brabus

Sure, it’s MCO. The fact is we’ve been so used to GWOT-level risk for 30+ years, so MCO-level risk to infrastructure/our mil assets seems insane. The thing is we’ve actually done incredibly well and the impact has been extremely limited when looked at through an MCO lens. For sure. Lots of people, in addition to the Ford, have spent 10+ months deployed over the last year and change. I have some real problems with force apportionment at the operational level for both AD and Guard.

Exactly, PUBLIC. Not sure why it’s so mind blowing for people that there is way more to things than what’s going to be stated publicly. In your open source based opinion, we are “far from a cohesive reason.” Those who are fully informed know that’s not an accurate statement. My biggest recommendation to you and others is understand there are great people doing amazing work for good reasons - and just because you aren’t personally in that realm/in the know doesn’t mean it’s not true. Also, open source (including admin press conferences) is primarily dead wrong, mostly full of shit, or intentionally vague/misleading.

@Pooter M2 summed my answer up quite well. It’s very evident your opinions and arguments are predicated on open source trash, or at best, some vaguely informed intel bro who read this one thing on SIPR (e.g. basically NIPR these days). You are far from accurately informed on this subject, but you talk like you’ve got it all figured out. There’s a lesson in this, if you can find it.

Why do you say that? There are very rational reasons for FISA, and I think people generally don’t understand how it works (hence why someone like Trump said “kill it,” then subsequently changed stance when he learned how it actually works and what it produces). That’s not to say abuse doesn’t happen, but that abuse is happening whether rules exist or not. So, why bureaucratically hamstring us on foreign intel collect that saves lives and wins fights?

The numbers actually do support the “they really shined” comment. I know that emotional, subjective assessments may differ. You’re not wrong about needing more interceptors or that the Army needs to put more effort into cUAS. But, your overall tone is Iran accomplished a lot - they did not.

@Clark Griswold …

That’s a very naive and objectively wrong statement. Additionally, I’m not tracking anyone here that said there aren’t any cons to a blockade. Thus, everything you said following said statements is invalid. Feel free to make your case starting from a true and accurate premise. You certainly don’t need to come to the same conclusion as others, but if you can’t start from truth, then the rest doesn’t matter.

Did someone say on here that oil isn’t a global commodity? To the rest of your rant: Why is the US blockading Iran to ramp up economic pressure such an insane concept to you? I’d love to here a critically thought out argument against foreign policy 101, along with how you would have dealt with Iran blocking the strait and attempting to play the one card they had left to influence war outcomes in their favor.

Not really, considering it’s an accurate description of your dialogue a majority of the time. I just possess a capability you don’t: I have no problem admitting when I’m wrong.

@Sua Sponte No I did not, thanks for putting that out. I do not support that and think it’s a bad post. Invalid response to Negatory regarding this specific post (my bad).

Do you just get a kick out of posting really stupid shit to ensure your credibility remains at rock bottom?

This is a wildly inaccurate statement and demonstrates you literally have no clue what you’re talking about, at the unclass level, and certainly at the classified level. The only thing you got right in your post is they are an economic power, that’s true.

Plenty, including these last two that I specifically said is retarded. But that would mean you’d actually have to have awareness on what you’re talking about and scroll up a few posts. How’s that foot taste?

@Pooter @No One It’s very easy to understand guys, stop being such disingenuous douches.

What we’re doing with Iran is reckless and without plan? 0% truth in that line you’re pedaling. That’s my point.

Well it hasn’t, so there’s no missed prediction as of time now. Always subject to change of course.

It must be exhausting to be such a miserable person so full of rage. Go have a few beers and relax a bit.

Beyond acceptable societal norms, his greatest failure with this string of rhetoric is the threat can only work if the regime cares about the survival of the people at large. Like all totalitarian regimes, they don’t give a shit about the country as a whole, civilians, etc. The only language they speak is violence against what directly affects them and their ability to wield power.

pK miss. I gave the succinct, accurate answer that can be written on an Internet forum. You have no clue what’s actually going on, but by all means, continue to run your mouth and make an ass out of yourself.

Take away (or at least reduce to max extent feasible) Iran’s ability to project any kind of influence, power, and/or destruction outside of their own borders.

@disgruntledemployee First, you put words in my mouth that I didn’t say. There are several things to be frustrated with on the tactical and operational level. That said, there is no war or great achievement without frustrations. So, yeah, there are actually sensible and good objectives with plans and contingencies addressed. Also, it was never all going to get done in 2-3 weeks. That was a dumb timeline from the beginning, but that doesn’t mean we barged in without a plan or zero thought put towards contingencies, off-ramps, etc. Bottom line: it’s a lot better than the MSM and you would like it to be. The red line for me would be mass ground invasion for longterm “nation building” (aka the last 25 years). I don’t support that one bit, and would view it as a leadership failure.

Summation of the last page: several people with not a lot of actual SA acting like they’ve got it all figured out. Par for the course I guess.

Nobody is rolling dice. There is inherent high risk in MCO and what is required to achieve intent/objectives - shouldn’t be a shock to anyone.