Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. GTANet.com

    2. GTANet 20th Anniversary

    1. GTA Online

      1. The Cayo Perico Heist
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Frontier Pursuits
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
    3. Crews

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Redemption

    1. Grand Theft Auto Series

      1. St. Andrews Cathedral
    2. GTA VI

    3. GTA V

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    4. GTA IV

      1. The Lost and Damned
      2. The Ballad of Gay Tony
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
    5. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    6. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    7. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
    8. Portable Games

      1. GTA Chinatown Wars
      2. GTA Vice City Stories
      3. GTA Liberty City Stories
    9. Top-Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    1. GTA Mods

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Red Dead Mods

      1. Documentation
    3. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    4. Featured Mods

      1. Design Your Own Mission
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Rockstar Games

    2. Rockstar Collectors

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Movies & TV
      5. Music
      6. Sports
      7. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. Announcements

    2. Support

      1. Court House
    3. Suggestions

Middle Eastern Conflict [General]


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Typhus said:

Be careful. Don't be so quick to wish for war. Remember, even the worst regime is still full of perfectly normal, innocent people with lives as worthwhile as your own. And they are the ones who will suffer from any war, all for things they are not responsible for whatsoever.

It's for the innocent the regimes needs to be destroyed.

Otherwise the innocent will suffer at the hands of the Islamic Revolution Guards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

It's for the innocent the regimes needs to be destroyed.

Otherwise the innocent will suffer at the hands of the Islamic Revolution Guards.

Are you sure about that? Let's say, worst case, that Iran retaliates, and America decides to launch a bombing campaign against their nation. They have already suffered under economic sanctions, what do you think will happen if their infrastructure is destroyed? What will become of the sick, and the old and the young? It is not reasonable to ruin lives, in all likelihood kill thousands of people, then shrug and say that what came before was worse.

I mean, can you see that? Because if this goes badly, that could actually happen.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Typhus said:

Are you sure about that? Let's say, worst case, that Iran retaliates, and America decides to launch a bombing campaign against their nation. They have already suffered under economic sanctions, what do you think will happen if their infrastructure is destroyed? What will become of the sick, and the old and the young? It is not reasonable to ruin lives, in all likelihood kill thousands of people, then shrug and say that what came before was worse.

I mean, can you see that? Because if this goes badly, that could actually happen.

I know regime change is illegal, but Iran attacked first, this should green light total destruction of the Ayatollah since it felt the need to get involved in Iraq and mess with American interest in the region and visitors to Iran based on trumped up spy charges.

I'm all for regime change in Iran btw, don't think I'm not.

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition to Typhus' point, the US has demonstrably shown its inability in instilling stability into the region following forceful regime removals.

 

As detestable as Iran is, launching head first into a forceful regime removal is incredibly stupid and damaging.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pesos said:

In addition to Typhus' point, the US has demonstrably shown its inability in instilling stability into the region following forceful regime removals.

 

As detestable as Iran is, launching head first into a forceful regime removal is incredibly stupid and damaging.

Trump himself has said he wanted to end the wars in the region once and for all, and other presidents have held back from killing this guy, not Trump. Trump delivers it seems.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ilovebender.com said:

Trump himself has said he wanted to end the wars in the region once and for all, and other presidents have held back from killing this guy, not Trump. Trump delivers it seems.

How has Trump delivered when he has, very potentially, kicked off another war as well as not ended any others the US is currently engaged in (and in some cases, has even upscaled involvement)?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

I know regime change is illegal, but Iran attacked first

Did it? Iran is operating within Iraq at the direct behest of the Iraqi Shi'a government (which truth be told is basically an Iranian proxy).

Iran is very definitely very heavily involved in all sorts of covert activities and proxy sponsorship in the region, some of which has cost Coalition service personnel their lives, but the actions of the US here are basically tantamount to assassinating Rodion Malinovsky over the Cuban Missile Crisis.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is great for the American war complex. More money funneled into the army/navy/air force, more taxpayer's money being wasted, more lives lost.

 

Awful for the region. Things were sort of beginning to stabilize after the two decades of American meddling, and there they go meddling again. This time they murdered someone they should really not be murdering. There goes any chance of a new nuclear deal.

 

Though I've read that this may have been a good thing for the current Iranian regime, as the guy had a lot of support and authority to potentially create a coup and seize the power. Though I'd call bullsh*t on this. 

 

This was a horrible, horrible idea. Luckily, I don't see this turning into full on WW3 because China is a pragmatist state, and Russia is too busy with their internal problems and border problems to bother with attacking America. However, since he was the commander of the Quds, a highly specialized and experienced force that has been categorized as a terrorist organization by the US... This will be very bad for America.

 

Oh and to the turd that is happy that this guy was killed, he was instrumental in defeating ISIL back in the day. Organized both the Syrian and Iraqi defense forces and pushed ISIL back into nothing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ilovebender.com said:

other presidents have held back from killing this guy, not Trump.

Because other presidents didn't want to start a f*ckin' war with Iran.

 

Trump believed that Obama wanted to start a war with Iran in order to get reelected. So, since we already know that this is the type of sh*t that he believes in, it's hardly a stretch to say that Trump thinks he can increase his chances of reelection by starting a war with Iran.

Edited by DareYokel
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

US needs to withdraw troops from Irak,Lybia,Afghanistan and stop toppling dictators all over the world(actually wars for oil),because the countries US have invaded are worse now than before. In Irak people miss Sadam Hussein and Lybia is a poorer country now. And US troops are in the part of Syria which has the most oil. Too much soldiers die in this wars,not only US soldiers but also soldiers from NATO countries which war doesn't benefit them,doesn't benefit myself and most likely doesn't benefit yourself. Trump musn't start war with Iran,he must withdraw all troops from Middle East and NATO shouldn't exist. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Triple Vacuum Seal

Probably dumbest thing Washington's done in a while. Forget Russia. Iran is the real sleeping giant. This is the unwinnable war we do not want. Americans have more to lose, and both "sides" will lose.

Another case of our extremely expensive DoD/war industry making our lives more dangerous.  Nice defense guys. lol talk about welfare queens. Could be worse though. That money we used to turn the Middle East into a proving ground coulda been wasted on education and healthcare. God forbid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This guy wasn't a saint.

I'm not about to go

"Oh no, he was a great man, I loved him!"

I never even heard of him, and all that I learned about him in the news reel makes me see Putin upset 'yay!'

Iran regime pissed off 'f*ck them!' 'We might not be fighting a religious war, but they are, f*ck 'em

Now Russia have one less friend in the Middle East.

Because we both had a common enemy ISIS and this guy was really good at getting them for Iran and Russia used that, f*ck him, glad he's dead. Couldn't care less what Putin says, little lone the Ayatollah!

A common enemy does not make him a friend we all lost! 

 

I'm not for war, but, f*ck that dead guy right, if Iran and America had any sense, they'd just walk away, bury him, and get on with life; because, he was a great commander, an intelligent leader, and the POTUS did something very brash and now that great leader is out and I bet Iranian Regime leaders want to avenge this; because sure, it was one of their own, but this just showed Iran than Iran can't just go messing around protecting Iranian interests in an American world, and if they think we're promiscuous music playing devils with all our ways in our tolerant Occident, and they want to war on us in some holy war, that's them, that is not us.

Remember, this guy who died, was also behind the hijacking of a UK registered ship last year captured by Iranian forces in the Gulf. f*ck this dead guy.

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

This guy wasn't a saint.

Nobody claimed he was, you muppet.

 

 

I never even heard of him

Course you haven't. And this is why your perspectives are utterly worthless- because you have literally no idea what you're talking about.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Nobody claimed he was, you muppet.

 

Course you haven't. And this is why your perspectives are utterly worthless- because you have literally no idea what you're talking about.

I watched the news go on all day about him, not one thing he's done has made me happy, and I'd probably have killed the bastard over that British ship but lucky for the world it seems, I'm not in a position to do such things - Putin's sad, good.

We all fought ISIS, he was just good at it, but that just meant we have a common enemy, and this guy was an arse hole; f*ck this dead guy.

He was a dictator's dick that was caught f*cking around in Iraq, and now he's gone.

They're still dicks that regime, f*ck 'em.

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your total inability to see big-picture implications of events is truly, absolutely mind-blowing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Your total inability to see big-picture implications of events is truly, absolutely mind-blowing.

I now fear Iran's attack and American retaliation leading to some f*cking war.

 

But I still think he was an arsehole.

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ilovebender.com said:

I now fear Iran's attack and American retaliation leading to some f*cking war.

Well that didn't take long.

 

Maybe if you'd opened your eyes before your mouth you wouldn't have spent the last few posts cheerleading an imminent conflict.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

Well that didn't take long.

 

Maybe if you'd opened your eyes before your mouth you wouldn't have spent the last few posts cheerleading an imminent conflict.

Just call that Trump diplomacy.

 

He's probably f*cked us into WWIII and a big war in the region, but chances are, he hasn't.

I saw the chemical attacks in Syria that time and was like

World wars with an odd number have chemical attacks, world wars with an even number have nuclear attacks.

 

WWIV was my new WWIII joke.

Edited by ilovebender.com
Link to post
Share on other sites

A world war requires willing participants.  The world has changed in numerous ways since the last one.  For one thing, states aren't as willing to go to war anymore.  Democracy generally tends to skew towards peaceful endeavours, because the people are going to be doing the dying also get to vote.

 

As for China and Russia, they are not suicidal.  And have little to gain in picking sides in an Iran-US conflict.  The biggest loser will likely be the Middle East.  So no news there.

 

So if you thought the migrant crisis of 2015 was bad, just wait till you see this.  Should it come to that.

Edited by Svip
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone from Sarajevo, I hope that this general doesn't become the Franz Ferdinand of the WW3. Tensions are high for a long time, and it could end up bad. Still, in this case Iran understand that going directly against US would be suicidal, so, instead expect them to drag Iraq into a guerilla war against US troops and PMC's that are still there, and maybe even Talibans in Afghanistan get some new MANPAD equipment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see Iraq as the likely battleground really. Iran's reach is much broader these days, and they're nicely integrated with a variety of Shi'a militant groups across the region. My expectation, aside from the obvious cyber angle, will be asymmetric attacks against US military infrastructure (think USS Cole bombing or the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing), attacks on diplomatic facilities and potentially individual diplomats in other Middle Eastern and Gulf countries, and probably some skirmishes in the Strait of Hormuz and in the Gulf of Aden, with US and Coalition naval forces and Western shipping being the likely targets. Plus targeting of US regional proxies such as KSA and potentially even Israel.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean, what can be said about this really? Beyond it being incredibly stupid? Seeing the disconnect between Trump shills and how people under the age of like 65 react to this is staggering. Convincing a bunch of MAGA kids who thought by preventing a Hillary presidency they stopped a war that war with Iran is a good thing, man. I guess Iran going the legal route is a good sign in terms of not going to war.

 

I expect Iran to respond indirectly, like perhaps attacking a Saudi oil field. If this gets real bad, the migrant crisis will look quaint in comparison. Good lord.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, sivispacem said:

I don't see Iraq as the likely battleground really. Iran's reach is much broader these days, and they're nicely integrated with a variety of Shi'a militant groups across the region. My expectation, aside from the obvious cyber angle, will be asymmetric attacks against US military infrastructure (think USS Cole bombing or the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing), attacks on diplomatic facilities and potentially individual diplomats in other Middle Eastern and Gulf countries, and probably some skirmishes in the Strait of Hormuz and in the Gulf of Aden, with US and Coalition naval forces and Western shipping being the likely targets. Plus targeting of US regional proxies such as KSA and potentially even Israel.

 

What are your thoughts on the American response to any potential asymmetric attack? Will it be in-kind, or something more conventional? Seems that the Americans want to withdraw from the ME, given it has pretty much achieved energy independence at this point. My statement may appear to contradict recent developments, but the fundamentals are still there (e.g., withdrawal seems possible). 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oops

 

 

Iran will do most of it's dirty work using proxies.  Trump has created a mess for himself, his predecessors and the world. 

 

 

 

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Baserape said:

Trump has created a mess for himself, his predecessors and the world. 

literally the understatement of the millennia...

 

carry on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

headline coming from a nation where citizens, in case of an emergency, can't call an ambulance because they're afraid of the bill

fat, arrogant, warmongering cunts

photo-2020-01-04-00-58-40.jpg

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the US would be in a strong position to criticize Iran for this even if it weren't hypocritical to do so. The US has regularly pressured countries into playing ball with them on abandoning nuclear programs only to later destabilize and topple the same regimes when the opportunity presents itself.

 

Any autocrat can look at what happened in Libya and Iraq over time (and they do), and draw the easy conclusion that the only way to ensure their continued existence is non-cooperation with America and development of nuclear weapons. From that perspective, can you really blame Iran for pursuing such weapons so aggressively?

  • Like 2
  • YEE 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's actually debatable whether Iran has aggressively pursued nuclear weapons. Certainly the inspection actions by the IAEA have found no evidence of an ongoing weapons programme and the terms of the JCPOA made domestic production of highly enriched Uranium and Plutonium extremely difficult for Iran.

 

Of course, Trumps decision to unilaterally rescind American engagement with the Plan has created a situation in which Iranian domestic enrichment capability is ramping back up to levels that act as a prelude to HEU production, so one of the spectacular own-goals of the US actions has actually been to increase Iranians nuclear weapon development capability.

 

 

 

It's a bit of a moot point, though, because what the US and other allied and coalition powers should really be worrying about is their tactical/theatre ballistic missile capability (from approximately 50-1500km range). This has been tested extensively by the Houthi rebels in Yemen against Saudi coalition forces armed with cutting edge weaponry, and has proven to be concerningly effective at hitting valuable operational and strategic targets in the heat of battle.

 

Dozens of separate strikes by Houthi rebels overseen by IRGC commanders have seen literally thousands of Saudi forces killed, mostly through highly accurate strikes against military bases using highly manoeuvrable launchers, repeatedly bypassing modern American-made anti-missile defences such as the Patriot system and even THAAD, which is supposed to be the premier theatre anti missile system.

 

Iran also possesses sophisticated Russian and Chinese made anti-ship missiles and has its own domestic production of the Noor and Qader (copies of the C-802) which is capable of sinking destroyer-sized vessels from about 300km away. The Qader launchers are specifically built on civilian truck chassis to allow them resilience against attacks in military infrastructure. It was an Iranian C-802 copy, fired by Hezbollah forces, which nearly sunk the INS Hanit off the coast of Lebanon in 2006, and another fired by Houthi forces which crippled the HSV-2 Swift off the coast of Yemen in 2016.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Caysle said:

headline coming from a nation where citizens, in case of an emergency, can't call an ambulance because they're afraid of the bill

fat, arrogant, warmongering cunts

photo-2020-01-04-00-58-40.jpg

 

3 hours ago, Bartleby said:

I'm not sure the US would be in a strong position to criticize Iran for this even if it weren't hypocritical to do so. The US has regularly pressured countries into playing ball with them on abandoning nuclear programs only to later destabilize and topple the same regimes when the opportunity presents itself.

 

Any autocrat can look at what happened in Libya and Iraq over time (and they do), and draw the easy conclusion that the only way to ensure their continued existence is non-cooperation with America and development of nuclear weapons. From that perspective, can you really blame Iran for pursuing such weapons so aggressively?

I get it,

"Death to America!"

You guys hate America, etc etc...

 

I'm sorry your boyfriend Iraian Regime and Putin's Russia are crying, God Bless America though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.