US has ‘tools in our toolkit that we so far haven’t decided to use’ on Iran: JD Vance

Difference is that Russia is most sanctioned country on earth and US - well. Crickets

Yeah, but Putin doesn't have a syphilis-eaten dementia brain. Trump is definitely a big enough moron to glass Iran

That’s the point. Trump is a Russian asset, dismantling the argument that modern, civilized nations don’t act like Putin’s Russia does. He’s removing any justification for Russian sanctions, or even for NATO.

difference is Iran is the global sponsor of terrorism and Ukraine is...a peaceful country.

[deleted]

They could be talking about one of those Leatherman things, though

And both thought it would be over in days...

Well, we haven't used our white phosphorus...yet

The russian threats are explicit though.

Yeah charming shit really. “Tools” in the “toolkit”. I’d love to see all these bastards assembled in a gym to dodge hurled spanners, as in Dodgeball. Might understand what a tool is then 

You don't understand his pain and suffering mom

It's too seduce mojtaba

No he\`s going for the pasty spider lashes next, skips all that messy tar goo., just going to use a permanent marker from now on.

Wait, so they're going to fire Vance at the Iranians where he will lay waste to them solo? Hope he wears a gopro.

Trump loves to publicly humiliate him and Vance just chuckles and takes it.

Starts with conflict in Iran IIRC.

Started watching this. By christ it is *so* depressing! But it really nails old England.

Going to rewatch tonight before the uh, festivities.

No. Russian rhetoric is circular non sequiturs and whataboutery. Usanian rhetoric is unsophisticated puerile lying. They are both equally unreliable and equally despicable.

Well, Trump is a Russian asset, along with others in his administration.

The tools we haven't tried: \-Strategy \-Diplomacy \-Intelligence \-Wisdom \-Historical insight

They were too busy blustering on Fox News to try. Then they tore up previous diplomatic efforts so it wasn't an option any longer. All because an eloquent, decent man, who happened to be black, did it. They hate all three, but especially the third the most.

I mean trump just said an entire civilisation will end. So they basically said it.

That will open the nuclear Pandora’s box, normalizing the use of nuclear weapons in conventional warfare. Eg, Ukraine and Taiwan

We can't. Congress decided to take a sabbatical.

> If Orban is a mouse who supports Putin and you are supporting Orban what does that make you, Vance? Mouse Shit

hard to use what one doesn't have

I think they would utilize a tactical nuclear weapon before any ICBM. It would be pinpointed and horrible. MAD will go out the window once that happens.

Nobody really likes JD Vance on either side. He's a completely empty vessel of a human being. There's no reason to think he's got the cajones or sway to organize such a thing. If there is any rebellion to get Trump removed, it's really gonna need to come from some of the moderate Republicans in Congress. We'd need about 19 of them to do it(maybe a couple less after midterms), which isn't remotely likely, but it's the only real chance.

My prediction is they will drop a MOAB on some vaguely regime target in Tehran and then say next time it will be nuclear.

and what is the plan to stop a megalomaniac when you live 2000 miles away with no finan ability to go to the capital?

Interfering on behalf of Putin

I believe it depends on the type of weapon and the kind of strike. Not all nukes create lasting radiation issues. The prompt radiation dissipates almost immediately, I think the rest is what is created as radioactive dust which varies a lot by the altitude of the burst. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

If you ever get the chance, visit the atom bomb museums in Nagasaki or Hiroshima. After hearing the stories from survivors and seeing the aftermath of the nukes, anyone still for using nukes would not be fit to be called human.

> Nuclear weapons are worse than people think. The explodes and kill everyone in the blast, but then they kill people for decades after the explosion, children born from the victims of the radiations comes with deformities and even worse, they poison the land and all the wildlife, and they create a whole trauma for the people. Is that "worse than people think"? Isn't that exactly what people think they are? Like maybe I'm overestimating what the average person knows about nuclear weapons, but I thought the whole longer term radiation stuff (and the ways that it's worse than just a gigantic conventional explosion) were well known? >They should have been banned a long time ago, but since some countries use them as a menace (like the USA, the only country to have ever used nuclear weapons against their enemies), all the others countries need them for protection. That’s the whole origin of the conflict, Iran trying to protect himself from the menace of a nuclear attack. This doesn't make sense. While Trump is both evil and crazy and I have no idea what shit he might do, over the last 75 years the existence of nuclear weapons LIMITS what the US can do. If you magically made all nuclear weapons vanish from existence (including the American ones), the US would become militarily stronger, not weaker. In any conflict where both sides have sufficient access to nukes, the existence of nukes helps the position of the side with the WEAKER conventional military, not the stronger one. Mutually assured destruction basically changes the equilibrium to a draw, and that means whichever side previously had an advantage has lost the advantage. For example, the US has a much stronger conventional military than Russia does. But the fear of Russia escalating to nuclear weapons was why Biden couldn't provide direct military assistance to Ukraine (I don't know whether he would have deployed American forces or not, but it would have at least been much easier for him to do so in a world without nukes). If the US wanted to cause mass death including mass civilian casualties in Iran, they could do it without nukes. Not quite as easily and not with quite as extensive casualties, but they could still kill millions (both directly with weapons, and indirectly by f****** up enough infrastructure as to cause things like famine, water shortages, lack of access to medical care, possible breakdown of society, etc... etc...

They're terrible but many people overestimate the damages they can do. Nagazaki and Hiroshima have been destroyed, and rebuilt, and now they're big cities in Japan, with no additional radioactivity. Nuclear bombs now are more powerful now but it's basically the same thing. It does create a trauma, it's horrible weapons because they will surely target civilians which is obviously illegal. But children of survivors don't come with additional deformities or problems: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hibakusha#Health / https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(15)00209-0/abstract > children of people exposed to the atomic bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki had no indications of deleterious health effects after 62 years.

People returned to Hiroshima and Nagasaki within a week. If you detonate air bursts, the fallout isn't nearly as bad. That being said, nukes are stupid because they don't achieve any military objectives conventional weapons can't, and therefore only useful as a deterrent.

Unlikely. They can already hit anything they want to hit using subsonic missiles. Hypersonic adds nothing, and it sure doesn’t wipe out a civilization. This is a pretty clear pretense that they will use nuclear weapons.

Don't think they've utilised a MOAB yet either, I also saw someone in another post mention Rod's from God, but no idea if that made it beyond the initial stages as those sats would have been up for a long time since then.

In this scenario, HCMs have no added benefit over regular ballistic missiles because Iran doesn’t have the air defense that would necessitate the maneuverability of HCMs and it’s not like HCMs have massively increased payloads. Could drop a MOAB but we’ve already done that a few years ago.

That's not a thing.