Iran Ground invasion imminent

[John Johnston]

As usual, Trump and his MAGA cronies did not think anything through. Now the American people will turn on you and it will be the lefties fault. Lol. 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, John Stone said:

But that does not in any way mean Europe could not reconfigure to provide a Continental defense. 

Or are you implying blue-on-blue? 

But again, to  believe Europe would be helpless against any future struggle against Russia (not Warsaw pact) without the USA, is ludicrous. 

 

 

Europe as constituted today cannot defend itself...for various reasons.

 

Quote

As of early 2026, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte and other experts argue that Europe cannot defend itself without the United States, warning that belief in full European defense autonomy is unrealistic. While Europe is increasing defense spending, it currently lacks the unified, independent military and nuclear capabilities—such as strategic airlift and intelligence—needed to replace the US security umbrella.

 

[John Johnston]

Just now, John Johnston said:

As usual, Trump and his MAGA cronies did not think anything through. Now the American people will turn on you and it will be the lefties fault. Lol. 

I'm going fishing...

[John Stone]

10 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

No, that is not how the U.S. Strategic Integrated Operation Plan (SIOP) worked until 2003, or upgraded flex options since then.

 

 

Not true....Russia will remain a superpower regardless of what hopes the rest of the world has about American influence.   We will never out suffer the Russians.

u believe Russia is a superpower simply based on its weapons - dated? 

China is much more a superpower than Russia based on science, technology, commerce, military ............... and weapons. 

What does Russia have? 

Oh, forgot ............. nukes! 

So does Europe

The fear of strategic bombing is the deterrent ........... not hitting hardened targets? 

The detection of launch is the squib for the holocaust ................... on strategic (civilian) targets. 

[John Stone]

5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Europe as constituted today cannot defend itself...for various reasons.

 

 

'it currently' - possible correct - but that was likely stroking. 

The US designed NATO to be dependant 

my god man, u believe Europe is going  to sit on its hands without the U.S.?

[Gaétan]

What are the babies in Iran going to eat? The Pope must not beat around the bush and should denounce the authors of genocides such as Trump, Biden, Netanyahu, Bush, Blair. Why? Because those who vote for them will put pressure on the elected officials of their political parties to stop them.

Jesus denounced the Pharisees at the risk of being stoned, but we are not asking that much of him. Anyway, Jesus said that whoever wants to save his life will lose it. Lose what? Eternal life

[bush_cheney2004]

2 minutes ago, John Stone said:

'it currently' - possible correct - but that was likely stroking. 

The US designed NATO to be dependant 

my god man, u believe Europe is going  to sit on its hands without the U.S.?

 

Wrong....NATO was designed to keep the Americans in, Russians out, and Germans down.  Europe has a host of problems regardless of what the Americans do or don't do.

[John Stone]

Just now, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Wrong....NATO was designed to keep the Americans in, Russians out, and Germans down.  Europe has a host of problems regardless of what the Americans do or don't do.

............... problems??

arguably not as great as the U.S. .................. beginning with their ersatz leadership. 

[bush_cheney2004]

1 minute ago, John Stone said:

............... problems??

arguably not as great as the U.S. .................. beginning with their ersatz leadership. 

 

Let AI answer this question:

Quote

Key NATO Military Limitations & Liabilities

• Significant Budgetary Gaps: Despite the 2% GDP guideline, many NATO nations spend significantly below this target, resulting in an estimated $827 billion in underfunding over the last decade.
• Reliance on the United States: The U.S. continues to represent roughly 68% of total defense spending by NATO members, leading to concerns about fair burden-sharing.
• Equipment and Infrastructure Shortfalls: There are critical shortages in armoured formations, long-range artillery, air defense systems, and logistical capabilities necessary for collective defense.
• Uneven Commitment (Strategic Liabilities): Some members, particularly in the Baltic region, are considered strategic liabilities because they contribute relatively little to collective defense while increasing the risk of direct U.S.-Russia confrontation.
• Non-Binding Targets: The 2% spending target, set in 2014, is a goal, not a contractual obligation, making enforcement difficult.
• Misleading Spending Figures: Some members meet equipment spending targets (20% of their budget) only by keeping their overall defense budgets very low, or by inflating "defence spending" to include items like military pensions.

 

[John Stone]

4 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Let AI answer this question:

 

..............have u examined Russia's budget sheet lately??

[bush_cheney2004]

11 minutes ago, Gaétan said:

What are the babies in Iran going to eat? The Pope must not beat around the bush and should denounce the authors of genocides such as Trump, Biden, Netanyahu, Bush, Blair. Why? Because those who vote for them will put pressure on the elected officials of their political parties to stop them.

 

 

That's the best part of today (Easter Sunday)...the Americans (and one Canadian) are on their way to the Moon (again), the U.S. military is pounding Iran for old times sake, and the frickin' Pope is American too !   

 

1 minute ago, John Stone said:

..............have u examined Russia's budget sheet lately??

 

Have you examined why Sweden and Finland joined NATO recently?

Edited April 5 by bush_cheney2004

[John Stone]

5 minutes ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Let AI answer this question:

 

..............have u examined Russia's budget sheet lately??

1 minute ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

That's the best part of today (Easter Sunday)...the Americans (and one Canadian) are on their way to the Moon (again), the U.S. military is pounding Iran for old times sake, and the frickin' Pope is American too !   

 

Have you examined why Sweden and Finland joined NATO recently?

............... Russia's failing attempt in Ukraine? 

[BeaverFever]

12 hours ago, User said:

Holy shit, yet another thing you are woefully ignorant on. 

Chemical/Nerve agents are delivered using the exact same systems militaries already use every day… artillery shells, aerial bombs, rockets, missiles. It is just a different payload. 

You don’t need to “hide” anything. The plane dropping the bomb is the delivery system. The artillery battery firing shells is the delivery system.

 

No you don’t know what you’re talking about.   Again. 
 

You still need a special type shell, bomb or rocket to deliver and disperse the agent, dummy. For example a warhead specifically designed to dispense an aerosol agent at the proper dispersion rate, altitude etc. What do you think they just pour a cup of sarin on a conventional shell?  And none of those weapons or the facilities to produce them were in Iraq, period. 

[User]

45 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

No you don’t know what you’re talking about.   Again. 
 

You still need a special type shell, bomb or rocket to deliver and disperse the agent, dummy. For example a warhead specifically designed to dispense an aerosol agent at the proper dispersion rate, altitude etc. What do you think they just pour a cup of sarin on a conventional shell?  And none of those weapons or the facilities to produce them were in Iraq, period. 

Typical Beaver tactics. Pretend you don’t say what you did. You comment was “weapon system” that “delivers” and how hard it was to make and hide and now you try to act like you were just talking about the artillery shell. It isn’t hard to hide an artillery shell.

“The weapon system that delivers the agent is more complex to produce and harder to hide than the agent itself.”

Also… you are wrong yet again about finding none in Iraq.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/10/15/356360949/pentagon-reportedly-hushed-up-chemical-weapons-finds-in-iraq

The Times reports in an extensive article:

"From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein's rule.

"In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act."

[BeaverFever]

31 minutes ago, User said:

Typical Beaver tactics. Pretend you don’t say what you did. You comment was “weapon system” that “delivers” and how hard it was to make and hide and now you try to act like you were just talking about the artillery shell. It isn’t hard to hide an artillery shell.

“The weapon system that delivers the agent is more complex to produce and harder to hide than the agent itself.”

Also… you are wrong yet again about finding none in Iraq.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/10/15/356360949/pentagon-reportedly-hushed-up-chemical-weapons-finds-in-iraq

The Times reports in an extensive article:

"From 2004 to 2011, American and American-trained Iraqi troops repeatedly encountered, and on at least six occasions were wounded by, chemical weapons remaining from years earlier in Saddam Hussein's rule.

"In all, American troops secretly reported finding roughly 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs, according to interviews with dozens of participants, Iraqi and American officials, and heavily redacted intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act."

OMG these ridiculously debunked and cherry-picked claims were put to bed 20 years ago!  I am sorry that you wre still in diapers or not even born then but we are not going back in time to re-litigate Bush’s thoroughly debunked WMD claims that they long ago admitted were false. The jury is thoroughly in. The Republicans long ago conceded there was no WMD and resorting to pretending it was due to “an intelligence failure”  and not their fabricated lies. 
 

As for your article, those were not Iraqi stockpiles arsenals or active weapons those were old discarded shells at a disposal site. It is a matter of public record that Reagan sold chemical weapons to Saddam in the 80s that has never been disputed. It is also a matter of public record that those weapons and the facilities to make them were systematically destroyed after Desert Storm. You can dig up old world 1 mustard gas shells from a European farmer’s field and you can still be “wounded” by the residue that remains if you are stupid enough to touch it, only an absolute fool would believe that meams it is still a battlefield effective weapon or that it somehow “proves” that the European country was amassing a stockpile of WMD

 

As I have explained WMD have to be stored in specific climatic conditions or they rapidly degrade amd become useless and yes it is hard to hide a stockpile of artillery shells rockets etc (not “a” shell but the thousands necessary to constitute an arsenal you dimwit) much less in perfect climate control and the launchers, cannons etc. . USA occupied Iraq for a decade and found ZERO arsenal, ZERO storage facilities, ZERO production facilities, ZERO launchers. And of course no WMD were fired at US troops when they invaded or by ISIS which consisted of significant Iraqi military forces, which is a key giveaway that they didnt have WMD. A decades-old buried dumpsite of Ronald Reagan’s expired inert shells is not evidence of anything. 
 

They jury has been in for 20 years amd Republicans have publicly admitted it for more than 2 decades, I am not going to go round and round with 100+ of your inane clueless posts simply because you can’t process basic facts and can’t admit you are wrong in an internet argument .

Edited April 5 by BeaverFever

[User]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

OMG these ridiculously debunked and cherry-picked claims were put to bed 20 years ago!

Typical Beaver BS.

You make the stupid false comment that none of these weapons were found in Iraq, period.

I point out you are wrong. Again.

You go off on some melt down tangent arguing things not said instead of just admitting you were wrong. 

[robosmith]

6 hours ago, John Stone said:

ur overlooking A.I. leverage? 

nuke powered - endless dwell? (surface, air, subsurface)

miniaturization will be perfected to an even greater degree - really the next great challenge Iran would have faced in their nuke warheads. 

finally - orbiting weapon systems - all the rules are off - what is really scary is  A.I. surveillance ........ 

I wouldn't trust AI with nukes. It's hard enough to trust humans who have skin in the game with nukes.

Maybe you don't know that nukes in orbit can easily make space uninhabitable with huge amounts of orbiting debris.

[BeaverFever]

1 hour ago, User said:

Typical Beaver BS.

You make the stupid false comment that none of these weapons were found in Iraq, period.

I point out you are wrong. Again.

You go off on some melt down tangent arguing things not said instead of just admitting you were wrong. 

Typical User trying to make distorting and irrelevant arguments because you can’t admit you don’t know wtf you are talking about anfd have no point 

Everyone with at least a basic level of intelligence understands that Saddam didn’t have WMD and that decades-old expired shells that had been disposed of and buried for years don’t count. If all you have is an empty peanut butter jar in your garbage can everyone understands that you don’t have peanut butter, NOBODY is dumb enough to think that means you have a peanut butter stockpile.  

The whole reason this is relevant is Bush Jr told Americans he had to invade invaded Iraq it had an active WMD program that could  strike US soil within 45 minutes of launch and Saddam was plotting with al Qaeda to do just that. He even showed the public what he claimed were satellite photos of these mobile launch vehicles and called the intel  a “slam dunk”. 
 

He didn’t say we have to invade Iraq because they might have some old discarded inert shells that might make you sick if you dig them up and lick them. 
 

You are hilarious.  Just like Trump is off randomly bombing stuff in Iran with no clear plan, objective or strategy you just barge in to every conversation trying to argue with people just for the sake of being disagreeable without having any point. Reminds me of when you tried to barge into a conversation in the thread on energy grid to try and claim that storing extra fuel at those gas power plants will produce more power during peak demand because the pipe doesn’t provide enough energy. It was just dumb nonsensical gibberish you posted because you wanted to he part of the argument even though you had no actual point to make and knew nothing about the topic. 
 

Saddam didn’t have WMD after Desert Storm, period.  Everyone understands that and that old discarded of shells don’t count. You are just desperate to pursue pointless wand winless internet arguments at all costs because you have no other life amd just like you blundering president in Iran you don’t know how to extract yourself when you’re in over your head so you just continue to repeat and double down endlessly because you know nothing else. 

[John Stone]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

I wouldn't trust AI with nukes. It's hard enough to trust humans who have skin in the game with nukes.

Maybe you don't know that nukes in orbit can easily make space uninhabitable with huge amounts of orbiting debris.

space already has huge amounts of orbiting debris. 

Orbiting debris makes nukes in space harder to detect........... 

U wouldn't trust AI with nukes (?) ..............me neither .........moot! 

Believe me, noone will be asking us. haha

The race for Space is on (again).............. with China......... strictly peaceful tho. 

Science / technology ........ Trump should stop cutting NASA's budget. 

 

[robosmith]

11 minutes ago, John Stone said:

space already has huge amounts of orbiting debris. 

Not nearly as huge as after a nuke explodes.

[Legato]

1 minute ago, robosmith said:

Not nearly as huge as after a nuke explodes.

It's not so much the debris (if any) but more a lingering radiation belt(s) that can disrupt electronics.

It's all electrickery.

[User]

1 hour ago, BeaverFever said:

Typical User trying to make distorting and irrelevant arguments because you can’t admit you don’t know wtf you are talking about anfd have no point 

You made the stupid argument about how chemical/nerve agents are delivered. 
 

I pointed out your ignorance. 
 

Then you try to claim none were found in Iraq.

Once again, I point out your ignorance.

Instead of dealing with your being wrong over and over again, you start doing the Beaver filibuster where you post a bunch of crap that has nothing to do with anything. 

Same thing you did when you were wrong about the Trees and a million other things on here.

You would rather prove how much of a liar you are willing to be than just admit you were wrong. 

 

[cougar]

21 hours ago, paxamericana said:

You support Iran? Or you just hate America?

I am on the side of international law.

Wonder how you do not hate yourself already

[cougar]

17 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Let AI answer this question:

 

Spending any money on military is a waste of money (time, effort, materials) and needlessly damaging the environment.

By the way, what is the US national debt and what happens when it can no longer be serviced?

I know what, the credit limit gets increased!

This is how one can become a superpower - just keep borrowing , make weapons and technology to threaten the world with and never repay the debt!

 

[bush_cheney2004]

3 hours ago, cougar said:

Spending any money on military is a waste of money (time, effort, materials) and needlessly damaging the environment.

 

That's fine...others have disagreed many times over because of world wars, regional conflicts, and threats.   One vote to a customer.  If you want peace...prepare for war(s).

 

Quote

This is how one can become a superpower - just keep borrowing , make weapons and technology to threaten the world with and never repay the debt!

 

Lots of countries borrow beyond their means, even without massive militaries or superpower status.  Canada is a great example.

National debts are never intended to be repaid in full...just financed, serviced, and monetized with resulting inflation and currency devaluation.