Iran warns of attack on US warship as peace talks open in Pakistan

Heh

Some people have never heard of Operation Praying Mantis

...That's not "proportionate"

> We took both countries militarily Nobody is disputing this. As I said, we're really good at coming in and blowing up the enemy military. That's not the issue. The issue is what happens next. > Iraq wasn't really a failure Depends on why we went in in the first place. Nuclear weapons weren't found. Neither was anthrax. What we found are the old weapons we sold them years ago. The country wasn't stabilized and it gave us ISIS. Around 200,000 dead. I don't even know how many were wounded, displaced, not to mention the money wasted and for what? To kill literally one guy and maybe a handful of members of his family? Worth it? Especially when Iran - and Saudi Arabia - are trying to influence the country all while Kurds are trying to carve up the territory in the North. > Afghanistan is another story but that's because it's not a country with an identity. Very true. Iraq isn't a country either. A foreigner drew a map that united 3 major tribes and gave the guns to the smaller one. > Iran has citizens that would welcome US overthrowing the regime by an overwhelming majority I heard this before only the quote was "We Will Be Greeted As Liberators". It didn't work out. Why? Because we started to kill the civilians (and destroy their stuff plus all the raping didn't help). If the current administration is threatening to destroy civilian sectors - power plants, bridges, etc - then you'll have a population that'll be turned against you. Don't forget that while Iranians probably hate their government, they very likely don't want to be killed by foreigners either. This is particularly considering the anti-Semitic and anti-US propaganda they've been fed for decades. You start killing the civilians and the relevant infrastructure and they'll join their shitty government. Iran wasn't a threat and the previous plan under Obama worked better. Their currency collapsed, they had protestors. That was the height of support and what did we do? We started screwing it all up. Instead of coming in with AID - including water - we came in with bombs. It didn't work out very well. You start giving Iranians hope and they'll turn on their dictators. Right now they're not going to do anything and the local population has a choice of their local leaders or "foreigners". You think they'll pick the foreigners? Particularly considering the propaganda they've been exposed to that's now coming true whenever we kill any civilian or bomb a non-military target?

>Iran has citizens that would welcome US overthrowing the regime by an overwhelming majority Completely delusional. Read what the US commanders had to say about the mission to rescue the downed pilot. He said that everyone in the area who had guns were shooting them at us. Doesn't sound like a grand welcoming, does it? Why the hell would they support a foreign invasion? We just threatened to end their entire civilization. This is existential for them. They will fight to the death.

Estimates put the US at 1500 Iranian civilians killed so far with 26,000 injuries. Im not sure moral standard is the right thing to be applying here.

And the US did not killed millions in other country in the past 60 years?? C'mon man. Don't be like that. You guys bomb hundred of children in the first minute of the war and call it a mistake. Lmao

Totally fair and I’ve seen those sentiments as well, is a complicated thing which I know is a dumb thing to say but it is

Most of the gulf states and most of the US bases in the area lack drone defences. Lot of US anti missile systems in the area have been blown up by drone strikes. Drones can fly too low to target. Not much thought was put into the war by the US.

That unfortunately appears to come from experience. The US is *awful* at this kind of war, a terrible track record all things considered. Regions fought like this had the best results. It's an extremely difficult type of war to fight as it's often "to the last man" fighting, not organized armies with heavy control chains. It's how the US pulling out often spelled collapse of their established systems and rapid replacement with previously opposing forces into power.

Was it closed or open before the war started?

How dare they fight back strategically!

If we ignore whether or not it was a reasonable response can we discuss whether it was obviously going to be their response and therefore should have been predicted? 

I read it was 3/10 of their requirements. I think it’s just being framed as nuclear as that’s the hot topic. 

So, tankers are moving again?

The US makes constant threat to the Suez Canal because they fear another nation would impede US traffic. They don't give a shit about other nations man. "free and open" is "our way, our direction, only". The US constantly speaks on the importance of territorial waters. The sea lane is in the territorial waters of Iran and Oman. And by distance, they overlap the usual territorial waters distance. It's part of why Iran *can* close the straight, it's not that wide.