"How will the US respond?" Topic

Yes, this seems to escape many.

Russia, China and Iran plus ilsamic terrorists/jihadis are the headliners in the new "Axis" or Axis of Evil" …

Iran was almost certainly behind Hezbollah on this and have been ever since. Syria too support Hezbollah in the Barracks Bombing.

There is a statue in Tehran of the "martyrs" who died attacking the barracks.

That should be on a target list somewhere.

I think the battleship New Jersey lobbed some 16 in shells as a response after several weeks.

IIRC it did but that was before the Barracks being blown up. That is why the precursor to Hezbollah.

I am surprised at no one mentioning this as we talk about Biden unfreezing Iranian funds.

I've mentioned that somewhere here. But Reagan's name was never mentioned.

And I have mentioned the amount of money that should be give to Iran is 0 …

"Millions for defense, not one cent for tribute."

I think the barracks attack precursor was the incident involving US destroyers shelling in support of the Lebanese army, which was getting ready to fold under attack by the Iran supported militia. The New Jersey shelling came much later, a memorable event because there had been no BB rounds fired since the 60's in Vietnam. But it was a token effort and there never was any serious response from the US.

Reagan did testify that the hostages were the main reason for selling arms to Iran. Cabinet members said they told him it wasn't legal, but he was worried about hostages. You may recall that Bush ended up pardoning everyone, probably getting himself out of a jam as well. In any case, the ME was not Reagan's best work.

Not so much of a criticism of Reagan as a reminder of how tough these scenarios have always been, and how our responses have varied.

Full armed response in a hostage situation? To me this is a kidnapping. I'd be looking for any way to get them back without losing them first. No good answers.

I predict that, once again, our politicians will choose to lose, and add injury to insult by importing a couple of hundred thousand of the hostile population to keep wages down and the threat level up.

There's a lot wrong with what we're doing, but you know what the worst part is (the death of Americans excepted)? Most of these societies are killing Americans and Europeans with weapons we made. You can cross the straits at Istanbul and cross Asia, and not pass through a single country that can manufacture a weapon more sophisticated than a Kalashnikov knock-off, until you reach India or Israel. They're using our own technology to kill us. Think about that for a second. Think about the message of weakness it sends, because one day, that technology is going to be nuclear.

Will we send the Persians to meet the Carthaginians when that happens? I don't know. Frankly, I doubt it. But we certainly aren't going to retaliate now in a way that would prevent it. They already hate us; it's not fearing us that's the problem.

Looking back Nine pound's IQ list, which I have no reason to doubt, I suspect that IQ is probably not much of a factor in international politics. Smart people are can be just as unstable, maybe more so, no matter what country they come from, regardless of its average IQ.

The US IQ does not explain it's less than stellar education performance.

link

Maybe not, but it's certainly a factor in domestic politics, and international relations happen downstream from domestic politics. Hamas is a great example of this: perhaps no other polity on earth is so completely representative of the political culture from which it sprung, like mushrooms growing in sh*t.

Weapons are a US corporate thing, they make products people want. Half a billion guns in the US, but sales set records, ammo even more. We are our own army. I seem to recall that Smith and Wesson made 100 million in a single month during the pandemic gun craze.

That's how it works. I don't think it sends a message. Business is amoral and successful large industries succeed regardless of government controls. Power and money are the same thing.

Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. are all one thing to me, sprung from Iran in its post revolution era. Its mantra blinds the participants to the reality of its actions, unified by fanatic hatred. But most people in Iran are under 40. They want more from life than these bullies running the show. Many are well educated. They are part of the change that has to happen there. Bombs are not enough.

I've heard that before. The ayatollahs are still in charge.

They and their military elites are the objectives.

They have had several revolts against the government. Sadly, they all failed.

Reagan did testify that the hostages were the main reason for selling arms to Iran. Cabinet members said they told him it wasn't legal, but he was worried about hostages. You may recall that Bush ended up pardoning everyone, probably getting himself out of a jam as well. In any case, the ME was not Reagan's best work.

I agree, but I think in context his focus was on defeating the Soviet Union which he saw as the bigger, main threat. His main goal with Iran was to keep them from allying with the USSR, and to them as a way to get resources to the Contras faction fighting the Soviet puppet government in Nicaragua. The Soviets had made deep inroads into the Western Hemisphere under Jimmy Carter, and Reagan was trying to roll them back.

I agree with you SB. A slightly simpler world then, but a dangerous Cold War enemy.

I think the barracks attack precursor was the incident involving US destroyers shelling in support of the Lebanese army, which was getting ready to fold under attack by the Iran supported militia. The New Jersey shelling came much later, a memorable event because there had been no BB rounds fired since the 60's in Vietnam. But it was a token effort and there never was any serious response from the US.

But didn't under Reagan a lot of Iran's Navy sunk ?

Yes, one of our destroyers hit an Iranian mine, heavy damage. So the navy put together an attack group and sank a couple of Iranian vessels, damaged some others. The Iranians had maybe a dozen vessels in their navy. Not exactly a naval power. But we delivered the message. They had some attack motor boats, only had a couple of frigates, but we got one of them, performed well.

The crew saved our destroyer, but when we started to tow it home for repairs a couple of weeks later, our cruiser escort fired a missile at a commercial Iranian airliner and shot it down. Many casualties, not good. You may remember this. Nothing ever goes smoothly there.

As of 3 days ago, our bases have been attacked 61 times. We've responded 3 times. Now include our ship attacked with a drone and over 30 US citizens killed by Hamas. They also hold US hostages.

Also the Houthis seized a ship in Red Sea. Fortunately not ours.

35th, I think a lot of the attacks are to be expected under the circumstances. Except for the first couple of attacks in early October, little or no damage or injuries. Mostly drones we intercept. The Pentagon says all affected troops returned to duty. The response has been targeted against terrorist logistics.

Not enough? Not IMO. But maybe the concerns about Iraq on the brink are real. We don't have the full story other than Blinken getting Al- Sudani to go to Tehran to get Khomenei to tell the militias not to escalate. Any US attack on Iraq territory could destroy the delicate balance we have with them. They are still on edge after the 2020 strike.

Any situation where the lives of US hostages hang in the balance means there is more nuance than applying force. IMO, get those people out of there, then destroy Hamas no matter what deal had to be made.

From day one there has been concern that we would take the bait and respond in force, triggering a regional war against us and Israel. Iran's crazy proxies would love this….

our bases have been attacked 61 times.

Reports are even the Pentagon is getting tired of no real response. While their troops are getting shot at. The plan should have been to take out some military targets and oil facilities, etc. Until Iran gets the idea. But once again, the elected & appointed officials at the top are risk adverse and think they can charm [or pay] Iran. With some misguided, naïve', concepts. In the name of some form of peace. But for that to work both sides must want peace. E.g. Hamas v the IDF, Russia v Ukraine.

a lot of the attacks are to be expected under the circumstances.

Well if Iran learned the hard way with taking loses to some targets in their own nation. Those "circumstances", whatever they are would not apply.

The response has been targeted against terrorist logistics.

The 3 targets chosen were not going to have the effect they wanted. The proxies just keep firing at the US. Of course the proxies must be serviced too. But I don't think that is happening to any real level.

little or no damage or injuries.

Not if you were one of the 25 US WIAs with TBI …

get Khomenei to tell the militias not to escalate.

Like Xi/the CCP, the Ayatollahs are not going to listen and only do what they want to do. E.g. Iran continuing to make deployable nukes. If they don't have them already ?

Any US attack on Iraq territory could destroy the delicate balance we have with them.

The US has 2500 troops in Iraq. To assist the Iraqis keeping groups like ISIS, etc. out of the picture. Those Shia militias are supported by Iran. Does the Iraqi Gov't support those militias too ? Albeit Iraq is 65% Shia, while only 15% are Sunni. As well as a mix of others. Like the Yazidis if you can find any not killed, maimed, sold into slavery, etc.

Again Iran is like 95% Shia, plus or minus. So who really supports who ? I'm betting those at the top don't even know for sure.

Any situation where the lives of US hostages hang in the balance means there is more nuance than applying force. IMO, get those people out of there, then destroy Hamas no matter what deal had to be made.

Getting those hostages out alive is a #1 priority. But at the same time Hamas must be "terminated with extreme prejudice". Sadly, the IDF found two female Israeli hostages dead. I fear there will be more of that.

The Mossad and/or Shin Bet probably have the Hamas leaders living a life of luxury in Quatar as targets. They have done this sort of thing before. The only thing stopping them is the fear the remaining hostages would be murdered. If those [cowardly] Hamas top leaders end up dead. Hopefully they'd die painfully. They deserve little quarter …

From day one there has been concern that we would take the bait and respond in force, triggering a regional war against us and Israel.

IMO that happening is very low. What Arab nations in the region would attack Israel or the US ?

Not Egypt or Jordan. They like things the way they are. And history demonstrates the Jordanians were the best of the Arab Armies with Egypt coming in a far second.

So who's left ?

Lebanon ? Syria ? Hezbollah? We know the only threat there could again be Iranian supported terrorist i.e. Hezbollah.

Iraqi Shia Militias with Iran's support would be the biggest threat. Would Iraq go on jihad too going after the US in country ? And the IDF? Next to missiles I don't think Iraq could physically move troops, etc. to attack Israel proper ?

The threat comes from the Iran proxies using US attacks to whip up more fervor. Yes to Syria, Lebanon, Iraq. This is not about their duly constituted governments or anyone else's. It's about the number of people in these places that hate us and want us dead.

I agree with some of the things your are saying but I think Iran's plan here is to drag us into escalation via Israel vs Hamas. This will not be the conventional war you describe, IMO. Iraq is not going to mobilize, but there are plenty of fighters there and a barely supported government. I do not consider them friends. My opinion.

Re injuries, I told you what the Pentagon said. I am not minimizing the impact myself. I have no first hand knowledge. But its a war zone and Iran is picking at us via their proxies. They will strike back if we go all out. I have no problem with crippling their infrastructure except I think all the hostages will die.

There is a fine line to walk in getting the bad guys without losing the victims. Let these negotiations play out. They say they are close. But, IMO, this is taking too long. Israel needs to move it. The longer this goes on, the more dangerous it gets.

I do agree with you that a military action against Iran is appropriate and must happen. And that the current admin may not be strong enough. Even though I don't know what they know. But get those people out first. It will be brutal telling those families whatever happens.

A 4th retaliatory attack by the US?

Subject: Joe Truzman on X: "Multiple explosions reported in Khan Dhari, Iraq. Initial reports claim an airstrike against an unknown target. t.co/BE7CwS5Zcc / X


link

"The U.S. carried out airstrikes last night directly responding to an attack at the al-Asad Airbase in Iraq, killing several militants, two U.S. defense officials tell Fox News.

The attack from Iran-proxy forces on the base happened Monday, according to the officials.

A U.S. defense official tells Fox News that an AC-130 gunship carried out an airstrike on a vehicle in the proximity of the base, killing an estimated five to eight militants.

There have been dozens of attacks launched on American forces in the Middle East since Hamas launched its war against Israel on Oct. 7.

The military response is the 4th time the U.S. has carried out an airstrike since the attacks ramped up in October.

The other counterattacks happened on Oct. 26, Nov. 8 and Nov. 12, all in Syria."

The first on targets in Iraq, as far as I know. Such a slow pace. But…get those hostages out if we still can ASAP. Then hit Iran, take out the refineries.

And the suicide bomber monument in Tehran.

It's about the number of people in these places that hate us and want us dead.

That has been the problem since the USA recognized Israel after the 1st Arab-Israeli War in '48. And even before that the Jews in Palestine and the Palestinians along with most of the moslem countries hated the Jews for not being followers of islam. And it has been that way for a very long time. There were always Jews in the Mid-East since biblical times and before.

Even in the '20s and '30s the Jews and moslems had riots, street fights etc. in Palestine. For no other reason than some moslems wanted to kill the Jews as they were not moslems.

E.g. during WWI, the Ottoman Turk Empire included most of North Africa, Palestine, Saudia Arabia, etc. The Turk's leader did not want Christian Armenians in his region alive. As they were Christians and infidels, so they had to die.

The genocide the killed about 3 million Armenians. The rape, torture, crucifixions, murder, etc. rivalled what we saw on 7 Oct in Israel. The Armenian women especially suffered greatly at the hands of Turk's genocide. And why did this happen because the Armenians were not followers of islam. So they were "Untermensch", infidels, etc.

Do we see a parallel here ? The Jews who are not moslems were and are treated similarly. For no other reasons than they were a different religion.

As we move into the 21st Century we see many followers of islam and the Jews have made "some level of peace" among themselves. E.g. Jordan & Egypt …

The pusher of this Jewish genocide are not even Arabs … but Persians from Iran. They only make about 20% of islam as they are Shia. And the Shia and Sunni don't always get along.

So after all this we know the problem I think … The Iranian theocracy. Who hate the Jews just because they are not moslems. As well as the USA's support of Israel. Make the USA the Great Satan. UBL's #1 upset with the USA support of Israel. Both Iran, UBL[dead], AQ, ISIS, etc. want the USA out of that region. And want to push the Jews into the sea.

Short answer … Iran is the #1 problem by supporting islamic terrorism and wanting to get nukes. To cut them any slack is to our own peril. They must be made to understand. If they or their proxies attack US Forces then they both must "reap the whirlwind". Attack the proxies and hit military targets and oil infrastructure in Iran. Repeat as needed.

Again IMO and others this recent AC-130 strike was not enough.

But for some reason the US leadership thinks they can talk[or buy] Iran into being a "friend" … When pigs fly ! 🐷

But…get those hostages out if we still can ASAP. Then hit Iran, take out the refineries.

And the suicide bomber monument in Tehran.

Yes … that is the Bottom line … Plus have the Mossad kill the Hamas leaders living in luxury in Qatar. They are some of the best at this "wet work". The Mossad, IDF SF, Shin Bet etc. are some of the best in the world at Commando Raids and freeing hostages. The current exchange is only Hamas trying to buy time.

Right on the money, Legion. Except I don't think Biden wants to be friends with Iran. I am hoping Mossad and the CIA are on this hostage deal.

Well, he is not playing hardball with Iran. And Iran is taking advantage of it. Just like Putin and Xi are, IMO … and others …

Let there be no doubt the Mossad, Shin Bet, the CIA and probably others are on the case. The reports are the IDF is using all types of AI. Which may be one of the reasons they have taken very low losses so far. Along with their superior training, tactics, motivation, leadership, etc.

Whatever Biden is doing, the proof will be in the pudding. He is playing a role in the hostage negotiations and the deal seems to have expanded to include more people. What happens if and when we get as many as are still alive home will tell the tale.

There must be a military response against Iran, IMO. I would like to get the leaders there and in Qatar. Otherwise, cripple oil production at the very least. The only way to break the cycle of Iran terrorism by proxy is by force at this point.

The Israelis are generally pros at every level. But down the road they need to figure out what went wrong with security in October. Netanyahu will be out.

You are right, there must be a lot of new tools to help with securing the buildings, a slow job. Our state troopers did not have great experiences with those robodogs, but by now things will have improved. Tech going too fastto follow, passed me by long ago.

Whatever Biden is doing, the proof will be in the pudding. He is playing a role in the hostage negotiations and the deal seems to have expanded to include more people. What happens if and when we get as many as are still alive home will tell the tale.

There must be a military response against Iran, IMO. I would like to get the leaders there and in Qatar. Otherwise, cripple oil production at the very least. The only way to break the cycle of Iran terrorism by proxy is by force at this point.

The Israelis are generally pros at every level. But down the road they need to figure out what went wrong with security in October. Netanyahu will be out.

You are right, there must be a lot of new tools to help with securing the buildings, a slow job. Out state troopers did not have great experiences with those robodogs, but by now things will have improved. Tech going too fastto follow, passed me by long ago.

Yes, we will have to see how this plays out. But nothing should stop the IDF from crippling and maiming Hamas. Like we did with ISIS. We are still picking off the remanences of them. As the IDF will have to do as SOP with Hamas.

The IDF is one of the best forces on the planet/in the region. Again, if anyone can, they can with our support. Including the ever-growing high-tech assets.

link

The NYT details some of the back and forth Biden has been doing to keep the hostage negotiations going. It is a pragmatic, patient personal approach, similar to how he once worked in the Senate. Some do not want to hear this but it sounds like punching bag Joe is hanging in. He will get pounded no matter. What a slow and painful slog it is dealing with Hamas through intermediaries.

Hopefully the hostage situation will be taken care of without more deaths. But I'm skeptical, based on the admin's past performance geopolitically, etc., IMO. Again, we are dealing with islamic fanatics who don't care if they die or who they kill.

Regardless, the few US strikes on the islamic terrorists by the US is not being well accepted by Iraq. Iraq says the USA can only basically kill ISIS threats in Iraq. Hmmm ?

Of course, Hezbollah, etc. is threating revenge. The US retaliatory strikes were few and did little damage. IMO we need to up the strikes and attack those before they attack us. The islamic terrorists/jihadis know the US is risk adverse and don't want to make it look like we are too aggressive, etc.

IMO more strikes against these terrorists. Let them reap the whirlwind. We have many TLAMs and drones in the region. As well as air assets. We are in Iraq and Syria to keep ISIS in check and continue to attrite them. As we know the Iraqis can't or won't do that. Remember Iraq is 60% Shia and Iran 90+% Iran … The Iraqis ties to Iran may be stronger than first thought. Shia vs. infidels[that's us]. Even if ISIS is Sunni …

link

Good article Legion. As many thought, tensions rising in the region. And I am starting to wonder whether my original idea of just giving Iran an ultimatum to have Hamas release the hostages or else is a better option. As much as Iran may be trying to set off the big holy war of terror, maybe we give them more immediate problems by taking out key infrastructure. Unless we get back the hostages.

But this keeps leading back to more danger for the hostages. Now we are all tip toeing around as these negotiations proceed. Very hard to watch.

The hostages are the "rub". That is why Hamas took them. But they must see they are not achieving any sort of "victory". Save for the media/propaganda war. Gaza city will have to be rebuilt. It looks like Stalingrad. As the IDF is hitting known and likely Hamas locations with CAS and FA. The IDF knows they have to save the hostages. But they also know Hamas and the other allied islamic terrorists tere have to "terminated with extreme prejudice".

The hostages are buying Hamas some time. But the IDF is going to clean house. They have to. And we have to clean up Iran. With surgical strikes on military targets, oil facilities, and maybe even nuclear production locations, etc. That is going to happen sooner or later.

Agreed!

It's good to see that the US DOES NOT negotiate with terrorists! We just accept their first offer…

The current US leadership has negotiated with the Taliban and Iran … Thay are terrorists … yes ?

We are now up to at least 74 attacks on our bases and you can add this:

Subject: Pentagon says US warship, commercial vessels under attack in Red Sea


link

Yes, and the numbers of attacks on land & sea will continue to go up. As there are no punitive actions to stop them …

75 now.

We launched a drone that killed 5 terrorists in the area yesterday.

Announcement:
"Because of the current shortage of human and camel virgins, due to the current death of martyrs in Gaza, 360 virgin goats are now running in fear in Jihad heaven this morning."

Yes, and the numbers of attacks on land & sea will continue to go up. As there are no punitive actions to stop them …

Our brilliant leader will handle this, I can predict his next speech on this crisis…

"Come on man! My fellow Americans…we hold these truths…you know the thing…anyways…"

OVI +1 … I heard that jihadis when they get to Paradise. They only get 10 virgins as with so many islamic terrorists ending up there. They are running short ! Goats may be the next option … As the IDF will continue to kill islamic terrorists. As will the USA hunting down the remnants of ISIS and Iranian proxies. They can run but they will only die tired.

75 now

Yes, have no idea what the US leadership is thinking. A number of US GEN RET. have said the US needs to continue to strike the proxies shooting at our troops wherever they are. And military targets in Iran must be hit as well. They said and I have as well. Iran knows they can't take on the US Military. The US destroying much of Iran's military targets, oil assets and even nuke facilities, etc. Will topple the regime.

But for now, to paraphrase those GEN RET. Iran has seen the USA's leadership weakness and again taking advantage of it. Which I have been saying along with others for a long time.

Our brilliant leader will handle this,

If I add my comments, I will certainly be DH'd. However, many can imagine what I would say … and it ani't good !

Well, at least Biden hasn't been selling weapons direct to Iran in some goofy scheme. Payback long overdue for 241 Marines killed in Lebanon also.

I agree the time is here where there is enough evidence of provocation and complicity against Iran and I will be climbing the walls as much as any of you if we don't respond in force. Can our other brilliant leaders avoid throwing away the treasure and sacrifice expended against Putin in Ukraine in this critical moment? Brilliant may not be the right word.

I wonder how it might play out against Iran? They will surely get their proxies involved, although I think we can handle them. They will cut power to Iraq and cause suffering and chaos there. China and Russia will make the most of the PR to justify what Russia has done in Ukraine. What about our allies? What about the Saudis? They should be happy to see this…

Well, at least Biden hasn't been selling weapons direct to Iran in some goofy scheme.

Oh come one! As lame as Iran-Contra was, we're talking about $10 USD-$30 Million in spare parts and Hellfire missiles sent by Reagan to Iran. Biden has unfrozen and allowed BILLIONS and BILLIONS of $$$ to Iran. He has dropped sanctions regimes, removed groups like the Houthis from the terror lists – WHILE we're in active conflict with Iran!

I agree the time is here where there is enough evidence of provocation and complicity against Iran and I will be climbing the walls as much as any of you if we don't respond in force.

We have that. What we don't have is leadership with the will to stand up for America and abandon its Iranophile fetish policies.

Payback long overdue for 241 Marines killed in Lebanon also.

Yes and there were Sailors and a few US Army KIA'd in this islamic terrorist attack, IIRC.

I agree the time is here where there is enough evidence of provocation and complicity against Iran and I will be climbing the walls as much as any of you if we don't respond in force

Bingo …

They will surely get their proxies involved, although I think we can handle them. They will cut power to Iraq and cause suffering and chaos there.

Yes, their proxies should be targeted as well as Iran. Iraq … again another failing state. That the US, etc. can't do anything more to "help or fix" them. Part of the reason is Iraq is 65% Shia and Iran is 90% plus Shia. Right across the border, that long dead European politicians created after WWI.

We have that. What we don't have is leadership with the will to stand up for America and abandon its Iranophile fetish policies.

Bingo ! +1

Reagan set a precedent. It has gone on ever since. But we best not debate it.

Who are the Iranophiles? I have coached some Iranian college players, great kids. They do have a rich culture, but they want to be like the West also. I liked them and admired their courage in coming here.

But I would not call myself an Iranophile. I can't find a single thing I admire about the Iranian government or military. I don't think any admin has had an Iranian fetish. Biden just wishes it would go away. But he has to realize that won't happen unless he helps make it happen. He has ignored it, much like the southern border. There is an opportunity here that may not come again for a while.

I asked how it would play out if we took on Iran because some US officials have likely advised against attacking them and I want to understand the risks they might be seeing.

I don't think any admin has had an Iranian fetish. Biden just wishes it would go away.

Nope. Biden's just a meat puppet, he runs nothing but his mouth and that increasingly poorly. We're experiencing the 3rd Obama term -- all of the core people around Biden on well, most things, are Obama and even Hillary people. And these people are still stuck on their flawed, broken ideas about Iran. Goes something like this.

1. American power is largely illegitimate and the source of all the troubles of the world.

2. American presence and proxy power is the key source of instability in the Middle East.

3. American presence and proxy power (aka Israel, Saudis, UAE) need to be reduced while the more legitimate "local" power of non-US/non-Western Iran needs to be raised up.

4. Once this has been done there will be a power equilibrium in the Middle East and peace will follow.

Stupid, but that's been their goal. And they seem incapable of admitting their plan doesn't work and course correcting, because that would force them to challenge their core world views.

"Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi suggested Tuesday that it might be a "good idea" to flood the Hamas terror tunnels in Gaza with seawater, commenting on a report in the Wall Street Journal that Israel was thinking about it."

The UN in an emergency session, declared this to be both inhumane and against all the laws of war and condemned the Israelis. Their spokesperson said: "Forcing a Hamas terrorist to bathe, is beyond heartless and inhumane!". Riots at every Ivy League school, immediately followed in protest of the proposed Isreali cruelty. 😉

SB +1

"good idea" to flood the Hamas terror tunnels in Gaza with seawater, commenting on a report in the Wall Street Journal that Israel was thinking about it."

That certainly is an option, but as always, the hostages may die. If they are not dead already. Regardless IDF probably has Mossad, Shin Bet, Spec Operators looking for them.

But in the end Hamas and the other islamic terrorists working with them have to be dead & gone.

And Iran must be attrited … to at lease slow up their support for islamic terrorists and making deployable nukes.

News Flash : You can't trust islamic terrorists and do NOT give them $ for any reason.

I'd say give'm cold steel … but TLAMs, etc. come in pretty hot …

Well, if Biden doesn't run anything, at least we can leave him out of the conversation from now on.

So…this still does not answer my hypothetical…if Hillary and Obama proxies attack Iran how might it play out?

So…this still does not answer my hypothetical…if Hillary and Obama proxies attack Iran how might it play out?

I guess it depends on how the US does it -- what the intent is.

If the intent is a show of force not to look bad, while begging Iran behind the scenes to cool off for a bit, then I would expect some strikes against Houthi missile positions and other proxy bases. Probably in order of importance to Iran, from least to greatest.

1. Pro-Iranian forces in Syria and Iraq get bashed about

2. Houthi missile positions get rapidly disassembled

3. Hezbollah positions get hit by US Carrier air strikes – probably the US says US planes were attacked by AA weapons and were forced to respond

I do not think Team 44/46 intend to use force to dissuade Iran from their actions – because then we'd see 2-3 carrier groups in the Arabian Sea, maybe we'd hear of air assets being deployed to the region and B-52s being sent to Diego Garcia. They don't want to be seen as "escalating" things and trash their hopes of normalizing relations with the Mullahs.

Oh, and the Current Admin is also beginning to position itself to escape blame for possible terrorist attacks inside the US, which I'm sure Iran is threatening us with -- and which they've been planning for.

FBI Director says U.S. is facing highest risk of attack in YEARS: Chris Wray says there are 'blinking lights everywhere' and warns terrorists will 'exploit' the southern border
Chris Wray tells Congress the threat has gone to a whole 'other level'
He warns violent extremists could draw inspiration from the Hamas attack on October 7.

link

Isn't that rich? I mean, they have had a deliberate Open Border policy for years allowing millions of people to flood into the US without any oversight or awareness of who they are, causing rising crime, social turmoil and economic costs, and security risks, while attacking anyone trying to stop the flood by using Administrative power and propaganda to label people as racist and such, and NOW they say the Open Border is a security issue?? That THEY intentionally caused?!?!

"…how might it play out?"

Well, you can't defeat all of their troops/militia/terrorists/proxies by air strikes alone (as we've seen numerous times – as the Israelis see right now, with Hamas concentrated in a small area!). Sooo …
Embroiled in another ME conflict with no obvious end. Again.

Well, you can't defeat all of their troops/militia/terrorists/proxies by air strikes alone (as we've seen numerous times – as the Israelis see right now,

Well the IDF prepped the battlefield with air strikes and FA. On known or probable enemy locations, etc. They continue to do that as the war continues.

The IDF is being very good at fighting MOUT against insurgents. Based on what happened on 07 Oct. to 1200 of Israeli. Being raped, butchered, executed, etc. by Hamas, etc. The Israelis had no choice but to do what they are doing.

The IDF in Gaza is again being very good at modern combined arms warfare in an urban terrain. With MBTS, APCs, dismounted Infantry, CAS, FA and gunship support. Their losses are very low for MOUT. However, Hamas etc. losses are in the thousands. Yes, some CD has occurred not matter how much they tried to mitigate it. It is fact of MOUT, etc.

So no the IDF is not relying on air strikes only to defeat Hamas, etc. They and we know better than that. It takes Grunts, tanks, AFVs with supporting fires from FA, CAS, Gunships, etc.

That is the way modern warfare is fought. By highly trained, skilled, led, motivated militaries. E.g. Just the opposite of the Russian Military.

Hamas, etc. knew what would happen after the medieval savagery they committed. They are reaping the whirlwind. They use their own people as human meat shields. They are repugnant to say the least.

SB+1