North Vietnam possessed a capable guerilla airforce and air defenses that gave the US military pause about carefree bombing runs, whereas the US air force has been operating over Iran with impunity after 3 days of targeted attacks. A real invasion of Iran would involve heavy tactical air bombardment to neutralize Iranian artillery - the initial results of the war show that this is effective, if nothing else.
|
American Politics Discussion Thread
|
(March 18th, 2026, 23:18)greenline Wrote: North Vietnam possessed a capable guerilla airforce and air defenses that gave the US military pause about carefree bombing runs, whereas the US air force has been operating over Iran with impunity after 3 days of targeted attacks. A real invasion of Iran would involve heavy tactical air bombardment to neutralize Iranian artillery - the initial results of the war show that this is effective, if nothing else. Is that really practical, even if the US has to fly in from outside the region using strato-tankers (wish this unit was in TBS 4x) assuming the airfields in the region are too bombarded?
Airfields themselves are pretty 'hard' targets, often repairable in hours. The scale of Iranian bombardment has also not been large or overwhelming, with there being less strikes day by day and generally focused on hitting civilian infrastructure and slow moving ships. I don't foresee the US having any problems continuing to run missions out of Bahrain, the UAE.
(March 18th, 2026, 23:18)greenline Wrote: North Vietnam possessed a capable guerilla airforce and air defenses that gave the US military pause about carefree bombing runs, whereas the US air force has been operating over Iran with impunity after 3 days of targeted attacks. A real invasion of Iran would involve heavy tactical air bombardment to neutralize Iranian artillery - the initial results of the war show that this is effective, if nothing else. The US carpet‑bombed three countries during the Vietnam War and caused the deaths of millions, dropping over five million tons of bombs - more than in all of WWII. Yet, you are saying the carpet bombing in Nam wasn't effective enough, praising Russia’s air defense as if that somehow explains why we lost in Vietnam!? Never mind the humanitarian moral issue of CAREFREE bombing civilians. A nation that carpet‑bombs other countries and slaughters multitudes of innocent civilians commits atrocities so brutal and dehumanizing that they tear lives apart, families wiped out, children buried under rubble, entire communities erased in seconds. This isn’t strategy or necessity; it’s suffering inflicted on people who had no voice, no choice, and no chance! And we still pretend to be humanitarian, even as our actions inflict suffering so immense that no claim to morality can survive it. Let say we wipeout a huge chunk of their population and bomb Iran into submission. But the real question is this, what do we actually win? A Victory That Costs Everything! Human Loss (Hide your sons and daughters. Don't let them die for some bullshit unjust war of choice) Economic Damage Domestic Instability Military & Strategic Costs Global Trust & Reputation When a nation inflicts massive suffering abroad, it risks creating the kind of resentment and extremism that can come back in devastating ways - like that of 911
FREE AMERICA? No, But Free Tibet - Wherever The Fuck That Is
We Cash All Checks - We Also Accept: Disinformation - photos from other places to fake concentration camps in Tibet. ✓ Raping a country with war crimes, nuking another to submission, makes us the lesser evil. ✓ Photos of concentration camps as solid proof of genocide ✓ Our free range troll  Keeping Everyone Honest#4832, #4781, #4772, #5056, #5095 |
