Right this goes to attrition.

Can this prevent the collapse of the government and a US occupation? Maybe, if it doesn’t though it will cause endless insurgency even if the US props up a friendly government.

Then we just get Afghanistan all over again.

The real question is can these autonomous cells continue operating their regions independently and for how long. Maintaining governance and a prolonged guerilla campaign aren’t the same.

And you know I hope they do repel the US, but I feel like it’s crazy to dismiss it as impossible

That is a very good point and seems likely if anyone tries to mount a full scale invasion.

You’ve clearly have never dealt with real world logistics in your life

Starting with the snark? Sure I tried to make my comment respectfully but whatever.

You’re not wrong, but the US could certainly throw a lot more into it. Then it, as I said, will come down to drones. That’s a function of time and deployment speed before the bombs hit. Currently I think the US has the raw numbers of munitions to overwhelm the country, but day by day that changes.

Plus it’s not like any of us has the up to date figures from each country. I personally thinkk dismissing either possible outcome is just really stupid. I’ve tried not to make it sound like my speculation was fact, but what I believe was the most likely outcome.

You only have to look at a map to realize that Iran is a very mountainous country that would be a nightmare to fight in.

Yes I’m well aware. This why I specifically said they could overwhelm the government. I do believe just due to raw numbers of munitions and equipment that the US currently could take out the centralized government (think more bombs and less boots), but as I said control would be a long bloody occupation that would never succeed. Just like Afghanistan just way more bloody.

I think you’re also dismissing US logistical capabilities in that part of the world. They spent 20 years setting up client states, Israel will give them all the access they need, and the majority of Europe is complicit allowing American bases to continue to operate within their borders.

But then again who really knows. I can’t outright dismiss your claim, and it would.be silly to do so. I think it’s more likely that the US could do it, but I can’t garuntee it. As I said each day the US doesn’t commit to a large scale invasion it increases Iran’s odds tremendously. Iran does need to build up enough drones. I don’t believe they have enough yet. They’re definetly working on it.

I don’t disagree with you in drones tech either. I think it just comes down to numbers and continued capabilities to launch the drones.

Unless that encourages the US to deploy everything to avoid that. We can’t even begin to predict what the idiot in charge will do.

If he goes that route the government of Iran would probably fall after a lot of death and then a long bloody, and ultimately unsuccessful, occupation would follow.

Hopefully he’s not dumb enough to try, and everyday the US doesn’t fully invade does tilt the scales in Iran’s favor

Right you just made his point? Cost is relevant as the conflict continues. If the US committed everything it could likely overwhelm the government (probably leading to an Afghanistan 2), but the longer the conflict goes the scales tip in favor of Iran due to these costs.

Unfortunately all it would take is a fast deployment tactic dedicating everything the US has. It comes down to raw numbers of immediately available manpower, aircraft, and munitions. The US has a stupid amount of these things at the ready.

It would be bloody and brutal and not certain, but I’d say the US would have a decent chance of overrunning the country.

Now this will only topple the government, then you get into a whole Afghanistan situation again. So I suppose it depends on what the definition of victory is. Could the US defeat Iran and occupy it? I think it’s likely, but the second they leave a new government that hates the US (rightfully) forms. Could they occupy indefinitely? Probably at a steep cost.

So I see a path for the US to overwhelm the Iranian military, but no real way for them to ever establish control of the region. I wouldn’t call that a win for the US for sure

Yes well known fact we shouldn’t research any technology to reverse the collapse of our biosphere or to alleviate climate change. Wouldn’t want anyone being able to sell that tech. Best we just turn off the lights and plant some flowers.

I love planting some flowers, but we’re going to need technology to undo the mess we created.

Shockingly I can proccess more than one view at a time. While I thought the first aid kit discussion was interesting I’m still aware of other factors of the case, I’m still aware that Trump is a child rapist, and I’m still aware that we are invading Iran.

Discussing something isn’t falling for a “disinformation campaign”.

They didn’t dodge anything. They answered your question quite clearly. The answer is context matters.

A first aid kit alone is not proof of that. The commentor did not claim that nor did the prosecution of the case. When taken in context with the other evidence and the actual actions they were able to use it as supporting evidence.

Now in my opinion their actions were based, but obviously illegal. If I were on the jury I would have let them walk, but that’s all beside the point.

It’s worthwhile to discuss the potential impacts of covid long term, but it will probably take a decade before full studies start being published.

Early evidence still looks bad

And so the cycle begins again.

Nearly my entire life has been engulfed by forever wars in the middle east. I’m tired of it

His tariffs were an executive powers case

Since it’s mostly a bombing campaign I don’t see how it would be much higher. It’s not that much different than the casualties seen during the gulf war. Only 219 US deaths from that entire conflict

The current court regularly votes down Trump, tariffs are the most recent example.

The issue is the court is full of conservative assholes who care more about their feelings more than the law.

Don’t get me wrong this is still a Trump caused problem, he appointed most of the new conservatives, but they still don’t rubber stamp everything he does.

Disagree, I was able to find the local grocery store’s store branded 100% fruit juice in cranberry, apple, grape, and pomegranate. It’s just a regular grocery store too.

They even had the welch’s 100% juice varieties.

Now that being said I had to pay real close attention to the labels to select the right juice, but the good stuff is still out there

I don’t remember a single line in the Constitution stating the military has the power to remove a sitting president.

At least the scenario I described was constitutional.

That’s the neat part about an oath to the Constitution, you can’t break it to save it. That would be outside of that very oath.

Well if we want to really go into constitutional interp, the military has no power to remove a sitting president.

But if elections do not occur a person doesn’t continue to be the president, additionally a 3rd term is banned by the constitution.

If Trump were to “cancel” elections, a power he doesn’t even have, the law is clear. He would still lose the presidency. It would then pass to the speaker of the house per the constitutional line of succession.

At that point the military would have a choice to make.

Of course these are big ifs, laws only matter if they are followed. And this scenario requires the law to be broken to even occur. Shits bad

Currently the most advanced primate after us are the chimpanzees and well bad news…

Added plus of the cell phone is it can also still call 911 even without a sim as long as you take it off airplane.

Or at least it should be able to, changing the OS could impact that

And today Germany still makes you register your religion. You’d think they would have learned…