Iran

#4,301
#4,301
dalton_vol said:
How long can a president carry out Military exercises against the country before Congress has to step in and officially declare war? Isn't it like 60 days?
Click to expand...
I don’t think that is right. We were in Iraq and Afghanistan a long time, but never declared war.

Haven’t declared war since WWII, have we?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, -GiveHim6- and GroverCleveland
#4,302
#4,302
jmacvols1 said:
would all the below attacks by Obama be acts of war or does Congress have to officially declare war?


GROK: During Barack Obama's presidency (2009–2017), the United States conducted military airstrikes, including drone strikes and bombing campaigns, in several countries. These actions were primarily part of counterterrorism efforts and operations against groups like al-Qaeda, ISIS, and the Taliban. Based on available information, the U.S. under Obama bombed the following countries:
  • Afghanistan: Continued and expanded airstrikes against Taliban and al-Qaeda targets, with 1,337 weapons dropped in 2016 alone.


  • Iraq: Airstrikes resumed in 2014 against ISIS, with 12,095 bombs dropped in 2016.


  • Syria: Airstrikes began in 2014 targeting ISIS and the Khorasan group, with 12,192 bombs dropped in 2016.


  • Libya: Airstrikes in 2011 supported NATO’s intervention against Muammar Gaddafi, and later in 2016 against ISIS targets.


  • Yemen: Drone strikes and airstrikes targeted al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), with nearly 100 attacks since 2009 and 34 bombs dropped in 2016.


  • Somalia: Drone strikes and commando raids targeted al-Shabaab, including the killing of leader Ahmed Godane in 2014, with 14 bombs dropped in 2016.


  • Pakistan: Drone strikes targeted Taliban and al-Qaeda militants, with 563 strikes during Obama’s presidency, compared to 57 under Bush.
In 2016 alone, the U.S. dropped 26,171 bombs across these seven countries, averaging three bombs per hour. Obama’s administration expanded the use of drones, aiming for precision strikes to minimize U.S. ground troop involvement, though civilian casualties sparked controversy
Click to expand...
ODS?
 
#4,307
#4,307
sonofUT62 said:
That’s not the point. The point is…you claimed that Trump would bitch out and you were proven wrong in a pretty public forum.
If you want to say that Trumps a liar then I’ll hold your beer. But you can’t claim he threatened to bomb and then chickened out.
Click to expand...
True, but this only proves that Trump's campaign promises - really all he's ever preached for umpteen years - where he promised not to get us entangled in foreign wars and constantly criticized past administrations - this event demonstrates that all the **** he's ever said was just ********. Yet many of the MAGA dumbasses are here cheering him on. SMH. Lemmings.

Wars are easy to get into. Do we really know how Iran will respond now? Trump obviously wants it to be done, but will it be? Nobody knows.

I'm hoping for the best, but this is no small event.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo and UTSuave’
#4,310
#4,310
MontyPython said:
True.

But wars are easy to get into... Do we really know how Iran will respond now? Trump obviously wants it to be done, but will it be?

He campaigned on the promise of not getting entangled in foreign wars, yet that's precisely what he may have done here.

I'm hoping for the best, but this is no small event.
Click to expand...

I don’t know how any of this will turn out and I’m 100% opposed to it.
 
#4,313
#4,313
K-town Vol Fan said:
What's sad is we ALL know the Taco thing played a part in his decision making. We all know it got under his skin. This is a result of his narcissistic ego.
Click to expand...
Well, if we ALL knew that meansthat, the ones saying it knew what the result was going to be. So, can we logically infer his opposition really wanted this?
 
#4,314
#4,314
Orangeburst said:
I thought is was like 2000 lbs..yea 5K is big boom..

One variant of the BLU-127 bomb body contains 4,590 pounds (2,082 kg) of AFX-757 and 752 pounds (341 kg) of PBXN-114, for a total explosive payload of 5,342 pounds (2,423 kg).
Click to expand...

What is that size in comparison to a nuke?
 
#4,315
#4,315
CagleMtnVol said:
You really have a lot of faith in the Iranian military.
Click to expand...

You think this is less dangerous than Iraq in 2003? Get real. The U.S. has bases all over the region, many of which are far closer to Iran than Israel is, and without anything close to the layered air defenses Israel has with Iron Dome, Sling, and Arrow. Iran hasn’t even started launching its short- and medium-range missiles yet. People acting like American soldiers won’t be in harm’s way are delusional. This isn’t about whether America can bomb Iran, we all know the U.S. has the firepower to do whatever it wants. That’s not the question. The question is at what cost?

A lot of Iranians will die. Fine. That’s a given. But how many American lives and resources are we about to lose because we let a rogue ally drag us into a full-blown war, one they probably couldn’t win without us, and based on no solid evidence?

And even if we bomb every nuclear site on the map, who’s to say we got them all? Can we really confirm without troops in the ground to confirm? What fantasy world are we living in where we think this regime will just roll over and never try to enrich uranium again? So what’s the plan? Bomb them every 3 years like clockwork? And if we take out the regime? Then what? More chaos, more instability, more unpredictable outcomes.

Some of you are so damn short-sighted. Your best-case scenario literally hinges on the idea that the very regime we’re accusing of building nukes to wipe out Israel will act calm, rational, and restrained after we attack them. That’s not a strategy—that’s a ******* gamble.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11, MercyPercy, EasternVol and 1 other person
#4,318
#4,318
Orangeburst said:
I thought is was like 2000 lbs..yea 5K is big boom..

One variant of the BLU-127 bomb body contains 4,590 pounds (2,082 kg) of AFX-757 and 752 pounds (341 kg) of PBXN-114, for a total explosive payload of 5,342 pounds (2,423 kg).
Click to expand...
I wonder if the first bomb goes in and then the second bomb goes in a few seconds afterwards? I would imagine the second bomb would really do a lot of damage
 
  • Like
Reactions: Enki_Amenra and Orangeburst
#4,322
#4,322
sonofUT62 said:
There “may be a leak” is a terrible excuse for breaking the laws related to Congressional oversight. We may have just spent the last 18-24 months with Susan Rice and Jill Biden making national defense decisions. You think it might have been good for at least the GO8 to know what was going on?
Click to expand...
Not with out current congress. We have congressional members breaking laws every day in support of foreign invaders. One of them even has voiced her allegiance to Somalia. Our elected leaders by and large are trash.

Also, it's not "May" is "Will".
 
#4,325
#4,325
Persian Vol said:
You think this is less dangerous than Iraq in 2003? Get real. The U.S. has bases all over the region, many of which are far closer to Iran than Israel is, and without anything close to the layered air defenses Israel has with Iron Dome, Sling, and Arrow. Iran hasn’t even started launching its short- and medium-range missiles yet. People acting like American soldiers won’t be in harm’s way are delusional. This isn’t about whether America can bomb Iran, we all know the U.S. has the firepower to do whatever it wants. That’s not the question. The question is at what cost?

A lot of Iranians will die. Fine. That’s a given. But how many American lives and resources are we about to lose because we let a rogue ally drag us into a full-blown war, one they probably couldn’t win without us, and based on no solid evidence?

And even if we bomb every nuclear site on the map, who’s to say we got them all? Can we really confirm with troops in the ground to confirm? What fantasy world are we living in where we think this regime will just roll over and never try to enrich uranium again? So what’s the plan? Bomb them every 3 years like clockwork? And if we take out the regime? Then what? More chaos, more instability, more unpredictable outcomes.

Some of you are so damn short-sighted. Your best-case scenario literally hinges on the idea that the very regime we’re accusing of building nukes to wipe out Israel will act calm, rational, and restrained after we attack them. That’s not a strategy—that’s a ******* gamble.
Click to expand...

I think between American and Israel Plains we should be able to take out a large majority of their missile sites. I do agree that our bases can be vulnerable to missiles but I think we'll do a pretty good job of taking them out. We're not going to have troops on the ground. I would say that we've had years and years of intelligence that has given us a very good idea of where they're bomb facilities are.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top