later it was going to bite them in the arse. I'd rather not be bitten.
 
argyle said:
America and Isreal did this unilaterally. They haven't given a crap about what anyone else wanted and you think our government demanding them to stand down will do anything? Spain's leader has and what has that achieved?

Our government can't rewind time, they would wish that Trump's government didn't do this but they have and we have to manage the fallout. We're no fans of Iran, they're a horrible despotic regime. So we've stayed out of it.

But we've allowed use of airpots as we can't go fully against America because we rely on them for security in other parts of the world. It's a shit situation. But our government needs to balance things.

Under Trump they are unstable and we've taken the choice not to join the war but also not to rock the boat. That's an understandable position. It might not please the far left who want to grandstand but that won't achieve anything other than recieving likes and retweets.
Click to expand...
Where does one draw the line though. If the US invade Greenland or Canada. Maybe even then we would utter platitudes not wanting to rock the boat. Suppose we do what we did in WW2 i.e. nothing until it became obvious we were going to be in the firing line as well.

I actually think the current US regime is as abhorrent as Hitler and his crew. Some won't see it that way as he's not attacking Europe currently but for me their behaviour is seriously unhinged and what's worse nooneyover there seems able to stop it.
 
Irwell said:
Siding with the US was always a strategic mistake as they've always been too gung ho about invading or bombing other countries. Even if in an alternate reality Trump hadn't been elected, sooner or later it was going to bite them in the arse. I'd rather not be bitten.
Click to expand...

Agreed but until our security services have a rethink and we come off our reliance on fossil fuels then we're stuck not wanting to get involved in the war but also not wanting to fully piss off the orange blimp currently in power.
 
argyle said:
Agreed but until our security services have a rethink and we come off our reliance on fossil fuels then we're stuck not wanting to get involved in the war but also not wanting to fully piss off the orange blimp currently in power.
Click to expand...
It isn't stopping other countries that have fossil fuel dependence from saying no to him. In fact them saying no is meaning their ships can pass through the straight and bring them those fossil fuels.
 
robbieh said:
There's a lot of they are all as bad as each other stuff going on in here.

The reality is that whilst N.Korea is an authoritarian state, as is Iran, and they treat their own people worse than democratic countries, they are not about to invade anyone.
China are not our western cup of tea but have not invaded anyone for a long time. Russia have invaded a perceived threat on their border. I am not saying that is acceptable but it is a very different order of magnitude to what the US is doing. Attacking a country half way across the globe. As MTG points out Iran hasn't dropped a single bomb on the US but Trump is talking of wiping out a civilization.

And then there is Israel which is a sort of mini me except they are in charge. A country that in the name of defending itself is constantly attacking Lebanon and the people living under martial law in Palestine. But even so like Russia they are attacking people , wrongly in my view, in their own vicinity.

So by some distance the US is the biggest problem on planet earth and has been for some time. As someone alluded to, the combination of an innate superiority mixed with an inferiority complex, makes them dangerous. And the fact they've got a maniac in charge is just making things far worse.

Hopefully he is bluffing.
Click to expand...
Whilst I agree on the appalling nature of what the US is doing, you seriously downplay how civilians are treated in North Korea, Iran, China etc. the former two much worse than China. Putin’s war on The Ukraine is less an issue for global markets and oil supply internationally, although still serious, but the Ukrainian government aren’t even remotely on the same planet as the Ayatollah and Iran’s regime. Zelenskyy is actually a good man, in a sea of utter cunts leading nation states today. They weren’t a perceived threat, they just so happen to be within what Putin sees as his nation’s right to territory, in his warped vision of the USSR Empire.
 
bridgeno1 said:
Hypothetically if the US nuked Tehran, radiation would spread to Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Pakistan (nuclear armed), Uzbekistan, Tajikistan with lower traces spreading to India and China (both nuclear armed).

If they nuked a site in the Person Gulf then the GCC countries would be affected.

For these reasons I can't see it happening.
Click to expand...
Not entirely true. It depends on the yield and more importantly how its detonated. Ground burst would cause the effects you mentioned as the radioactive isotopes mix with the debris but airburst, which is what would be used if you wanted to destroy a city, wouldnt spread anywhere near that far as the radioactive isotopes would remain in the upper atmosphere and become dispersed, but overall resulting in much lower levels of radiation. If it was detonated over Tehran, god forbid yes it would be detectable in other countries but not at dangerous levels.

Lets hope to god for everyone that the orange idiot doesn't even consider it, never mind use one.
 
Kompany Car said:
Not entirely true. It depends on the yield and more importantly how its detonated. Ground burst would cause the effects you mentioned as the radioactive isotopes mix with the debris but airburst, which is what would be used if you wanted to destroy a city, wouldnt spread anywhere near that far as the radioactive isotopes would remain in the upper atmosphere and become dispersed, but overall resulting in much lower levels of radiation. If it was detonated over Tehran, god forbid yes it would be detectable in other countries but not at dangerous levels.

Lets hope to god for everyone that the orange idiot doesn't even consider it, never mind use one.
Click to expand...
Suspect they'll use bunker busters etc. Tactical nukes are aimed at hitting concentrated troops formations, carrier fleets etc, none of which are in Iran presently.

TBH Iran is an absolutely despotic state guided by religious ideology. And the less said about the current Israeli administration the better.

Fuck Trump and also fuck radical religion which basically is a reflection of tribalism in the human condition, which filters down to us mere mortals in how we support football clubs. Tribalism will be our downfall, albeit most football fans aren't prepared to die for the cause!
 
Irwell said:
It isn't stopping other countries that have fossil fuel dependence from saying no to him. In fact them saying no is meaning their ships can pass through the straight and bring them those fossil fuels.
Click to expand...
Flagging and ownership is complicated but the Strait is full of ships and sailors from countries that played no role in the war. A lot of those sailors are Chinese, Indian, or from other unallied Asian countries because that's where most Hormuz oil goes.
 
WT86 said:
Flagging and ownership is complicated but the Strait is full of ships and sailors from countries that played no role in the war. A lot of those sailors are Chinese, Indian, or from other unallied Asian countries because that's where most Hormuz oil goes.
Click to expand...
Agreed, it wouldn't completely resolve the situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top