Iranians have no reason to trust the United States on a good day, and less when Trump is in charge.
War with...Iran?
- Thread starter Technarch
- Start date
The military build up near Iran is... At least worrying? It seems that the US might be closer to an actual war than I had previously realized. The amount of assets the US has moved into the region is staggering (more details in the linked piece).
But the worrying part is that sources from the administration talk about a larger conflict: not a single strike, but rather a campaign aimed at crippling the nuclear program, the missile program and regime change might be on the table.
https://www.axios.com/2026/02/18/iran-war-trump-military-strikes-nuclear-talks
But the worrying part is that sources from the administration talk about a larger conflict: not a single strike, but rather a campaign aimed at crippling the nuclear program, the missile program and regime change might be on the table.
https://www.axios.com/2026/02/18/iran-war-trump-military-strikes-nuclear-talks
The fallout from the Maduro snatching hasn't been that big, so that might be emboldening Trump.
There dont apear to be any consequences whatsoever for the other regime in the region that has executed probably more than three times that amount. But yeah, they are our good "allies" and a "democracy"
It is almost comical how many times, and for how long, Netanyahu has been assuring everyone that Iran is weeks/days/HOURS away from creating a usable nuclear weapon. But why not...it always seems to work. People who really ought to know better are engaged by this.
Butt of course they dont actually believe it but they know that the masses will. Its the WMD thing again isnt it? And look how well that worked out.
Funny, I was told we had eradicated the Iranian nuclear program last June.
Of course, it was obvious even back then that our unprecedented B-2 strike had eradicated nothing but some recently-vacated holes in the ground, at best. Netanyahu was in the White House last week, presumably communicating this unfortunate reality to Trump and finalizing the details of what's coming.
And the ever fun of "They have to make a deal!" Never mind that they had one... which was broken by previous Trump.
There's the yet-to-be-announced bombshell of a secret Epstein compound and file repository there.
Can they pull off regime change without putting boots on the ground?
Or is it going to be some prolonged insurgency?
Or is it going to be some prolonged insurgency?
There's the yet-to-be-announced bombshell of a secret Epstein compound and file repository there.
Why, is Israel going to airdrop their copy?
And the secret Epstein compound is in New Mexico... but now I've crossed the streams.
Yeah I am pretty sure that Trump is going to bomb Iran by the weekend. There are now 2 carrier groups in striking range of Iran, the Lincoln (Nimitz class) and the Ford, aka the newest and most dangerous CV atm, which also happened to be the CV strike group that was involved in the Venezuela thing. And I don't like to post things from other "forums" here, but this was a post by some redditor in response to Tucker Carlson being detained in Israel thread from earlier today:
Barring the conspiracy stuff, I find the sentiment fits well.
Barring the conspiracy stuff, I find the sentiment fits well.
That's because you're counting Hamas fighters as civilian casualties. Ever conflict has civilian collateral damage, which is not the same as mounting a machine gun to a truck and gunning down protesters. And civilian casualties are higher when fighters use schools and hospitals as bases, which we know has long been Hamas's strategy. We have their leadership on the record that civilian casualties are a PR win for them... they don't care about civilians, which is why they've siphoned off funds to build tunnels and get rockets, rather than develop services for people.
And Iran is absolutely a destabilizing force: you seriously want to tell me the world is better off because we have Hezbollah? Yeah, if only more countries could go through the great transformation that Afghanistan just experienced.
I wouldn't have expected the great lengths people here go to defend the Iranian regime's slaughtering of civilians... it's quite a position to take and really makes me wonder what kind of information environment people are in.
He obviously has an incentive to exagerate, but generally, something happened afterward that reasonably set back the program. For example, they took out the leading researchers, blew up infrastructure, etc. Know-how and infrastructure doesn't come back immediately, which is why you set a program back for months. But there are more scientists and infrastructure can be rebuilt, so you can't end the program through military force. (You can, however, take out a regime that wants to build them.)
If anything, the anti-Israel protests have shown that they don't need to care about what the masses think. A whole lot of them are on the level of "LGBTQIA+ for Palestine!" because Hamas is known for its gender progressive views. And when some of these masses are chanting "globalize the Intifada" outside of synagogues, maybe there are enough reasons to think that ignoring them is the right thing. (Or having laws that ban protests outside of houses of worship, which NYC at least is now considering.)
I have an Iranian colleague whose family is right in the middle of all this.
There hasn't been a time in the past few months where he hasn't been noticeably stressed about his family - except when they came to visit him over the year end break.
There hasn't been a time in the past few months where he hasn't been noticeably stressed about his family - except when they came to visit him over the year end break.
I don't even think they think people believe it. I think they think it gives people who want to go to war against Iran the excuse they're looking for.
This all tracks. Netanyahu is going to get whatever leverage he can out of the Epstein files while he still can, before they're all released. He's probably taking Carlson off the board to cut off a critical information source for Putin. It's just a question of when the Ford CVBG can get into range to defend Netanyahu from Iranian missiles. Should be around Sunday.
But I was told that several hundred million dollar strike we did for our bosses in the Israeli government put an end to their nuclear program entirely????!
Oh my, human shields! Hamas hiding in hospital! Stop with that shit already.
Hezbollah exists because of the belligerance of Israel and its western allies and their constant interference in the region.
And why is it anyones business to do that? Oh yes, its because USA, UK and Israel do not want another nuclear power in the middle east. Especially if it is full of brown people who are not christian or jewish. Iran does not start wars with other countries, or invade them, unlike the afermentioned three.
Yes, that does seem to be the case.
Here you are again with your "holier than thou - we are more civilised than them" nonsense. You have never spent any time in Palestine have you? You really know nothing of it. But this is not the thread for this conversation, if indeed there is one to be had with you.
Intifada just means uprising. You do know that, right?
More or less so than Israel or the Trump administration? Israel just wiped another country off the map and then let Trump take bribes to get in on building a resort on top of the ruins.
Reason to stay the fuck out - we've never succeeded at this, save for one very unique situation.
Unfortunately, with a heavy heart, I think that the plan is to actually put US troops in harm's way to trigger a full war with US public support. Full Gulf of Tonkin style. They want US troops to actually die, the more graphic the better.
It's for misdirection and excuse for Republicans and Zionists to supress dissent. Republicans at risk of losing the midterms and Israel at risk of losing US funding with the loss of US public support with AIPAC supported candidates being primaried.
It's for misdirection and excuse for Republicans and Zionists to supress dissent. Republicans at risk of losing the midterms and Israel at risk of losing US funding with the loss of US public support with AIPAC supported candidates being primaried.
Nope.
Iran has a population of 91 million, and the capital is about 10% of that. It is a large country with army bases all over the place. It is twice the size of Iraq, three times the size of Venezuela (who both have their population concentrated in smaller areas to boot). It is generally well-ordered and stable, quite unlike the basket cases the US tends to invade (Afghanistan, Iraq, even Venezuela to some extent). There is no obvious opposition leader to prop up. This is not going to be as easy as dropping a few bombs.
People get to define themselves, and Hezbollah according to themselves exists to make Israel leave Lebanon. Which they did in 2012, so I'm sure Hezbollah will get the message and disband any day now.
Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy, nothing more and nothing less. No matter how much I detest Trump's actions in the region, Iran needs to stop funding bands of thugs to act as its proxies. See also the Houthis in Yemen.
Nope. It's fine if you don't want to believe it. But we know this as Hamas's strategy long before 2023, and it's hardly a secret. But let's move on from this because it's beyond the scope of the thread.
Hezobllah's stated purpose for existing is to destroy the state of Israel. Yeah, how dare those Jews not drown in the ocean, or something... Israel isn't going anywhere. Its neighbors have started to accept this reality with the Abraham Accords. Iran's continued support for Hezbollah is causing instability in the region.
Yeah, I have no problem claiming our Western society is more civilized than societies that execute women for not wearing a hijab or where gay sex is punishable by death (speaking of Iran, the topic of this thread). Not everything is a matter of cultural relativism... besides, Iran used to be progressive and wealthier than it is today! Clearly, a very large part of the Iranian population wants to return to that, so they would seemingly agree with me.
And jihad just means struggle. Words have meaning beyond their literal translation, and you know this.
Succeeded in largely eliminating Hamas, which I might remind you started the conflict by murdering civilians and taking other hostages. The proportionality is a fun debate to have in the abstract (not really), but there's no country that's going to entertain this idea while maintaining any kind of credibility in the world or with its own population. As much as you might disapprove of the US response to 9/11, no other organization decided to carry out an attack on US soil in the meantime. Disproportionate responses are exactly how you deter future attacks.
And on the topic of Iran, the current US build-up looks like it's going to show what exactly it looks like when a superpower wants to flatten some infrastructure. This is clearly preparation for a weeks-long conflict, not a one-off strike. But it's also likely going to be precision strikes: U.S. Gathers the Most Air Power in the Mideast Since the 2003 Iraq Invasion
I wouldn't be surprised if a decision had already been made and Trump is just playing his usual "I could make a decision at any time, let's see what happens" game. But there are currently also some Russian and Chinese ships in the area for a joint naval exercise... so there may be a reason to hold off for a few more days.
The rest of your post reeks of American exceptionalism and holier than thou thinking, so I'll ignore that part and just respond to the part where you're responding to me. It's not a "fun debate". Other than the US and Israel, it's pretty well considered to be a genocide.
Advocating for disproportionate responses as deterrence is just broken thinking. Moreso when you finally realize you're on the wrong side of history and the majority of the world wants to deter your side. If you can step outside your American exceptionalism and holier than thou mindset, it's easier to realize that.
I mean, people do actually struggle to process multiple atrocities going on at the same time and will tend to focus on one at a time. OTOH, focussing on the numbers is a little strange when you've got atrocities in Sudan that are visible from orbit.
Wait, what?
Really? What world are you living in to believe that Afghanistan has gone through some sort of grand transformation? I mean, this is the most recent news from Afghanistan, published mere hours ago: New Taliban Law Permits Domestic Violence Against Women in Afghanistan. Some transformation that is. And here you are suggesting that it would be great if more countries suffered that kind of transformation? Really?
There are reports that the UK won't let the US use RAF Fairford or Diego Garcia as bases to strike Iran from. Diego Garcia in particular would be very helpful as it would let the US base bombers closer and there wouldn't be any issues with overflying other countries.
https://www.twz.com/news-features/u...ould-impact-bombers-role-in-iran-air-campaign
https://www.twz.com/news-features/u...ould-impact-bombers-role-in-iran-air-campaign
It may be me, but I think his last sentence was sarcastic?Wait, what?
Oh wow, all these years I thought Diego Garcia was a 100% American base/island. Learn something new everyday.
That probably adds a logistical wrinkle to the grand plans. Diego Garcia is (or shall we now say was) an important strategic base for the US military’s global reach.
Strategic assets like the B-2 and B-52 could operate from US bases and rely upon aerial refueling, but in doing so will require more materiel and planning. That will add greater workloads on flight crews and limit operational flexibility.
Strategic assets like the B-2 and B-52 could operate from US bases and rely upon aerial refueling, but in doing so will require more materiel and planning. That will add greater workloads on flight crews and limit operational flexibility.
The UK denying the use of Diego Garcia is a big fucking deal. They had all but given it over to the US to the point where @Buxaroo and I both thought it was a US possession.
One wonders if it is because the UK is pro-Khamenei or anti-pedophile. I'm going to guess the latter.
Jordan has also formally denied the use of its airspace for attacks on Iran, which means the Trump admin is going to be seriously cramped for bases to attack from that aren't in range of lots of Iranian missiles. I suppose they could operate out of Ankara?
It may be neither.
More nations—some of them formerly staunch allies—probably want little to do with the Trump Administration’s foreign adventures. Plenty of long-standing good will has been lost, and regional allies would have to deal with any potential fallout that might get little attention after Trump gets his photo op.
The Venezuela actions were probably a wake up call for many still relying on the succor of normalcy bias.
They can always attack from aircraft carrier group from Arabian Sea /s.
Jordan closing its airspace wouldn't just limit using their bases, it puts up another obstacle to US aircraft flying from elsewhere, such as a carrier in the eastern Mediterranean. If a couple other countries in the region do the same, it could potentially add hours to flight times to go around them all (assuming the US respected the closures, or maybe the announced closures are just public posturing and Jordan and others are secretly in support of the potential attack). Haven't read anything about Turkey yet, and whether they wold support strikes on Iran. Not sure if they would or not given Iran's threats to hit any bases involved in strikes on them.
Seeing as the US has a lot of equipment in the region, and an attack is almost guaranteed at this point, it would be a great time for Iran to launch a pre-emptive strike. Especially if the could catch at least some of the E-3s and F-35s on the ground with a saturation ballistic missile attack.
The Ayatollahs really need to go, but without a coordinated opposition ready to step in, this is not likely to go well at all for the general population. I wonder if how quiet things are in Venezuela has given Trump and co a false sense of confidence in what they can do?
The Ayatollahs really need to go, but without a coordinated opposition ready to step in, this is not likely to go well at all for the general population. I wonder if how quiet things are in Venezuela has given Trump and co a false sense of confidence in what they can do?
An excellent point, but I'm expecting the Ford CVBG to primarily be there to defend Israel. Turkey borders on Iran directly, providing a clear path to Iran--but it's 500 miles from Incirlik to the border and then another 400 miles to Tehran.
I'm a little surprised they haven't, but maybe they calculate they can bribe Trump hard enough to stand down.
Almost certainly. At this point I would hope that some civilized third party would try to engineer a smooth transition to a Pahlavi-led interim government. Dunno who that would be though. Kuwait?
Is there any broad consensus support for Pahlavi within the Iranian population? Foreigners installing a regime favorable to them has the stink of Operation Ajax all over it—especially given the family connection.
It’s especially ironic coming from the chief instigator of this operation—who is ignoring their own laws, violating international norms, and transitioning to autocracy.
It’s especially ironic coming from the chief instigator of this operation—who is ignoring their own laws, violating international norms, and transitioning to autocracy.
Ut! Such an ugly word, 'autocracy.'
How about something more benign-sounding? Maybe... Unitary Executive?
From reading a few articles since the recent protests in Iran started, one of the big issues was that there was no common goal or coordination among the various groups in the country regarding what people wanted to achieve. Some do support Paklavi, while many others don't. The US or Arab countries installing him, or any other, government might not go well.
They might be, but with the restrictions Jordan is placing on the use of their bases, I would expect the aircraft in Jordan to be used to defend Israel, while the carriers are used to hit Iran.
Makes sense, but Iran is really fucking big. It's 400 miles from where the Lincoln is to the Iranian coast, and another 800 miles from there to Tehran. F-35C has a combat radius of like 800 miles and I don't see tankers being able to operate in the area, unless the Saudis allow overflight.