Toggle sidebar

Trump Attacks Iran, III

BREAKING:US-Israeli forces have struck Heavy Water Research facilities in Khondab, Iran. According to initial reports, it is believed to be a Khondab Heavy Water Nuclear Reactor Complex (formerly known as the Arak nuclear complex). A major Iranian nuclear facility is located approximately 250 kilometers southwest of Tehran.
https://twitter.com/x/status/2037568722907381944
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: UAH
cdub55 said:
I haven't seen the patented "Figure Four Toilet Lock" or the "Clothesline from Taco Bell" since my days in college...
Click to expand...
I had my own version of the "pile-driver." It involved drinking a large quantity of whiskey and prune juice just before the match started.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: cdub55
and here i thought we had completely wiped out their military capabilities

www.reuters.com

Exclusive: U.S. can only confirm about a third of Iran's missile arsenal destroyed, sources say

The assessment, which has not been previously reported, shows that while most of Iran's missiles are either destroyed or inaccessible, Tehran still has a significant missile inventory.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com

WASHINGTON, March 27 (Reuters) - The United States can only determine with certainty that it has destroyed about a third of Iran's vast missile arsenal as the U.S. and Israeli war on the country nears its one-month mark, according to five people familiar with the U.S. intelligence.
The status of around another third is less clear but bombings likely damaged, destroyed or buried those missiles in underground tunnels and ‌bunkers, four of the sources said. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the information.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: selmaborntidefan and UAH
92tide said:
and here i thought we had completely wiped out their military capabilities

www.reuters.com

Exclusive: U.S. can only confirm about a third of Iran's missile arsenal destroyed, sources say

The assessment, which has not been previously reported, shows that while most of Iran's missiles are either destroyed or inaccessible, Tehran still has a significant missile inventory.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com

WASHINGTON, March 27 (Reuters) - The United States can only determine with certainty that it has destroyed about a third of Iran's vast missile arsenal as the U.S. and Israeli war on the country nears its one-month mark, according to five people familiar with the U.S. intelligence.
The status of around another third is less clear but bombings likely damaged, destroyed or buried those missiles in underground tunnels and ‌bunkers, four of the sources said. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of the information.
Click to expand...
As a military planner told me after the revolution in precision weapons begun in Gulf War I: "Dirt is your friend." The best way to defeat precision weapons is to put stuff underground. The deeper the better.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: 92tide, UAH and Con
Tidewater said:
As a military planner told me after the revolution in precision weapons begun in Gulf War I: "Dirt is your friend." The best way to defeat precision weapons is to put stuff underground. The deeper the better.
Click to expand...
this is what i read earlier (from cnn). of course the images coming from "iran state media" makes it suspect

Images published by Iranian state media Thursday appear to show US-origin anti-tank land mines scattered across a residential area near Shiraz in southern Iran, according to a CNN analysis and two munitions experts who reviewed the images.

The images are consistent with publicly available imagery of American BLU-91/B anti-tank land mines, part of the Gator Scatterable Mine System. The United States is the only party in the ongoing war that is known to possess the Gator system.
 
Tidewater said:
It is not the purpose of the thread to turn into a bash Lincoln thread, but I could post some quotes by Lincoln in 1858 (two years before he was elected president) that would bring into question his empathy.

In praise of Lincoln I will say he was a great orator and propagandist. He could motivate people to do what he wanted them to do.
Also, (relevant to this thread), early in the war, he tried to micromanage the army and it was a disaster. Later, he learned the president's proper role: set political objectives, establish priorities, marshal resources, and let Grant do his job.
Click to expand...
Probably because McClellan wouldn't do anything and later he trusted Grant to do what was needed
 
Its On A Slab said:
How is defending your sovereign territory that has been invaded labeled an "attack"?

Apologists for Putin are just going to be apologists, I suppose. Love the semantics.
Click to expand...
Sorry you don’t like the wording - helping people defend themselves against Russian invasion (better?) is still a dangerous proposition compared to attacking an ally. If your helping Russia’s enemy kill Russkie soldiers or attack Russian assets/cities - deserved or not - that’s a whole different ballgame than attacking Iran.

Quite a silly equivalency, in fact.

If you cannot see the difference and instead wish to act like I’m apologizing for that piece of excrement, you’re simply wrong.
 
92tide said:
this is what i read earlier (from cnn). of course the images coming from "iran state media" makes it suspect

Images published by Iranian state media Thursday appear to show US-origin anti-tank land mines scattered across a residential area near Shiraz in southern Iran, according to a CNN analysis and two munitions experts who reviewed the images.

The images are consistent with publicly available imagery of American BLU-91/B anti-tank land mines, part of the Gator Scatterable Mine System. The United States is the only party in the ongoing war that is known to possess the Gator system.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I saw that. First, the Gator is a land-based system. BLU-91s are for air delivery.
Second, I just do not think the color is right. I have never seen anything in the US militarty inventory that shade of green. I have seen Soviet stuff that shade. Makes me suspicious.
I am not saying the US did not use scatterable mines (that would actually be an effective use of scatterables to stop TELs), just that the mine pictured may not be US made.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: 92tide
Tidewater said:
McClellan was competent but cautious.
That does not explain why Lincoln went through McDowell, Little Mac, Burnside, Hooker, Meade, before landing on Grant.
Click to expand...

Simply because every moron on both sides was taking the wrong lessons from Napoleon and devising large scale plans with heroic charges. Grant and Meade might be the only competent generals serving in a major command in the entire war on both sides. Before you give me “Cold Harbor”… let’s honestly ask what was more costly… Union losses at Cold Harbor or Southern losses at Chancellorsville? Grant won the war because he realized what most didn’t… The Army of Northern Virginia might as well have been Hannibal’s army after Cannae. But Lee was a far lesser Hannibal.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: UAH
81usaf92 said:
Simply because every moron on both sides was taking the wrong lessons from Napoleon and devising large scale plans with heroic charges. Grant and Meade might be the only competent generals serving in a major command in the entire war on both sides. Before you give me “Cold Harbor”… let’s honestly ask what was more costly… Union losses at Cold Harbor or Southern losses at Chancellorsville? Grant won the war because he realized what most didn’t… The Army of Northern Virginia might as well have been Hannibal’s army after Cannae. But Lee was a far lesser Hannibal.
Click to expand...
Tactical contexts matter.
Lee was trying to destroy the AoP at Chancellorsville because an attritional model was a losing game for the Confederates.
Overall, Grant lost more men between 5 May and 15 June than Lee had in his entire army.
Grant gets credit for continuing the campaign, despite the carnage (He could afford the casualties. Lee could not).
Grant's system was (1) grossly outnumber your opponent (In the Vicksburg campaign, Grant had 150,000 men, Pemberton has 30,000; at the Wilderness, Grant had 118,700, Lee had 66,140) and (2) remain on the strategic offensive and never mind your casualties no matter how bad they are (see point 1). By the time they got to Petersburg, the Union VI Corps was the only one fit for attacking. The rest had been bled dry and could generally hold trenches, but could not attack them so Grant just stretched the lines further than Lee could (especially after the wave of Confederate desertion after Lincoln's re-election.
As for Grant's applicability for today, there are not many opponents the US can outmuscle and trade casualties at the rate of 17 US to 11 enemy and win. The US could in 1864, but those conditions are no longer applicable today.

Wade Hampton made what I find an convincing point. Keep the two sides exactly the same on May 5, 1864 (manpower, strategic objectives) and swap the commanders (and only the commanders). A Grant-led ANV does not survive past Christmas.
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: UAH
UAH said:
Recently watched a perspective on Grant and Lee at Appomattox. The tragedy of the war had deeply affected both men. Grant put out a general order to prevent victory demonstrations by Union troops that would demean the beaten Confederate Troops. He issued rations to starving troops and came under intense criticism for allowing Confederate soldiers to keep their horses and mules. It seems clear to me that Union leadership from Lincoln down were deeply affected by the war and were focused on healing. Of course we know that history suddenly changed all of that.
Click to expand...

My mother and I went to Appomattox in the fall of 2024. I would encourage anyone who has NOT been to go (we went to Gettysburg last year). They have a Southern belle out there who does a dramatic reading that lasts about 20 minutes or so that will definitely hold your attention. It doesn't justify anything (before anyone goes there), she muses as a woman left behind while her husband was fighting and how their food had been cut off, the struggles they were having as people and a sudden feeling once the war was over of "okay, what's gonna happen now"? And then the talk - too common unfortunately in US history in all battles - of the good things that were gonna happen now followed by, of course, the carpetbaggers, crooks, etc.


IMG_6553.jpeg

IMG_6550.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huckleberry, Con and UAH
  • Like
Reactions: UAH and 92tide
Tidewater said:
After visiting the front at Fredericksburg and seeing the carnage, President Lincoln said, "If there is a worse place than hell, I am in it."
I wonder when Trump will experience that level of regret, but I doubt he ever gets there.
As they say, "No brain, no pain."
Click to expand...

"On the eve of the ground war, at a White House briefing, Powell and Cheney discussed the question of casualties. As Cheney recalled, the Brookings Institution estimated that “between a thousand and four thousand Americans were going to die. Others warned that ten thousand Americans would be killed.”

In the meeting, Scowcroft suggested that the president be protected from hearing the grisliest details of the coming battle. “We’ve got to spare you from some things,” Scowcroft said.

“I know,” Bush replied, “but that isn’t one of them.”


(Lest anyone get confused, this is the "good" Gulf War led by the Dad).
 
  • Thank You
Reactions: Con and UAH
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads

Top Bottom
Back