Quote:
Originally Posted by tw
We only know that Iran is truly concerned about this one painful sanction.
|
That requoted sentence was incorrectly quoted. We know they are concerned. No doubt about it. And no reason to believe otherwise.
Their concern was never in doubt. That quote reposted to subvert reality.
The unknown is what 'they' are willing to do about it. Who 'they' are. And how committed other parties are to those sanctions. We don't even know if and by how much others (ie Russia, Turkmenistan, Pakistan) are onboard. All three questions need be answered.
Military strikes on Iranian refineries would not cause "the country would come to a halt in a matter of days." Those numbers and conclusion are obviously wrong.
UT is 100% on target. Amazing how the most militaristic demonstrate no grasp of basic military concepts. UT has defined how all great powers operate (as opposed to dying powers so ‘George Jr’ and ‘Nixon’ dumb as to waste resources in 'Nam or "Mission Accomplished").
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
Soft power is looking good so far.
|
Meanwhile, bad military deployment would have a second carrier enroute to the Gulf. Foolish military deployment would have any carrier task force in the Persian Gulf. Even dumbest are those politicians who advocate a unilateral (Pearl Harbor) attack on Iran with nuclear weapons. Yes, a few that dumb are even trying to become president.
Currently happening is posturing. Rooster huffing up its feathers to intimidate another rooster.
Now, what should concern everyone is 'who in Iran' is actually in power. Again, which "Iran" is capable of converting 'huffed feathers' into action. I still do not see a single post that says 'who in Iran' has the power. There is no monolithic Iran as so many posts assume.
Just another reason why those with better grasp understand well proven concepts from 2,500 years ago - soft power.