we're fucked

daww what a cute toy. i want one for screwing around inna lake.

>>11381482
>>11381514

Fuckin screen capped.

If the USA invaded Iran, Iran would be able to put enough fight to win a few conventional battles, kill a lot of USA troops and embarrass the US military but would lose in the end and put up the worst insurgency since Vietnam except it would be even worse then that.

>>11381544

couldn't we just fly small remote control jets you get from hobby shops with a small explosive charge into them

>>11381524
You can probably build them in your garage.

That's what Iran does.

http://youtu.be/qTIoezhRS3g

>>11381544
nah, that's just a battlekid's wet dream. also the plot of bf3.

>>11381544

yeah, ok kid.

>>11381579
>>11381577
> Implying that human waves and gas attacks won't cause tremendous US dead
> Implying Murrica strong
Face it, Iran will be the only country with a relatively capable military you will have fought in 30 or 40 years. They have a good airforce, navy and Army with capable tanks and they WILL use gas against the Americans.

>They have a good airforce, navy and Army with capable tanks

I don't even have a reaction image...

Iran's Air Force consists of F-14's that haven't seen servicing in decades. Iran's Navy consists of these boat looking mother fuckers (and pic related).

>>11381601

>human waves
>implying that works against a modern army

I know its your wet dream to see the US embarrassed, but its not gonna happen kid.

>>11381601
>implying it wouldn't be just Desert Storm II, followed by a long as fuck insurgency where most of the US casualties would occur when we are forced to become a police force

>>11381601
>implying that as soon as the iranian military gets something to do the sunni and shia won't start killing each other, even more than already

>>11381625
> Implying they don't service their planes
Hurr Durr
> Comment on Navy
I'll give you that one but they can mine the straits fast enough to cause market failure
>>11381629
The human waves come when they start to get desperate and I don't care how "Modern Armies" can instantly destroy them because when you have 12 million basji militia either running at you or hiding for an insurgency you WILL take casualties.
>>11381632
> Implying Iran is Iraq
>2012

>>11381658

0/10. was hoping you were legit.

>>11381672
Alright I don't even see what I did that could actually be taken as trolling.

>>11381658
>> Implying they don't service their planes
...they don't.

No nation will send them F-14 parts and they can only manufacture very few of those parts. Only 30 or so of their F-14's are even flyable.

The Iranian air force isn't good by any metric.

>>11381658
remember how well human waves worked in ww1, winter war, and stalingrad?

>>11381704
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_the_Iranian_Air_Force

>>11381707
>stalingrad
>implying

>>11381704
I can't even begin to imagine the condition those engines are in. The Iranians are in no way shape or form capable of constructing any vital components for them. They're ticking time bombs.

>>11381707
These aren't the type of human waves were everyone runs at machine gunners with bolt actions, these are the type of waves were semi trained militia armed with automatic weapons use cover and move and other basic tactics against a more well trained well equipped force, they would probably work the better trained and equipment conventional forces.
>>11381704
Even so the USAF is not used to fighting against it's own craft plus they have F-4s and SU-24Ms.

>>11381751
>Even so the USAF is not used to fighting against it's own craft
I don't think it matters considering the poor poor shape those aircraft will be in. Also, ever heard of Red Flag, or any other war game for that matter? US pilots are constantly flying against US planes.

>plus they have F-4s and SU-24Ms.
Are you trying to convince me the Iranian air force is good or bad with that statement?

>>11381751
That's not even counting the Russian "advisors" they are likely to get. Pakistan also vowed to back them up, and India will get in on that if it happens. Hint: India and Pakistan have nukes. No one wants a war in Iran, seriously it would be a shitfest.

Pic related, a feat of Iranian engineering.

They managed to hang an old Hawk SAM off one of the underwing pylons.

>>11381779

Don't be stupid. No one is going to start lobbing nukes over goddamned iran.

>>11381772
I'm just saying they'll probably manage a few kills and make it unsafe for A-10s,B-52s, B-2s and Apaches.

>>11381779
>Hint: India and Pakistan have nukes
You honestly believe India or Pakistan, or any nation for that matter, would launch nukes over an invasion of Iran?

>>11381791
It's Pakistan and India we are talking about. They will look for any excuse to nuke the other. This is already retarded.

>>11381794
>I'm just saying they'll probably manage a few kills
With what?!

You are seriously overestimating the capability of these aircraft. Nearly every single piece of technology on them is from the 70's. If any NATO aircraft are brought down it will be because of Russian or Chinese influence, but even then it will be pretty rare.

>>11381794
And that's assuming they will have capable pilots! Chances are they on the verge of falling apart and are restricted to a load of 3 Gs, which means little combat training for their pilots.

>>11381805
Okay now you're just being silly, I don't care how shitty the Iranian airforce is they are still going to manage to down a NATO plane if you won't even admit that you're just being MURRICA INERADICABLE

>>11381821
If you haven't trained to fight your jet aggressively then you're in for a big surprise when ya go cranium-2-cranium with someone who has. I'm not saying the Iranian Tomcat pilots are slouches. But if they try to get into an engagement with someone who's had even rudimentary experience at one of our Flag events then it's gonna get real ugly for the Tomcat.

>>11381805
Yeah, probably, or all the fucking SAM sites they have set up there. Seriously, if your leaders have any sense, they will not fight in Iran. Diplomacy will always work better in that area. Plus why would you fight Iran? What would that accomplish but raise oil prices and get another couple of conflicts going?

>>11381824
>they are still going to manage to down a NATO plane
With what????

>>11381834
With their F-14's, SU-24Ms, F-4s and Air defenses

>>11381833
SAM is their only chance of taking down NATO aircraft. Considering SAM is not difficult to counter though, I'm not sure how long that advantage would last.

...hue hue hue hue hue, Phalanx is not impressed.

>>11381842

0/10

why are people forgetting the huge stockpile of surface to air Iran has been amassing for years...? Even if their radar/EWS are taken out by f-22's, youve still got a fuck ton of cheap chinese/russian/iranian domestic produced shoulder launched/easily disguiseable SAM's making it very fucking difficult for apaches and US ground attack air to operate operationally....?

>>11381824
history tends to repeat itself. regardless, in desert shield we were up against over 1 million iraqis but wikipedia that result.

>>11381842
>With their F-14's, SU-24Ms, F-4
Do you not understand just how old those aircraft are? Even in pristine condition they would likely not be capable of taking down most modern aircraft. Then when you take into account the shitty conditions these aircraft are subjected to, and the likely little training their pilots get, it is very very unlikely for what you are saying to take place.

>>11381853
>>11381851
> Apparently F-4s, F-14s and SU-24Ms will just explode once they encounter a American craft

>>11381824
You're a moron. The condition of all of the best Iranian Air Force airplanes can best be described as "used up".

There's no way that their pilots get enough stick time to maintain proficiency.

They don't have AWACs support, the list goes on.

Iraq had better and newer planes, with better trained pilots, and better support systems, and still couldn't score a single air to air kill.

> durr durr iran only has 6 broken F-14s and a few suicide bombers

this is what fox news watching /k/ids actually believe

>>11381805
You are over-estimating your countries shit planes if you actually think that.

>>11381862
Except that Iraqis are probably the most militarily incompetent country on this Earth, they didn't understand tactics or strategy and had shit tanks.

The real problem with fighting an air war against Iran is where we would base our fighter forces out of. Unless we can get Turkey and Saudi Arabia on board, we would going to be limited to whatever the Navy can bring.

>>11381874
Are you fucking kidding me? If you think that Iran IS actually a threat, than you are the Foxnewskid.

>>11381874
refer to
>>11381713

>>11381860

Iraq had those too, and we destroyed them twice with minimal losses.

People seem to completely ignore US military superiority. Its a completely lop-sided fight.

>>11381875
1/10 i replied

>>11381879

If Iran gets nukes they matter. If we or Israel can stop them they go back to being a sand flea that can do little more than fund proxy terrorism at a level that is laughable compared to the Saudi Royal Family.

>>11381867
No, they will explode when they meet an American missile.

And since Iran lacks any real AWACs style support, and the US doesn't, will tend to be before they realize the Americans are there.

Ground based air control radars are easy meat for missile strikes.

>>11381878
Oh yeah, Afghanistan and Iraq aren't part of the long game that started on 911.

>>11381867

Even better; they'll explode before they leave the ground.

>>11381887

are you even reading your own links?

>>11381867
Yeah pretty much.

>>11381879
Iran's T-72's are effectively modernized, and their M1A1's copies are fairly average, their soldiers are trained and religiously motivated plus well armed and equipped, every time the US take a city they would have to deal with ambushes and IEDs every hour and it would effectively stall them.

sure looks like a couple of broken F-14s made of wood eh?

>>11381877

Read up on the Iran/Iraq war. Tell me how Iran is any better. You are fucking STUPID.

>>11381877
Which is why Iraq WON each of their wars with Iran?

>>11381905
F-15 fodder, especially with Iranian pilots.

>>11381903
>>11381903
> Implying the B-2 won't get shot down by the time it gets in Iranian airspace

>>11381878
Israel?

>>11381877
even though they tore through kuwait right up to the saudi border. it's like you think iran has the best military in the wold

>>11381878

You don't realize that Iran and Afghanistan share a border? What the fuck, kid.

>>11381875
>USAF
>Shit planes

0/10.

Go back to buttfuckistan you yropoor.

>>11381932
By what?

By the time the B-2 is in the area, that means all your SAM sites have already been destroyed.

>>11381892
The average retard in /k/ believes that the only thing Iraq ever had in terms of military capability was some camels, trucks and some rocks.. Oh, and their T-72s weren't made from kits sent directly from factories in the USSR but instead were made of tin foil and cardboard.

The sheer amount of historical revisionism in regards to the first gulf war is just astounding.

>>11381930
What the hell are you talking about? They started the war with an advantage and were forced to call a ceasefire because the Iranians where driving them to a stalemate.
>>11381927
> Implying Iran hasn't changed from 1980

>>11381877
Except that the US has trained Iraqis for how many years...
As witnessed by their ability to kill shit loads of their own really efficiently these days.

>>11381932

>implying you have any reason to believe this

Cool post OP.
I think Irans logic is that they can build one for like $20 bucks and zerg a ship with them. The thought of them trying is pretty humorous I guess.

>>11381879

believing a country is capable of defending its own borders from an attack =\= believing a country is on the verge of launching nuclear armageddon on another country halfway around the globe

but of course, republicunts can't into shades of grey

keep on watching hannity & colmes, /k/id

>>11381942
> Implying that Iraqi made T-72s are the same as Soviet/Russian T-72s
Are you fucking kidding me?

>>11381956
>mig-29

Oh, you mean that jet that was routinely destroyed by the F-15?

>>11381900
Neither of them want the sort of shit a shooting war with Iran would bring, given the issue they have just to maintain order. Our best bet would be Israel, but that certainly isn't going to win hearts and minds in the Middle East.

Look, while I agree the Iranian military isn't quite first world, it's always safe to remember never to underestimate your enemy. The Iranian military is still fairly capable, and do remember that these pilots/soldiers/tankers/militia are both insanely religiously motivated and defending their homeland. If we go in there expected a weeks long smash up, we're going to find ourselves in a sticky situation.

>>11381956

Do you honestly believe Iran could defend itself from the US military? You are fucking retarded; and I'm not even an American. You are just dumb.

>>11381960

if they've got over 80 of them they should be able to do some damage before we take them out

not saying they're going to shoot down all of our planes but you and F-22 guy seem to be deluding yourselves into thinking that they've got less than they actually do

>>11381964

>remember that these pilots/soldiers/tankers/militia are both insanely religiously motivated

confirmed for not knowing shit about Iranians.

>>11381954
Fast attack boats are fast attack boats.
Fit one of the swarm with a nuke and the enemy gets to guess which one to fire at.
Bye bye CBG.

>>11381482
Ah a Wing-In-Ground effect vehicle or WIG.

Flies really low to the ground/water on a 'pocket of air', sorta like a starwars landspeeder.

From the looks of it, they aren't weaponized, I assume they are going to be used as some sort of recon craft. Which would make sense, given their high speed.

If Iran goes to war, then this would be the first time an WIG was ever used in war.

>>11381893
The USA has some of the most poorly designed planes. Everything they use is terrible. Especially the F-22 due to it's unfortunate air-problem, melting skin, no armour, lack of ability to dogfight, etc.

>>11381779

>Pakistan and india fighting against america
>implying Pakistan and india arent mortal enemies who's nukes came from an arms race against each other

also pakistan isnt stupid enough to lose the US aid we give them, despite them harboring terrorism like motherfuckers.

>>11381971

defend was probably a poor choice of words. I'm sure they'll put up more of a resistance than iraq did though.

>>11381964
This. I don't like Iran, but that doesn't mean I won't take them lightly.

>>11381971

How are those planes going to get off the ground? We'll do exactly what we did in Libya and send B-2/B-1/cruise missile strikes against their airfields before we every start bombing the fuck out of the rest of their military.

>>11381965
I said they would inflict losses and win a (Probably) low number of battles, I didn't say they'd drive them back into the sea.

>>11381972
Oh Space Jesus I can sense the retardation through the force. You realize Iran is a Theocracy, right? My grandfather served in Iran, and I've heard stories about it all my life. Wile they're certainly not quite fanatical I guarantee you any war would be spun as a religious one by their authorities.

>>11381978

0/10

>>11381978
>The USA has some of the most poorly designed planes. Everything they use is terrible. Especially the F-22 due to it's unfortunate air-problem, melting skin, no armour, lack of ability to dogfight, etc.
0/10

[citation needed]

>>11381986
You do understand that unlike Libya Iran's military core is far away from the sea.

>>11381993

The average Iranian hates their government and does not want to associate with them.

>>11382006

You do understand that B-2s and cruise missiles are easily capable of reaching anywhere in Iran?

>>11382010

I'm sure given a choice between welcoming an invading army, and serving under a government they don't like, they'll choose the invading army

/sarcasm

>>11381964
fucking idiot iranians want to kill their minority population because of religion. they don't give two shits until that's done. iran is a pile of shit with an attitude and that counts for 0 when your planes are crumbling, your rifles are almost 70 years old and your navy is rusting.

>>11382010
The only thing they dislike more than their own government is the US.

>>11382026

From the Iranians that I've met while studying abroad; yes they would. Most Iranians remember the past when the US and Iran were friends, and life in Iran was a much, much better place. The biggest complaint I heard from Iranians about George Bush was that they were pissed he went after Saddam, INSTEAD of Ahmadinejad.

If you think most Iranians will be loyal to their government, you're delusional and naive; but what else should i expect from the basement dwelling idiots on here?

>>11382036
>G3s
> 70 years old
Why are you on /k/

Everyone here keeps forgetting that they'll use gas against the USA too

>>11381978
lololol where did you think your holy f-14 came from, also f-15

>>11382036

Glen Beck listener? Keep eating that shit up.

>>11382058
>Everyone here keeps forgetting that they'll use gas against the USA too

Iran using gas on the US is a free pass for the US to use whatever the fuck it wants on Iran.

>>11382058
He's talking air to air. Think they're going to launch gas clouds over their bases or some shit?

>>11382006

Yes, but bombs and cruise missiles tend to be able to go farther than the ocean.

Also on the question of where to be based where the war happens. Northern iraq would be ok. Saudi arabia is total fucking enemies with Iran. They want, in the king's words, to cut the head off the snake. Different islam.

Turkey is our ally as well.

>>11382071
Do you really think the regime will care if it's losing?

>>11382085

The people who actually have to carry out the orders may care.

>>11382053

yes because of course, exile communities who fled their homeland because it sucked for them can present a realistic survey of what the average person believes back home

inb4 you accuse me of liking glenn beck, or islamic theocracy, or whatever else suits your argument

>>11381959
>>11381959
They were identical in. Terms of standard armor protection. They only differed in optics and ammunition. To say otherwise tows remarkable ignorance of the T-72s they received from the Soviets.

Perhaps you're thinking of the indigenous Lion of Babylon tank instead?

>>11382069
Sorry no, liberal here. And I suppose I should qualify that. They like the US well enough (the younger ones at least), but they are dead-set against becoming a US-occupied territory.

>>11382101

>who fled their homeland

nope, they still lived in iran. They were studying abroad.

>>11382058
>>11382085

Honestly, yes. Weapons of mass destruction would allow us to use weapons of mass destruction against them. A VX nerve gas attack on a US base would be the end of iran. A hellfire which has not been since the end ofg WWII.

>>11382127
Just image the butthurt if they managed to strike at a large amount of bases and the people weren't protected, that'd be in the tens of thousands

>>11381920

Fucking idiot, those are MiG-29's. Cant you see the R-27's, R-73's and the very noticeable look of the aircraft?

>>11381842
>war begins
>US/NATO opening move: massive B2 rush on known SAM emplacements
>F22 keeps Iranian fighters away
>SEAD out the ass

Phase 2: in which the majority if Iran's high-end SAMs are gone
>USA fills the sky with B52s
>Tomcats show up
>40% of missiles fail completely
>F15C/F22A annhialate 40-60% of tomcats off the bat
>Iranian F4 takes down single F22 before spontaneously exploding
>the incident is the subject of intense debate for decades, /k/ dynamically shits itself

Phase 3: Gulf War Redux Part 2 Director's Cut SPECIAL COLLECTORS EDITION
>joint coalition force invades
>bloody march to the capital
>china makes a surprise visit to the theatre but doesnt do much
>USA fucks off as soon as mission accomplished to avoid another shitty occupation

>>11382150

how's that aspergers treating you?

>>11382143
Your whole argument, since the beginning has been based on hypothetical situations. To save face, just stop now.

>What if he doesn't though? Then we'll have to sit and watch as his ideas keep getting shot down over and over again.
>Iranian aircraft reference, anyone?

>>11382127 Weapons of mass destruction would allow us to use weapons of mass destruction against them.

Yes, but I doubt we would. WMDs are a pain in the ass to use with a lot of civilian casualties, and it's not like we would need them to win. Might as well keep the moral high-ground with the international community. It would definitely let us escalate the level of force though.

>>11382058
i'll leave this here,

Under the United States policy of Proportional Response, an attack upon the United States or its Allies would trigger a force-equivalent counter-attack. Since the United States only maintains nuclear Weapons of Mass Destruction, it is the stated policy that the United States will regard all WMD attacks (Biological, Chemical, or Nuclear) as a nuclear attack and will respond to any WMD attack with a nuclear strike.

>>11382163

Fuck you nigger. That fucking guy fucking implied those MiG-29's were F-14's and i cant fucking stand that, that people can be so fucking wrong.

You HAVE to be retarded to NOT see the difference.

>>11382143
Indeed. Thousands upon thousands of US soldiers would die. Basically wipe out the bases entirely.

But of course the millions of Iranians killed when weapons of mass destruction are authorized will be a nice rebuttal.

tens of thousands of Americans dead and a hell fire never before seen in human history. An entire country laid to waste.

I dont think theyre that stupid, but if they are, I want a montage like at the end of dr strangelove.

Gentlemen, please, calm yourselves! The odds of a war in Iran are minuscule, to say the least! Of course, we don't know what our ever-so-helpful Israeli allies are planning, that may wind up drawing us into a fight, but I guarantee the US won't go and start another war.

Though, I wouldn't say they'd roll over. I don't know about F-22 guy, but I'd bet the Iranian ground forces wouldn't go down without a fight. And that's not even beginning to mention the utter shitshow an offensive through Iranian terrain would be. 600,000 square miles of mountains errwhere, most of them 10,000 feet high, large expanses of desert, no doubt some pleasant weather, and enough built up, urban areas of impressive size to make things a slog. Add in the hybrid-style warfare they'd use, with a mix of conventional and assymetric tactics, and it would be a slog.

So yeah, if you're in a goddamn plane, I'm sure it would be so much fun. If you're like me, you'd be on the ground, on line, and looking up at a 10,000 foot tall beehive of MG nests, with another 10,000 foot tall beehive of MG nests behind it.

>>11382162 >F22 keeps Iranian fighters away

Based from where?

>>11382188

lol, you're too much

seriously though?

you're just fucking with me right?

>>11382181

Future is grim tho. Thanks to a president hell bent on dismantling the nuclear arsenal, while other nations such as Russia and China are producing new warheads and ICBMs.

An Defense News article just came up today, saying all US experts with actual testing experience will retire within 5 years.

>>11382162
Can you imagine all the movies they would make?

>>11382053

You were talking to Iranians outside the country, weren't you?

Those people are usually the rich or escaped the revolution and therefore don't really care what happens to Iran because they won't be there being dragged to the front lines by their government.

In Iran, we know our freedom is being suppressed and yes life was better under the Shah.

But they also remember how America backstabbed them, funding Iraq to fight them.

People here would like a regime change or at least a slight change in its current policies, but most are not stupid enough to think America is the answer, especially after what we've seen with Iraq and Afghanistan. 'Freeing' us by starting another war will be like cutting off a man's leg because he complained about his toe itching.

>>11382204
>>11382204
Iraq, Saudi, Kuwait, Afghanistan, India, Diego Garcia, lots of choices.

>>11382203

Who said ground invasion is compulsory in a war?

>>11382209

You are rustling my jimmies to the very core. I dont like that and you should be ashamed.

Pic = MiG-29 like the ones @ >>11381920.

>>11382204
any of the almost dozen of countrys that border or are near Iran that would/have to let US put planes on their soil.

>>11382221
My god that is a beautiful photo. I want to stick my dick in it. I have never been sexually attracted to an inanimate object this way before.

>>11382234
Oh, you think you can subdue an enemy without ground forces? It's never happened, bub. Every war we've fought has had some sort of ground force to take and hold the territory. Even Kosovo and Libya had rebel armies on the ground. You can hide from bombs, and pop back out when the bombing is done. And at the end of the day, you still hold your territory, as no one has come to take it from you.

>>11382221
Hey f-22 guy, is that trip for lulz, or do you really fly f-22's?

>>11382217
Yeah, because the what, 5,000 nuclear warheads the US has aren't enough?

If this war with Iran does happen, you better get ready to put on your zergface, because fucking momo's like you are going to make up the first wave.

>>11382256
That's why the aussies lost the emu war.

>>11382258
Just an enthusiast.

>>11382240

well that's a surprise, I thought it was funny that a wooden F-14 came up under a google image search for "iranian mig 29"

spoiler: I'm the one who first started bitching about migs ITT
spoiler2: you have level 10 aspergers and cannot into sarcasm

>>11382233 Iraq
nope

> Saudi
probably not

> Kuwait
maybe

> Afghanistan
nope

> India
lawl, no

> Diego Garcia
too far

>>11382265
ahh, kk.

>>11382245
Not for a shooting war. Iran would have to do something extra egregious to piss off the international community, and they seem content to sit back and wait for us to come to them.

>>11382273

Why 'probably not'' for Saudi Arabia?

You remember those wikileaks.

Those Sunni arabs hate Iran so much that they requested the US to attack Iran.

Also all UAE, Bahrain etc.

A land so cooked with nuclear fire that even the earth itself will catch flame.

The air will be so thick with radiation that no life will be seen in Iran until the end of time itself.

Oh how great it will be to look back on, the defining moment that showed how one nation on this earth deemed a part of the earth undesirable, and then obliterated it.

I will tell me grandchildren this story. I will tell them how dark and exciting a moment seeing a second sun on earth was. I will tell them how even bacteria will not form in Iran anymore for fear of another nuclear response. It will be horrifying, it will be the essence of fear itself, and it will be glorious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxrWz9XVvls

>>11382306

I like you.

>>11381558
lol, propeller prop, open cockpit,

>and dat subtly sped up production video

>>11382226

There is a large displaced Iranian population in the US who GTFO when the Shah fell akin to the Cubans who bailed out and lost everything when Castro took over.

>>11382306
please

>>11382341
why do you do this to my testicles

>>11382306
You will be telling this to your grandchildren from a cave, or the shattered ruins of some building.

Because the rest of the world would finally decide that it is sick and tired of the US's shit too, and do something about them.

>>11382273

Saudi Arabia is a yes, Kuwait is a yes, bitch we own Iraq and Afghanistan and India is a hell yes.

India hates Iran, and Pakistan, and all of those fucks up north that are hell bent on trying to destroy them. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait hate them as well. Iraq and Afghanistan would have to say yes. I can see karzai saying no but then us going back into afghanistan to squash the inevitable iranian refugees.

>>11382347
If you're insinuating a nuclear response from other nations, they have a name for that. It's called the end of the world.

>>11382362
Nuclear response? Nah.

Embargoes, embargoes everywhere. Thousands of them. Then war, when the US inevitable tries to muscle its way back on to the top, probably by trying to invade Canada or Mexico.

>>11382262

5000 warheads? yea right,

Google up. '' To that goal, U.S. President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed a new START treaty on April 8, 2010 to reduce the number of active nuclear weapons from 2,200 to 1,550.''

And now the pentagon is even planning to reduce it to between 300 and 1100.

And did I mention, all the ICBMs and warheads are ageing with no new replacements in sight?

>>11382203
Exactly. Iraq was easy because it's mainly desert and plane land. Enabling quick advance with the tanks and good air support.

In Iran the terrain is mountains, deserts and large cities, european style, with lots of >10stories buildings. So where would the invasion start?
The Iraq border, where defenses are already built and the terrain is mountains.
Afgan border? Desert, no roads, looks good for tanks but logistics and man morale, not so good.

It's though terrain. USA already has trouble fighting talibans in Afghanistan because of the steep terrain. And they think they can fight Iran on even worst ground?
Sure, they can, but this isn't like Iraq. It won't be fast. No Modern Blitzkrieg here.
Will be another vietnam.

>>11382393
.....wat.

Are...you on drugs? Why would invading mex-...

You know what, never mind.

Keep living the dream, buddy. So few are left that are as willfully ignorant as yourself. It must be beautiful.

>>11382347

Funny story, because they wont. The use of wmd's will be justified completely. Also, the world enjoys our shit. The whole anti American thing is blown over with you euro children/idiots. Could it be that we do more good to the world than harm. Yes. Honestly think, I mean it will be hard for anti American idiots, but honestly think what the world will be like without America. Now imagine what the world would be like without Europe. It would suck. If we didn't have Europe it would suck, and if you didn't have America it would suck.

>>11382400
So the US would only be able to destroy the world 10 times over, instead of 25?

>exposed engine
>props

>A-10

lol