Just do it you can’t negotiate with these evil bastards. Wipe em out and be done with it

I understand why Trump is attempting to negotiate with those people. Given what they are, there’s zero chance any agreement will be honored by them. They cannot be trusted. It’s not a criticism of Trump when I say, I wouldn’t even bother. I’m too impatient to waste time on wild eyed true believers in evil.

I think it's to give cover..."I tried to negotiate with the regime but they refused"...oh well, the targeting will continue.

Just go ahead an MOAB the hell out of the entire Kharg Island installation; bounce the rubble. The mullahs and the followers want their 72 virgin goats, so accommodate them.

Well we actually want to keep the assets on Kharg. We just want it under our control and devoid of Iranians.

The Hormuz issue is tricky but maybe we need to finance a causeway across Oman at its narrowest point and then tanker traffic doesn’t have to transit through any Iranian waters to get to the gulf.

That would be a 20 mile causeway across Dubai, the Arabs have plenty of money to do that. They make money from oil sales, may as well spend some on capital improvements.

I've been pondering this a bit, and I have zero military or naval experience, so maybe some of you can set me straight, but is there a reason we can't control the strait from the air? We've got plenty of access to bases on the west side of it. Put up 24/7 fighter patrols for a few weeks. Any land based launch site that's dumb enough to show itself gets vaporized, anything on the water without our authorization gets sunk. You wouldn't even necessarily need to use expensive munitions for a lot of that since we have air superiority. Seems like aircraft could cover more area and address threats more quickly than ships, and you wouldn't be exposing an entire naval vessel and crew to Iranian missiles and mines. The LCSs might need to go in there to do some mine sweeping, but are actual sea-based escorts for tankers really necessary?

quote:

Originally posted by 2BobTanner:
Just go ahead an MOAB the hell out of the entire Kharg Island installation; bounce the rubble. The mullahs and the followers want their 72 virgin goats, so accommodate them.

No... we don't want to do that.

I heard General Keane say there are thousands of missiles remaining. I would guess as long as the crazy murderers have that many missiles, they will not surrender in any form under any circumstances, since ballistic missiles are the next best thing to nukes.

I can't see how this can end until the job is finished, as in done, our common enemy completely defeated.

^^^ I'm confused and disappointed. We've heard how well we've demolished their arsenal, yet they keep attacking. What's the damn truth?

Religious mental insanity, and missiles. What else do you need to survive until your enemy gives up and goes home.

quote:

Originally posted by 6guns:
^^^ I'm confused and disappointed. We've heard how well we've demolished their arsenal, yet they keep attacking. What's the damn truth?

We've been pounding the shit out of their missile launchers. One pops up and fires, and either the US or Israel has had a fantastic success rate on destroying it.

Grok estimates that prior to Feb 28th Iran had an estimated:

400–500 ballistic missile launchers (mobile TELs/transporter-erector-launchers plus some fixed sites). Now, US and Israel are saying destroyed 70% to 75%.

2500 medium range ballistic missiles. They've fired 400 and the US/Israel has hit storage and production facilities bringing it down to 1000

Also Iran's firing rate has decreased 90% since opening days. Partially due to missile launchers being destroyed, fear of more being destroyed, and missile losses.

Hammering the launchers is key. Even better than bombing one that just fired is if Iranians notify intel on location of launchers and where Iran is converting commercial heavy-truck chassis (6x6, 8x8, or 10x10 trucks/trailers) into new launchers.

It's like getting "guns off the streets".

You have to find them to get them.

It's 4 weeks. It took 47 years to get to this point.

The problem is short sighted, selfish people that think 8 seconds is too much time, any more is a waste, and agenda driven deciet from media and "influencers".

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:
I've been pondering this a bit, and I have zero military or naval experience, so maybe some of you can set me straight, but is there a reason we can't control the strait from the air?

Latest blurb I heard recently was A-10s patrolling the strait. Good loitering time and PLENTY of “yeah, that needs to go away”.
I try not to follow much news since a lot of it is such bullshit.

quote:

Originally posted by KMitch200:

Latest blurb I heard recently was A-10s patrolling the strait. Good loitering time and PLENTY of “yeah, that needs to go away”.
I try not to follow much news since a lot of it is such bullshit.

Yeah, it seems like the A-10, working in conjunction with some E3s or Hawkeyes would excel in that role. It might even give the pilots some air-to-air opportunities shooting down drones.

I also saw this article today: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...ocks-Royal-Navy.html. According to it, the entire Royal Navy only has 5 operational ships right now (3 frigates, 1 destroyer, and 1 sub). They even had to borrow a frigate from the German Navy to complete a scheduled exercise, and aren't able to adequately fulfill their security commitments in Cyprus. It's no wonder they don't want anything to do with escort duty in the strait...they couldn't do it if they wanted to! I knew things were bad, but I had no idea they were THAT bad.

Size comparison A10’s autocannon vs. VW Beetle:



NOBODY WANTED THE A-10 WARTHOG—AND NOW IT’S THE MILITARY’S MOST BELOVED PLANE

quote:

Originally posted by 92fstech:

Yeah, it seems like the A-10, working in conjunction with some E3s or Hawkeyes would excel in that role. It might even give the pilots some air-to-air opportunities shooting down drones.

Sadly the USAF E-3 tech is dated and old, many barely able to fly. The E-2D squadron that recently returned off of Nimitz, was re-deployed because their radars are modern and able to pick-up the smaller, hard to track drones.

quote:

I also saw this article today: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/ne...ocks-Royal-Navy.html. According to it, the entire Royal Navy only has 5 operational ships right now (3 frigates, 1 destroyer, and 1 sub).

The RN has been in a sad state for over a decade. Their Type-45 destroyers are great anti-air ships but full of gremlins. Hard to believe in an cost cutting effort when they first came out, they bypassed on the fire-control software upgrade to allow their deck gun to shoot-down air threats.

Meanwhile Iran's bitches in Iraq are getting blasted.

https://x.com/visegrad24/status/2037605060155158801

Not hearing much from Israel of late, I would guess they are locked up pretty tight with regime takedown operations. When people aren't talking it means stuff's getting done, and you can only hope you're not on the receiving end.

quote:

Originally posted by lkdr1989:
Meanwhile Iran's bitches in Iraq are getting blasted.

I've never heard an A-10 from the receiving end before. That is utterly terrifying!