Trump Pulls out of Iran Deal

Could easily be another Vietnam, if the Iranians use the mountains and desert to their advantage like the NVA did with the jungles
Can't be everywhere at once, plus how do you find an enemy when you don't necessarily know what he looks like?

Another mess my generation will have to clean up.

Attached: 8f23d977b9b128a9fd147fcecff2995857ecbab4c899f57a07b32d62d8be779a.jpg (425x414, 27.62K)

Honestly concerned that Russia and China won't support Iran against the US when it invades. China especially.

Win in the sense of destroying the Iranian state as an effective government in the traditional sense? Yes
Win in actually achieving a stable puppet in Iran with the defeat of guerilla and even irregular military forces? Hell No

well it's more than just drones, iran has an actual army along with alot of weaponry, this will be an extreme bloodbath for the americans

Well, I think they would prevent it before it got to an invasion in the first place, but Iran already sort of has weapons from both nations.

China might get cold feet yeah but Russia can't afford the southern border to be that exposed. Even if secretly the Russian federation would give a great deal of support to Iran as possible. China also has an intense interest in supporting Iran as well but it might be too diplomatically risky to go through with.

Russia won't do shit. Their southern border is already plenty exposed in Georgia and via Afghanistan. At best they will continue to send arms, but they will not risk a force on force confrontation.

this. Iran is alone, they'll just get arms from close allies like Lebanon and Syria, and maybe China will step in with a few hundred thousand cheap knock-off aks.

Weapons and tech would be enough. America needs to be bled, not routed (at least not all at once.) Can you imagine the reaction in the US when they are forced to absorb 1000 military casualties daily?

Well obviously they won't intervene directly. I mean they'll send proxy forces and arm paramilitary organizations in Iran send advisors and lend lease advanced equipment. Exactly because the south already has issues they'll be in no hurry to let that opening expand.

Attached: babywtf.jpg (500x376, 15.97K)

reminder the only reason the US won against Saddam in Iraq was because Saddam was convinced he could win a conventional symmetrical war (lol) against the US. Had he spent the same amount updating his arsenal for an asymmetric war by getting things like the RPG-29 in large amounts and more equipment for a state-funded insurgency he'd still be around.

I'll go out on a limb and say an invasion of Iran would be a total disaster for America. America's military is a rapidly decaying money laundering operation that's deathly afraid of casualties and relies on mercenaries to do the actual fighting.
Iran would suffer more because the fighting would take place there but America hasn't faced a real opponent in decades.

To be honest I'm willing to bet the initial attack on the straits could amount to around 200,000 casualties the Iranians go full on patriotic war

well the iranians have effective ASBMs, maybe they might even sink afew carriers if their lucky

this is gonna be fun

who's ready for the happening?

Attached: isreal vs iran attack.png (605x333, 59.43K)

Entitled Millennials. Why can't you just let the Boomers have one last bloodbath?

I'd be happy if the US sent all boomers to die in Iran tbh

...

In b4 false flag attack by American proxies in Syria as a pretext for war with Iran and Hezbollah in Syria and Iran, with an option on war in Iran itself.

...

That ties into this.

Spoiler: He doesn't.

Attached: Worry.jpg (653x321, 117.93K)

We invaded sovereign soil, going after oil
Taking countries is a hobby paid for by the oil lobby
Same as in Iraq, and Afghanistan
And Ahmadinejad say they coming for Iran

Attached: runthejewels-F1-header.jpg (1022x846, 75.37K)

Reminder that America hasn't bought a seriously motivated and well equipped military since the 1940s and has repeatedly failed to defeat much less advanced and organized foes since then. They are walking into a well deserved blood bath.

*fought not bought

it works either way.

I think what we might see is a situation where ground war is waged on Syria and Lebanon, and an air war on Iran.
Which is a recipe for Iran taking the role of North Vietnam.

Tide pod eating whippersnapper. You'll be going to save Boomer America.

Don't expect your family to get a pension either. Boomers need that money for high priced cars.

more, interesting, updates
twitter.com/AsafRonel/status/993914140224782336
twitter.com/AmichaiStein1/status/993913648786657280

Attached: idf iran2.png (615x281 49.87 KB, 43.53K)

how fucking convinient lol

...

I wish, but the saudi mudslimes and Bonaparte Jr would back the yankees up.

America is literally Mordor-tier at this point. Jesus Christ.

Attached: 1491102414300.png (1856x1651, 1.29M)

yeah he would, but most french people wouldn't.

Better than fighting for burger imperialism

Iranians speak farsi

the absolute state of the american education system
most Iranians Farsi (aka Persian) which is an Indo-European language. Arabic is a semitic language.

Bruh

I doubt they would allow you to fight for them. Then again what would be the harm? It's not like you could go back.

Attached: northkoreamfw.jpeg (1280x720, 106.69K)

At least their heart is in the right place. This makes them superior to 99% of amerifats who know that.

There's a misconception that America "never wins wars", yet if we take victory to mean destroying the enemy state and its ability to organize, then America is EXTREMELY efficient. So much so that the state that's under attack is normally ousted before a single American troop sets forth on their respective land.

What America can't do, and I doubt any modern army can, is occupy a country effectively.

Then again, I feel like the chaos in Iraq and Afghanistan was planned. A chaotic rabble of "terrorists" are easier to control than a state.

you do have a point

We need a global depression in order to dethrone America first before any realist challenge can be made against them I think. Without their economic weapons America will be forced to send its malformed children in battle where they will be freely slaughtered.

nobody will care because its a volunteer army. there's a reason the govt stopped doing conscription after Vietnam m8. Military becomes less accountable to the citizens when they don't have to get drafted to die

key point is every war post vietnam has indebted america, demoralized her people and increased government distrust, iran might just break america

Excuse my retardation. Point I'm making is that I'd rather fight against 'murica than for them, and if the opportunity presented itself then I'd take it.

Attached: IMG_0084.PNG (246x255, 66.99K)

its ok

Attached: 1490132761141.jpg (1000x1000, 207.21K)

I doubt it, people have been saying the same about every war prior. There needs to be some freak incident for America to truly recoil and rethink its strategy. So far things have been going perfectly for the US - despite what others say about "bumbling empire".

What is Zig Forumss reaction to this?

no problem. But your post is pretty accurate for decribing what the american public is exposed to these days. They're told to hate a country, despite not even knowing who fucking runs the country.

They wouldn't? how did they choose Jupiter instead of Melenchon?

iraq ate up so much burger money, and with the petroyuan on the horizon iran is going to eat up even more money, not counting how a rogue iran would likely start rebellions in SA, further tanking the US dollar

""""FUCK YEAH WE JUST MOVED THE DOOMSDAY CLOCK EVEN CLOSER TO MIDNIGHT BUT WE'RE OWNING THE LIBS""""

You're a good burger. I hope we get to butcher lots of right wing burgers together, user.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (639x480, 338.68K)

...

reminder that wars don't actually eat up chunks of the economy, they just relocate it quickly and efficiently into the hands of people who will never let it go.

...

Does that mean we /internationalbrigade/ then?

Depends on how you define victory. It would be a fucking mess either way. Topographically, Iran is a mountain fortress with vast swaths of it's interior made up of uninhabitable salt flats. It's a logistics nightmare for any invading force.

The debt means literally nothing for the US, it can climb to 100 trillion yet America will still engage in "costly" wars.

Yet another issue where Trump flips off the voters.

Attached: 1396304316683.jpg (640x480, 48.85K)

It only stays this was so as long as the petrodollar is still a thing, a destabilized iran would destabilize SA

Pretty sure wars do eat value, as productive forces are put towards consumables like bullets and rockets that are used once and are just wasted, and potential laborers are murdered. It shrinks it along with transforming it, I think

That's how bourgeois democracy works.

The US will park 2 aircraft carriers of Iran's coast and bomb their capital into the dirt. You really underestimate the capability of America's military.

Of course. Boomers don't care about debt they will never have to pay back.

not like it changes anything. Most of his voters were easily impressionable, undereducated white dudes. They'll just vote cruz or whoever says "I dislike brown people" the most in 2020

Wars eat value in a total sense obviously but I don't think they do so in terms of liquid capital.

Not sure.

that's the joke, the value is transferred into the people who are killed, and they will never let go of it

We're the /antiyankeegang/ fren
We eat eagles for breakfast.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (793x554, 765.83K)

I mean the overall debt of the US, no one's going to claim it from them. That's the reason why they sink so much money into their military - you need a level of coercion to demand a debt to be paid, which no country possesses at the moment.

America is too politically weak to sustain a war against Iran or any country with a competent military.

Battle of Tsushima 2.0 when?

Tehran and Tabriz, where like 70% of the popualtion lives are more than a thousand miles away from the sea.

And Iran will just shoot them down.

They did "win" in the sense that the war profiteers made money, extracted minerals, took over their opium cultivation, etc.

I don't doubt the US will take causalities but they're going to destroy the state military of Iran in a fortnight. The same happened with Iraq, the US didn't lose a single M1 Abrams during the entire conflict - they only started losing them when the war progressed into the unconventional.

Heh.

Attached: 1443423934354.png (500x358, 178.62K)

They're not the majority, so it doesn't matter what his voters think. What matters is everyone else. This is why everyone is watching independents this election season.

Watch how they switch from muh based Aryan Persians to hurr mudslime sandniggers. Remember that Zig Forums's worldview is humans vs. orcs.

And you don't understand how war works. You can't occupy a country with bombing runs. If the goal is regime change then they'll have to send in ground forces.

Kim is already explicitly saying publicly that Trump has done nothing to help.

THE AXIS OF EVILS, TOGETHER AGAIN

Attached: AXIS OF EVILS.jpg (365x169, 25.97K)

Iraq was considerably smaller in terms of land mass and military, and had fairly flat terrain. Iran on the other hand is huge by comparison, and much better armed and equipped with huge swathes of mountains and salt flats.

This is a no pessimism zone.

After hearing about stuff like the Lavon Affair and the USS Liberty this wouldn't even cause me to bat an eye. If anything happens I'm going to be super suspicious

Attached: zog.png (1024x539, 37.05K)

I don't even think they care much about regime change anymore. Take Syria for example, supposedly the area where ISIS/YPG occupy, thus the US, have ~80% of Syria's oil reserves. If you can park your "guys" in the area where the goods are, extract them and leave, then you've done what you set out to do.

Like yeah, that doesn't sound like "war". But when was the last time there was a "proper" war waged by the US? Most of the time it's been extremely asymmetrical and the real intentions were obscured.

I also doubt they're going to send in US soldiers - explicitly. Just going to fund more "rebels" and have them cause a ruckus again.

This is correct, Syria is a prime example how proxies are not enough to achieve change when Russia decides pull their weight. If the USA creates a proxywar in Iran, Russia will 100% support the government.

The problem is, if the war in Iran is going to be even close to its disastrousness, it's not gonna be restricted to Iran. It might pull in Iraq, Afghanistan, Qatar and even Turkmenistan - many of the southern CIS have actually been a retreat for islamists. This might have implications one can only imagine.

But it's true, Iran is alone. It can only count on Lebanon and the DPRK. It's geopolitical position isn't good. Qatar might support them, depending on how much they decide to detract themselves further from the Gulf monarchies.

8ch.net/pol/res/11562435.html

After more looking, it looks like Zig Forums is confused as usual.

Don't count on Qatar, they are not that close with Iran. And besides, likely even the Saudis could occupy them in a weekend.

🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧coincidence🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (609x245, 39.64K)