• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

US strike kills Iranian Quds Force commander

Page 49 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
NWRMidnight said:
This is why Iran cut the attack short. Once they realized they targeted by accident a civilian jet and shot it down, game over. If this did not happen, the attack would have lasted much longer, and the results would be much different.
Click to expand...
Huh? The plane crashed hours after Iran launched their missiles. Some 4 hours after the final launch.
 
NWRMidnight said:
Have they fired any more missiles since? Missiles attacks can last for days, with pauses in between waves as they move to other targets.
Click to expand...
Again. Huh? Iran launches their last missile into Iraq at 2:15 local time. The jet took off at 6:11 local time. Iran was done their attack. They didn’t stop early because of the crash. It was unrelated.
 
Had we had a competent leader in the White House this would be a perfect opportunity to condemn conflicts of war and recognize this tragedy and reach out with an Olive Branch to recognize that people needlessly died.

Instead I’m sure tensions between our countries will rise and killings will continue.
 
MomentsofSanity said:
Again. Huh? Iran launches their last missile into Iraq at 2:15 local time. The jet took off at 6:11 local time. Iran was done their attack. They didn’t stop early because of the crash. It was unrelated.
Click to expand...

Again, have they fired any more missiles at any other targets yet? You are under the assumption that their attack was planned to happen all in one wave and that's it.
 
NWRMidnight said:
Again, have they fired any more missiles at any other targets yet? You are under the assumption that their attack was planned to happen all in one wave and that's it.
Click to expand...
And you seem to be making plenty of assumptions yourself. What exactly would the point of waiting over four hours between waves be? To make sure the US has plenty of time to launch a counterattack and destroy the bulk of their air and missile forces in between waves?
 
The odds are that it was just a huge mistake caused by nervous people in dangerous situations. The SAM sites where on high alert expecting a retaliation from the US, and that plane's flight plan coincidentally took it directly over the SAM site. The operators got spooked, thinking it was an American plane coming to hit the SAM sites and fired before positively identifying the target. This is the sort of thing that happens when tensions are this high.
 
ewdotson said:
And you seem to be making plenty of assumptions yourself. What exactly would the point of waiting over four hours between waves be? To make sure the US has plenty of time to launch a counterattack and destroy the bulk of their air and missile forces in between waves?
Click to expand...

Do you hear yourself? What targets in Iraq can they destroy that would remove the US's ability to destroy their air and missile forces? None! Second, you are under the assumption that they are at the level of being able to change targets, reloading, etc all within minutes. IF setting up targets and attacking was so instantaneous for the Iranian's why did it take them days to retaliate against the US's killing of their second in command? We are talking about a country that can't even decipher a black box without help. Now, if we where talking about China or some other equally as powerful, technically and Military capable, I could understand your take on this, but the fact is, we aren't and Iran isn't even close. Hell, the US could take out their forces from a sub sitting in the ocean. Of course, any attack takes time to move, setup and place your assets used in such attacks, and it takes time to move such assets if you plan on switching targets. Unlike a video game, everything takes time, from hours to days, not minutes.
 
NWRMidnight said:
Do you hear yourself? What targets in Iraq can they destroy that would remove the US's ability to destroy their air and missile forces? None! Second, you are under the assumption that they are at the level of being able to change targets, reloading, etc all within minutes. IF setting up targets and attacking was so instantaneous for the Iranian's why did it take them days to retaliate against the US's killing of their second in command? We are talking about a country that can't even decipher a black box without help. Now, if we where talking about China or some other equally as powerful, technically and Military capable, I could understand your take on this, but the fact is, we aren't and Iran isn't even close. Hell, the US could take out their forces from a sub sitting in the ocean. Of course, any attack takes time to move, setup and place your assets used in such attacks, and it takes time to move such assets if you plan on switching targets. Unlike a video game, everything takes time, from hours to days, not minutes.
Click to expand...

I’m just addressing one point in your rant: they took three days to respond because that’s what the Ayatollah called for, three days of mourning before responding.
 
Iran has had a functional, competent, home grown missile program since the days of the Shah. The Iranians probably have more missile experience than the Chinese.
 
NWRMidnight said:
Do you hear yourself? What targets in Iraq can they destroy that would remove the US's ability to destroy their air and missile forces? None!
Click to expand...

None, which is exactly my point. It would be stupid of them to plan on launching multiple waves of attacks with hours separating strikes. Their only two realistic options were a small strike that wouldn't demand reprisal or a massive initial strike where they unloaded as much of their arsenal as possible, knowing they wouldn't get a chance at a second strike.
 
ewdotson said:
None, which is exactly my point. It would be stupid of them to plan on launching multiple waves of attacks with hours separating strikes. Their only two realistic options were a small strike that wouldn't demand reprisal or a massive initial strike where they unloaded as much of their arsenal as possible, knowing they wouldn't get a chance at a second strike.
Click to expand...
Happens all the time, or haven't you been paying attention to history? If Trump was a man of his word, even a small strike would have resulted in reprisal.
 
Last edited:
You really don't know as much you think that you do. I'm sure you think the same about me. That's fine, but I think we're done here.
 
ewdotson said:
You really don't know as much you think that you do. I'm sure you think the same about me. That's fine, but I think we're done here.
Click to expand...

Assumptions are a mother, aren't they? In all reality, neither one of us has proof to back up our position, as the evidence doesn't sway either way. One or the other could be right, or neither of us. We really don't know what Iran did or didn't have planned or what influenced their decisions. It's good that you hold your assumptions with such conviction, and believe that I know nothing, or is it? Either way, enjoy the rest of your day.
 
ivwshane said:
What could/should be done. As far as we know it was an accident. Tragic as it may be how many more people should die for this needless conflict?
Click to expand...

Maybe the Ukraine should deal with it? They aren't going to get any help from us, they're on Trump's shitlist now.

I find it amusing that Iran is going to need "help" with the black box on the crashed airliner. "Help" from the Russians forging data on it to make it look like an engine malfunction, I'd imagine.
 
ultimatebob said:
Maybe the Ukraine should deal with it? They aren't going to get any help from us, they're on Trump's shitlist now.

I find it amusing that Iran is going to need "help" with the black box on the crashed airliner. "Help" from the Russians forging data on it to make it look like an engine malfunction, I'd imagine.
Click to expand...

They don’t need help with it, the Canadians do as they are the ones that want the truth.
 
Starbuck1975 said:
Diplomats aren’t the masterminds behind a network of proxy terrorist cells, commit war crimes or coordinate attacks on combatants
Click to expand...

The PM of Iraq, the host country, obviously considered him a diplomat. Whose country is it, anyway? If we can't offer our strategic partners a certain amount of respect we can't expect them to be partners for long, which is what's happening here. There's also the matter of the 25 Iraqi militiamen killed previously. Respect? Iraq wants a little bit of respect? Fuck them people. We'll do anything we want in their country. Suck it, biatches.
 
How Pompeo convinced Trump to kill Soleimani and fulfilled a decade-long goal

Taking Iranian Gen. Qasem Soleimani "off the battlefield" has been a goal for the top US diplomat for a decade, several sources told CNN.
Targeting Iran's second most powerful official -- the leader of the Revolutionary Guard Corps' Quds Force, the politically and economically powerful military group with regional clout -- was Pompeo's idea, according to a source from his inner circle. That source said the secretary brought the suggestion to Trump. Pompeo "was the one who made the case to take out Soleimani, it was him absolutely," this source said.
Click to expand...

"Pompeo provided the warrant for why Soleimani is a bad guy," the source said. "It's not personal because he was a terrorist and the mastermind." The source also said taking out Soleimani had been Pompeo's mission for a decade.
The secretary of state has been so fixated on the Iranian general that he even sought to get a visa to Iran in 2016 when he was a congressman from Kansas. While he said it was to monitor elections, he also suggested to confidants that he wanted to try to confront Soleimani when he was there. He never got the visa.
Click to expand...

The source told CNN that as the years have gone by, Pompeo has told friend and colleagues that "I will not retire from public service until Soleimani is off the battlefield."
Long known as a "Trump whisperer" for the relationship he's cultivated with the President, Pompeo's ability to sell such an aggressive Iran strategy to Trump -- a conflict-averse President -- is testament to his unparalleled sway.
Now, with Pompeo's recent declaration that he will not run for a US Senate seat in Kansas, the former three-term House lawmaker and CIA director appears set to continue wielding his influence in the Trump administration.

"He's the one leading the way," according to the source in Pompeo's inner circle, discussing the face off with Iran. "It's the President's policy, but Pompeo has been the leading voice in helping the President craft this policy. There is no doubt Mike is the one leading it in the Cabinet."

One former Republican national security official, who is a Trump critic but supported the strike on Soleimani, told CNN that Pompeo is so influential, he is like the "secretary of state, secretary of defense and director of the CIA" combined.
Click to expand...

Trump claims he doesn't want the US to be bogged down in more ME conflicts, but he keeps surrounding himself with the most insane warmongers.
 
ivwshane said:
What could/should be done. As far as we know it was an accident. Tragic as it may be how many more people should die for this needless conflict?
Click to expand...
Accident? Odds are maybe 10,000:1 against that. No, I don't want to see more casualties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top