Damn those Rouges.
***Iran [Military Action Thread]***[See Staff Note in OP]
1,938,800 Views |
8899 Replies |
Last: 21 min ago by flown-the-coop
that twitter feed is well known to be complete BS
TxAg82 said:
From the looks of the last 3 posts... someone may be going rogue with these attacks. I bet the politicians in Tehran who are at least trying to negotiate are scattering right now.
IRGC broke off into 31 different factions, so each one has a different commander ( I believe)
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
It tells me that the War Powers Act has more teeth than people think it does. And/or we want something pretty significant to happen before we crank up the war again. Also, it's no secret we've exhausted a lot of ammunition so we may be restraining because of that.
Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
obviously Trump and the braintrust around him at the White House
believe it is better for the USA right now to strangle the Islamic Republic into submission than to start heavily bombing them.
there is even an air blockade in that no aircraft have even been flying OVER Iran the past few days much less landing.
YouBet said:Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
It tells me that the War Powers Act has more teeth than people think it does. And/or we want something pretty significant to happen before we crank up the war again. Also, it's no secret we've exhausted a lot of ammunition so we may be restraining because of that.
first point may be possible
last point definitely NOT correct.
there have been 6600 TONS of military equipment airlifted and sea lifted into Israel in the past 6 weeks alone.
there were 24 USAF tankers over Israel / Jordan / Saudi Arabia yesterday.
there are literally new Iron Dome batteries protecting the UAE which fired yesterday.
ammunition is not a problem.
nortex97 said:
It's an 'interesting' route to be sure.And yes, the "US Navy route" appears deep enough to accomodate the largest oil supertankers, but it's very narrow, with several obstacles both north and south the route (including shallow reefs).
— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) May 5, 2026
I'm not a mariner/navy guy at all, but that seems quite narrow/thin for these enormous VLCC types of ships. Hopefully much more to follow.
Our goal should be to open that one in red along with keeping the green one open. Essentially that would completely open the strait. Hopefully that is our goal and we are working on it
Once that is done that takes everything away from Iran. The strait is basically all they have left
This should be our top priority
The Fall Guy said:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/hegseth-iran-ceasefire-is-not-over-the-us-is-not-looking-for-a-fight/
Hegseth said ceasefire is not over. US not looking for a fight. Still think yesterday's attack on UAE was rouge elements.
So Fing weak in my view, not looking for a fight? That sounds so weak.
I do not understand it, finish them off.
Maybe and hopefully he is just saying this so we can catch them off guard
LMCane said:Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
obviously Trump and the braintrust around him at the White House
believe it is better for the USA right now to strangle the Islamic Republic into submission than to start heavily bombing them.
there is even an air blockade in that no aircraft have even been flying OVER Iran the past few days much less landing.
I believe this is correct. The administration is making progress in moving towards their goal of capitulation without great expending lives and material. Why not take the slow road with less risk? Trump seems to weigh the cost of American servicemen very heavily, something that should be very much appreciated.
Right now, exposing Iran's bluff on the SoH is a key point in removing the last leverage that Iran has, to the extent that leverage actually exists. Without that threat, everything else Trump wants becomes much easier. I still think the time for more bombs will come, but that will be over forcing the surrender of the nuclear material and hopefully the end of the IRGC and control of Iran by radicals at large.
Iran continues to poke the bear.
🚨 The Iranian terror regime has launched another missile and drone attack on the United Arab Emirates.
— C14 News Israel | EN (@c14israel) May 5, 2026
Today, unfortunately, many Americans have good reason to fear that they will be victimized if they are unable to protect themselves. And today, no less than in 1791, the Second Amendment guarantees their right to do so. - Justice Samuel Alito 2022
Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
A desperate enemy is much more likely to make mistakes and to present a better target package. They're dealing with ever-dwindling resources with no way to replenish supplies. Competing elements within their own ranks will act like new battle fronts without any action needed on our part. Better to wait them out a bit and face a weakened opponent.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
We really need to call the current strategy what it is, a siege. Sieges have historically been very successful. We control the air, they are mostly surrounded by hostile neighbors, we are establishing control of the sea, and land crossings of any scale can be controlled with air superiority. While the scale of this siege is enormous given the size of the country, but technology has made large scale sieges possible. We aren't talking castles and fortified villages any more.
The only downside to a siege strategy is that the real pressure comes from starvation, something nobody wants to see because we are not trying to starve to death a citizenry that can create a civil nation if the radicals are removed. That's the trick.
The only downside to a siege strategy is that the real pressure comes from starvation, something nobody wants to see because we are not trying to starve to death a citizenry that can create a civil nation if the radicals are removed. That's the trick.
agent-maroon said:Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
A desperate enemy is much more likely to make mistakes and to present a better target package. They're dealing with ever-dwindling resources with no way to replenish supplies. Competing elements within their own ranks will act like new battle fronts without any action needed on our part. Better to wait them out a bit and face a weakened opponent.
Yes I agree with that. I just don't want to lose a destroyer because that's the "trigger". Don't even want to take that chance.
nortex97 said:
It's an 'interesting' route to be sure.And yes, the "US Navy route" appears deep enough to accomodate the largest oil supertankers, but it's very narrow, with several obstacles both north and south the route (including shallow reefs).
— Javier Blas (@JavierBlas) May 5, 2026
I'm not a mariner/navy guy at all, but that seems quite narrow/thin for these enormous VLCC types of ships. Hopefully much more to follow.
From what I understand, that route is perfectly fine for navigation for even the larger ships that go through the strait.
Now...... I don't think it's feasible for ALL of the traffic that would normally go through the strait to go that way at the same time.
benchmark said:nortex97 said:
I'm not a mariner/navy guy at all, but that seems quite narrow/thin for these enormous VLCC types of ships. Hopefully much more to follow.
Looks like the passage may be between 2 small Omani islands Bu Rashid and Didamar - a distance of about 5 NM. By comparison, SW Pass on the Mississippi is about 1/3 of mile wide. The difference being that the Hormuz ships don't have a pilot aboard (a specialized navigator with local waterway knowledge).
ETA. Also for comparison, the Singapore strait is 1.2 NM wide at it's narrowest point south of St. John's Island.
The depth of the water matters too. That's the part I'm not sure about.
LMCane said:Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
obviously Trump and the braintrust around him at the White House
believe it is better for the USA right now to strangle the Islamic Republic into submission than to start heavily bombing them.
there is even an air blockade in that no aircraft have even been flying OVER Iran the past few days much less landing.
I heard that Iran can, supposedly, only hold out for a few more months then everything collapses and then they're completely done.
Now to see if our Intel is correct.
There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the later ignorance. Hippocrates
Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
Restraint is the key strategy here.
You're dealing with 30+ factions of a government now - it's not one clear command structure.
You are never going to get 30 factions all to agree to stop fighting, not when their religion glorifies death. Negotiation is tricky here, and we have some semblance of peace and a route to a successful negotiation with the important parts of their leadership. The conflict going back "hot" would be disastrous for those efforts.
Negotiate a deal with those leaders and then let them (or help them) put the others in their place. That's the route where this ends in the next couple months and you don't have to create a humanitarian crisis for 90 million people.
I would not call the collective of 30 or so fractured IRGC groups to be anything resembling a government.
The fighting groups are splintered. I am not sure we have a great grasp on how everything "government" related is working - like power, water, food, healthcare, etc.
The fighting groups are splintered. I am not sure we have a great grasp on how everything "government" related is working - like power, water, food, healthcare, etc.
2026NCAggies said:American Hardwood said:LMCane said:Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
obviously Trump and the braintrust around him at the White House
believe it is better for the USA right now to strangle the Islamic Republic into submission than to start heavily bombing them.
there is even an air blockade in that no aircraft have even been flying OVER Iran the past few days much less landing.
I believe this is correct. The administration is making progress in moving towards their goal of capitulation without great expending lives and material. Why not take the slow road with less risk? Trump seems to weigh the cost of American servicemen very heavily, something that should be very much appreciated.
Right now, exposing Iran's bluff on the SoH is a key point in removing the last leverage that Iran has, to the extent that leverage actually exists. Without that threat, everything else Trump wants becomes much easier. I still think the time for more bombs will come, but that will be over forcing the surrender of the nuclear material and hopefully the end of the IRGC and control of Iran by radicals at large.
The only way you finish them off is through another bombing campaign. They do not care about the blockade, have you seen their last proposal? Complete joke. There is no negotiating with these idiots, they could care less about the economy, they just want to outlast us and survive
It is time to finish the job and devastate through bombing
You do not go the slow route period, congress is fed up already and so are the population. FINISH THE DAMN JOB
This thing could be won within another month. The blockade will take a long time. We do not have that kind of time.
Rs are going to get their asses tore up in the midterms if this lasts months
Completely disagree. You can't "finish the job" with bombing alone, we have already bombed 95% of the military targets. To meet the objectives of taking Iran's Uranium and essentially taking over the strait and ensuring safe passage would require significant "boots on the ground" presence which i think in the US is the least preferred option.
flown-the-coop said:
I would not call the collective of 30 or so fractured IRGC groups to be anything resembling a government.
The fighting groups are splintered. I am not sure we have a great grasp on how everything "government" related is working - like power, water, food, healthcare, etc.
"we" means you and me on an internet board.
you can bet your mortgage that "we" BEING MOSSAD AND CIA AND NSA AND NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL AGENCY
have an exact understanding of what is happening all over Iran.
LMCane said:flown-the-coop said:
I would not call the collective of 30 or so fractured IRGC groups to be anything resembling a government.
The fighting groups are splintered. I am not sure we have a great grasp on how everything "government" related is working - like power, water, food, healthcare, etc.
"we" means you and me on an internet board.
you can bet your mortgage that "we" BEING MOSSAD AND CIA AND NSA AND NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL AGENCY
have an exact understanding of what is happening all over Iran.
But dammit Cane, they have to tell me! One of the WH reporters asked Trump the "threshold" question on the cease fire. He said you would know when the threshold has been crossed.
I haven't exactly scoured the interwebs for it, and I understand the internet blackouts and jamming, but I do remain surprised at just how little is out there (or it's not being correlated widely).
Perhaps a "scenes from Tehran" thread could be interesting.
Agador Spartacus said:Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
Restraint is the key strategy here.
You're dealing with 30+ factions of a government now - it's not one clear command structure.
You are never going to get 30 factions all to agree to stop fighting, not when their religion glorifies death. Negotiation is tricky here, and we have some semblance of peace and a route to a successful negotiation with the important parts of their leadership. The conflict going back "hot" would be disastrous for those efforts.
Negotiate a deal with those leaders and then let them (or help them) put the others in their place. That's the route where this ends in the next couple months and you don't have to create a humanitarian crisis for 90 million people.
Sounds like the only positive and realistic outcome we can hope for from this situation, that doesn't involve a "kick the can dow the road" settlement is a civil war.
The moderates in government and the Army vs. the IRGC. It sounds like one is tormenting already. We just need to keep the pressure on until it materializes. Then we can offer material and intelligence to the moderates
harge57 said:2026NCAggies said:American Hardwood said:LMCane said:Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
obviously Trump and the braintrust around him at the White House
believe it is better for the USA right now to strangle the Islamic Republic into submission than to start heavily bombing them.
there is even an air blockade in that no aircraft have even been flying OVER Iran the past few days much less landing.
I believe this is correct. The administration is making progress in moving towards their goal of capitulation without great expending lives and material. Why not take the slow road with less risk? Trump seems to weigh the cost of American servicemen very heavily, something that should be very much appreciated.
Right now, exposing Iran's bluff on the SoH is a key point in removing the last leverage that Iran has, to the extent that leverage actually exists. Without that threat, everything else Trump wants becomes much easier. I still think the time for more bombs will come, but that will be over forcing the surrender of the nuclear material and hopefully the end of the IRGC and control of Iran by radicals at large.
The only way you finish them off is through another bombing campaign. They do not care about the blockade, have you seen their last proposal? Complete joke. There is no negotiating with these idiots, they could care less about the economy, they just want to outlast us and survive
It is time to finish the job and devastate through bombing
You do not go the slow route period, congress is fed up already and so are the population. FINISH THE DAMN JOB
This thing could be won within another month. The blockade will take a long time. We do not have that kind of time.
Rs are going to get their asses tore up in the midterms if this lasts months
Completely disagree. You can't "finish the job" with bombing alone, we have already bombed 95% of the military targets. To meet the objectives of taking Iran's Uranium and essentially taking over the strait and ensuring safe passage would require significant "boots on the ground" presence which i think in the US is the least preferred option.
Um we have not bombed 95% of the military targets. Trump and Hegseth said we only bombed 70 to 75% and it is probably more around 65%. You bomb the remaining targets, kill off more top leaders and bomb their infrastructure to rubble. While keeping the blockade
They will be done with if we do that. Arm the civilians and get factions of the Artesh army to turn against the IRGC and it will definitely be over
And we have already cleared one passage in the strait without boots on the ground...............
Quote:
I'm not a mariner/navy guy at all
Nor am I, but Sal Mercogliano says this southern route (width and depth) is not an issue at all. I tend to take his word for that.
Via Fars: pic.twitter.com/Mdsshz4ziS
— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) May 5, 2026
2026NCAggies said:harge57 said:2026NCAggies said:American Hardwood said:LMCane said:Rockdoc said:
What I want to know is what is our "threshold" as the general put it? Even though we intercepted what they fired at our ships, what if one slips through and hits one of our destroyers? That's not acceptable and pure BS. The act of firing should have been the threshold. Quit screwing around with these idiots. Losing a multi-billion dollar ship is not acceptable.
obviously Trump and the braintrust around him at the White House
believe it is better for the USA right now to strangle the Islamic Republic into submission than to start heavily bombing them.
there is even an air blockade in that no aircraft have even been flying OVER Iran the past few days much less landing.
I believe this is correct. The administration is making progress in moving towards their goal of capitulation without great expending lives and material. Why not take the slow road with less risk? Trump seems to weigh the cost of American servicemen very heavily, something that should be very much appreciated.
Right now, exposing Iran's bluff on the SoH is a key point in removing the last leverage that Iran has, to the extent that leverage actually exists. Without that threat, everything else Trump wants becomes much easier. I still think the time for more bombs will come, but that will be over forcing the surrender of the nuclear material and hopefully the end of the IRGC and control of Iran by radicals at large.
The only way you finish them off is through another bombing campaign. They do not care about the blockade, have you seen their last proposal? Complete joke. There is no negotiating with these idiots, they could care less about the economy, they just want to outlast us and survive
It is time to finish the job and devastate through bombing
You do not go the slow route period, congress is fed up already and so are the population. FINISH THE DAMN JOB
This thing could be won within another month. The blockade will take a long time. We do not have that kind of time.
Rs are going to get their asses tore up in the midterms if this lasts months
Completely disagree. You can't "finish the job" with bombing alone, we have already bombed 95% of the military targets. To meet the objectives of taking Iran's Uranium and essentially taking over the strait and ensuring safe passage would require significant "boots on the ground" presence which i think in the US is the least preferred option.
Um we have not bombed 95% of the military targets. Trump and Hegseth said we only bombed 70 to 75% and it is probably more around 65%. You bomb the remaining targets, kill off more top leaders and bomb their infrastructure to rubble. While keeping the blockade
They will be done with if we do that. Arm the civilians and get factions of the Artesh army to turn against the IRGC and it will definitely be over
And we have already cleared one passage in the strait without boots on the ground...............
in hindsight wonder if the initial decapitation strike was the right approach? Maybe for the Israelis thinking of it in terms of perpetual regional war, and IIRC that strike was the Israelis' doing, it was a good move. But for us looking to destroy nuclear and missile capability and get out, it left too big a void in national authority figures who could cut a deal.
Flavius Agximus said:
in hindsight wonder if the initial decapitation strike was the right approach? Maybe for the Israelis thinking of it in terms of perpetual regional war, and IIRC that strike was the Israelis' doing, it was a good move. But for us looking to destroy nuclear and missile capability and get out, it left too big a void in national authority figures who could cut a deal.
That is an interesting alternative scenario but I think ultimately the decapitation will be shown to be correct - primarily because it did not stop at just the head or top layers and has continued (and likely will continue) until reliably non-jihadic leaders open to a nuclear, ballistic missile, terror proxy supporting free Iran emerge.
The IRGC leaders who continue to hold out are likely being marked for deletion.
The problem is not the void, it's how deep the "Death to America" cult persists in the "regime".
Gaeilge said:Via Fars: pic.twitter.com/Mdsshz4ziS
— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) May 5, 2026
Yeah, habib, it's called "unconditional surrender".
It's what happens when you lose a war in dramatic style and have absolutely NOTHING to negotiate with.
It would be good for you to learn that really quickly.
Heck, we're not even asking for unconditional surrender. We're not asking for land or dictating their form of government or anything like that. Just give us the enriched uranium, stop trying to make more, and cut out the terrorist activity in the strait and elsewhere. Just normal simple stuff most countries would be ok with in exchange for us dropping sanctions, etc and letting your country thrive.
They would rather die than to agree to those things. We should oblige.
Gaeilge said:Via Fars: pic.twitter.com/Mdsshz4ziS
— OSINTtechnical (@Osinttechnical) May 5, 2026
I don't think he understands the two are intertwined.
The US puts max pressure on you IN ORDER for you to accept their unilateral demands.
If there is no pressure, then there is no reason for you to come to an agreement/end the conflict/surrender
The four key figures driving decision-making in Iran - including the recent strike in the UAE:
Ahmad Vahidi - Commander of the IRGC
Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr - Secretary of the National Security Council
Hossein Taeb - Senior adviser to the Supreme Leader
Mojtaba Khamenei - Supreme Leader
According to my sources, the three coordinate decisions with Mojtaba.
Source close to the IRGC tells me:
"Any sign of hesitation will be seen as weakness and will push the Americans to further harden their terms."
Ahmad Vahidi - Commander of the IRGC
Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr - Secretary of the National Security Council
Hossein Taeb - Senior adviser to the Supreme Leader
Mojtaba Khamenei - Supreme Leader
According to my sources, the three coordinate decisions with Mojtaba.
Source close to the IRGC tells me:
"Any sign of hesitation will be seen as weakness and will push the Americans to further harden their terms."
javajaws said:
Heck, we're not even asking for unconditional surrender. We're not asking for land or dictating their form of government or anything like that. Just give us the enriched uranium, stop trying to make more, and cut out the terrorist activity in the strait and elsewhere. Just normal simple stuff most countries would be ok with in exchange for us dropping sanctions, etc and letting your country thrive.
Problem is that the Islamic Republic is not most countries:
they are a vicious apocalyptic Islamist dictatorship believing they go to heaven and get 72 beautiful virgins for eternity if they are killed in battle as Shahids by the USA.
and the idiots in the West pretend that the Islamic Republic can be reasoned with like we do with Luxembourg
Featured Stories
See All
27:18
53m ago
1.3k
17:04
1d ago
3.3k
CHAMPS! Aggie women's tennis claims second national championship
by Richard Zane
9:32
43m ago
714
Deluded push for 24 teams would dilute the CFP
by Olin Buchanan
cef88
NAACP Proposes boycott of SEC schools from states that redistricted
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
61
96AgGrad
Anonymous Coach Comment on Elko: "Mike Elko is a real-deal ball coach"
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
35
rollingwoodaggie
NAACP Proposes boycott of SEC schools from states that redistricted
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
16
Bay Ag
Anonymous Coach Comment on Elko: "Mike Elko is a real-deal ball coach"
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
15