Exactly, Iran’s only hope of not being bombed any time the U.S. or Israel wants resides not on beating them at the air combat game, but to demonstrate that the consequences are costlier than they want to pay.
Alternatively they could surrender unconditionally and let Donald Trump select their leaders but for some reason they seem disinclined to take that option…
A third alternative: Sitting down in the negotiating table and hammer out a compromise which it all parties could live, is precluded by the lack of reliable negotiating partners…
This is how the IRGC clears mines:
That’s why some of us think that the regime has to go.
It’s not just mines, and my Navy experience and knowledge suggests that mines are just a relatively small part of the risk. When you hold territory along that strait, it’s just ridiculously easy to threaten shipping continuously with very, very low cost. Really, all you need are speedboats and small arms. You don’t even need drones. Just send guys out with RPGs and machine guns, and you’re doing big damage to global trade. That’s one of the big reasons why this war was so stupid - because of how easy it is for Iran to gum up foreign trade.
I suspect that’s the main reason Iran has not completely flushed the strait with mines.
They are using small numbers so it can be both a threat and not so hard to clean afterwards.
Iran is still using the Strait to ship oil to China.
Closing the Strait is really their only card to play and it is a good one. If they can disrupt economies, then affected countries (e.g. China and Saudi Arabia) will start to pressure the US in their own ways.
If they are not completely stupid they will have a map indicating where the mines are. They can make a lot of money in demining services, and guess who is gonna pay for that? Hint: It’s not the Mexicans.
That is not exactly what the link says. It says the USA might have problems clearing away the mines on their own in a short time. Locating the mines is one big obstacle. The Iranian Navy should know where they dropped the mines.
That happened indeed when Saddam Hussein attacked Iran (with the blessings of the USA, BTW. The current illegitimate president is not the first, nor the second, nor the third… illegitimate president to make a stupid mistake in that region). But those were landmines, seamines are different. On one hand, they don’t react to children, they are not magnetic. On the other, Iran should know where they are, which they did not know then.
Oh, it’s about the children now! Iranian children! You could have said that 45 years ago.
You almost make it sound like you believed I was on Iran’s side. To make this very clear one more time: I am not. I consider the ayahlollahs and mullahs a murderous group of fanatic despicable assholes. I could go on for a while, but you get the general idea.
But I also think that the USA and Israel are being short sighted hypocrites. Again.
I don’t want to wheigh one war crime against a crime against humanity. You can’t right a wrong with another wrong.
Also the second option doesn’t work for the same reason the third doesn’t; they have no reason to think that unconditional surrender would stop either Trump or Israel from attacking them. Or would accept a compromise of any sort.
It worked for Venezuela.
For now. Iran is Muslim however, and therefore unlike Venezuela a permanent target of the US.
And the USA has more scores to settle with Iran than with Venezuela.
No, it does not matter who started when.
Not that Venezuela is lacking those scores to settle too, mind you, just think of Hugo Chávez saying at the UN that it smelled of sulfur, but there is still a big difference. Some orders of magnitude.
Moderating:
This is definitely too broad a topic to be discussed in this thread, if you wish to continue a discussion on this assertation, please create your own thread to do so. No warnings, but let’s all be careful about the current focus.
How to Reply as a linked Topic
Click Reply, in the upper left corner of the reply window is the reply type button, looks like a curving arrow point to the right.
Choose Reply as linked topic and it starts a new thread. As an example, you can choose GD, IMHO or The Pit for it.
That is actually the best method.
We have a misunderstanding here, if the current regime unconditionally surrendered and let Trump govern their country the bombing would cease.
It would just require them to let their country became a de facto U.S. colony, something that surely is not against everything they have ever stood for, fought for and worked for…
An American KC-135 tanker has gone down.
I haven’t seen any news outlets bring up the fact that Iran attacked 540 tankers/ships and completely sank 30 in the Strait of Hormuz during 1980’s Tankers War . This is why there is a 5th fleet in Bahrain. After 3 years of Iran bombing ships the US stepped in and it took almost three years for Iran to capitulate.
Aircraft loss.
Mentioned 2 posts above.
No identification of affected unit or homebase, no information about casualties or cause, other than “not hostile action”. So mechanical issue, pilot error, that kind of thing.
There was another plane involved. So a collision, most likely with an aircraft it was refueling.
What I read was that the second plane was another KC-135. An update in that article states:
So, it’s quite possible to have been a mishap during a tanking operation, even if both A/C were KC-135s (as at least one is an RT variant, capable of receiving as well as dispensing fuel).
Crew of 6 with no parachutes on board.
Minimum crew is only three – pilot, copilot, boom operator (fuel transfer operator/loadmaster).
Who do you expect the other three to be?