US - Iran - Israel | Hostilities May Breakout Shortly | Feb. 2nd-28th | Discussions

[NuclearID]

start of war?

The days that presidents announced from the oval office declarations of war or action are over. Ambiguity and the element of surprise is just too great to give up.

Also that means asking Congress. Which the last 4 presidents didn't care to do and declaring war publicly would require a president to ask Congress.

Besides Bush and Obama speech on his war against ISIS all past presidential actions or acts of war have never been announced by the oval office but rather we find out after the fact or during the fact.

Ambiguity and surprise attacks have become the norm. So announcing that you're attacking kind of defeats the purpose of all of that. Hence why we don't see presidents announcing their actions militarily anymore from the oval office before they do it.

The days nations formally declare war are over and have been for quite sometime. It's ambiguity at its maximalistic. Everyone guilty of it, not just US.

In fact since world war 2 there have been very few formal wars declared by any of the major/regional world powers at be.

 

[NuclearID]

In fact since world war 2 there have been very few formal wars declared by any of the major/regional world powers at be.

Want to learn something useful? Here you go:

Way more simplified version:

 

[william]

The days that presidents announced from the oval office declarations of war or action are over. Ambiguity and the element of surprise is just too great to give up.

Also that means asking Congress. Which the last 4 presidents didn't care to do and declaring war publicly would require a president to ask Congress.

Besides Bush and Obama speech on his war against ISIS all past presidential actions or acts of war have never been announced by the oval office but rather we find out after the fact or during the fact.

Ambiguity and surprise attacks have become the norm. So announcing that you're attacking kind of defeats the purpose of all of that. Hence why we don't see presidents announcing their actions militarily anymore from the oval office before they do it.

The days nations formally declare war are over and have been for quite sometime. It's ambiguity at its maximalistic. Everyone guilty of it, not just US.

In fact since world war 2 there have been very few formal wars declared by any of the major/regional world powers at be.

I agree but I can foresee the President getting up there and announcing something like this, " tonight I have ordered the US military into action against the Islamic Republic of Iran because of blah, blah blah." Something like that.

 

[william]

Want to learn something useful? Here you go:

Way more simplified version:

So, I guess technically you can say the US did not lose the Vietnam war because there was no war declared.

 

[Publius]

It's an area of debate with 2 opposing points of view. A very interesting thought experiment. Is it an idea for a video for the DWS YouTube channel?

It’s not a question of what is targeted and destroyed. It is a question of deciding to escalate with a nuclear warhead.

A dump truck with a nitrogen/diesel fuel bomb roles through barriers at Whitman AFB and destroys half of our B-2 bomber.
Strategically maybe even more damaging than sinking a carrier.

The first question is the US could respond conventionally to an Aircraft carrier being sunk with conventional weapons.
So the default will not automatically be to escalate.
Now would a the loss of a capital ship like a carrier and the lives with it justify an escalation?

All that said a US aircraft carrier is not NOT part US nuclear triad.
Would the sinking of an Ohio submarine justify a nuclear escalation?

 

[Charmender]

A dump truck with a nitrogen/diesel fuel bomb roles through barriers at Whitman AFB and destroys half of our B-2 bomber.
Strategically maybe even more damaging than sinking a carrier.

All that said a US aircraft carrier is not NOT part US nuclear triad.
Would the sinking of an Ohio submarine justify a nuclear escalation?

Perfect summary.
That's it.

 

[william]

Ooh great question. Let's not get overly partisan with responses so we can keep this thread unlocked.

If no military action occurs before SOTU, I think the President will announce a peace deal that is overly optimistic in nature. There may only be a framework for discussion in place, but President Trump will fall back on previous strategies to use power of positive thinking to try and shape a favorable negotiated outcome.

(I don't think it will succeed, but I think President Trump will give it a try ...)

That very well could be. Personally I think the decision has already been made and the WH has turned it over to the pentagon to let the WH know when they are ready.

 

[Charmender]

That very well could be. Personally I think the decision has already been made and the WH has turned it over to the pentagon to let the WH know when they are ready.

From what is known...Iran was given a 2 weeks time windows starting from yesterday to come back with a proposal to fill the gaps between the 2 positions or face consequences.

But Trump could act before.
I don't think that Trump besides the public announcements is really striving for a military action in ME

 

[william]

It’s not a question of what is targeted and destroyed. It is a question of deciding to escalate with a nuclear warhead.

A dump truck with a nitrogen/diesel fuel bomb roles through barriers at Whitman AFB and destroys half of our B-2 bomber.
Strategically maybe even more damaging than sinking a carrier.

The first question is the US could respond conventionally to an Aircraft carrier being sunk with conventional weapons.
So the default will not automatically be to escalate.
Now would a the loss of a capital ship like a carrier and the lives with it justify an escalation?

All that said a US aircraft carrier is not NOT part US nuclear triad.
Would the sinking of an Ohio submarine justify a nuclear escalation?

IMO, NOTHING would justify the release of NUCLEAR weapons short of an imminent collapse of the US government due to war. I have always said. I feel the first one to use nuclear weapons will be the side that is getting their butt kicked.

 

[william]

From what is known...Iran was given a 2 weeks time windows starting from yesterday to come back with a proposal to fill the gaps between the 2 positions or face consequences.

But Trump could act before.
I don't think that Trump besides the public announcements is really striving for a military action in ME

I don't think he is stiving for it either, but I do think he knows it has to be done. Wish Mrs. Thatcher was still the PM of the UK and advising the WH that "this is not the time to go "all wobbly" Donald.

 

[DEFCON Warning System]

But Trump could act before.

He won't. He doesn't want to go in. This isn't Venezuela where they go in and capture a leader.

But the US is setting itself up where, if negotiations fail, they must do something.

 

[RiffRaff]

Actually sinking a aircraft carrier which houses nuclear weapons warrants a nuclear response, not conventional. Aircraft carrier is appart of triad. You attack nuclear systems you get a plenty of nukes shoved up your ass to put it bluntly.

Correct. This has been a part of US nuclear doctrine since the cold war. Sinking a US aircraft carrier or sub with nuclear weapons aboard puts a nuclear response on the table. It's not an automatic response, but it is an option.

 

[RiffRaff]

Guys, this conversation briefly started to get out of hand and I thought I was going to have to say something, but you all dialed it back down on your own. I just wanted to say I notice these things and I appreciate it.

 

[NuclearID]

 

[Spyglass]

6 E-3’s have been deployed to Europe.

All that communication and coordination power… this campaign is going to be MASSIVE.

 

[Spyglass]

Here’s a red flag…

https://twitter.com/x/status/2024188878391796096

The Israeli Homefront Command and Magen David Adom (MDA) have been instructed to prepare for a full-scale war with Iran, with a high-level defensive alert having been declared across Israel, according to N12.

 

[NuclearID]

In the event of a attack, the active Reporting and Discussion threads will be locked immediately and replacement threads will be created.

Reminder: do not post real time photos/videos of U.S. or allied military movements. Delayed posting is safer and helps avoid unintentionally aiding hostile actors.

Wait at least minimally 24 hours before posting any videos of strike aftermath in Israel. Footage of any aftermath from Iranian strikes can be exploited by Iran to refine their targeting/accuracy for follow up attacks on Israel.

 

[Gaijin]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2024148107538116770

Ex Head of Israels military intelligence

I recommend anyone who is scheduled to fly this weekend to consider their steps.

 

[intel-bank]

Alright guys I don’t have time to look through all these threads I haven’t been able to stay informed much, what are the basics here? (What changed in the past few weeks)

And other stuff you think I may have missed in the past few weeks certainly wouldn’t mind a DM or reply.

 

[Snowfall]

Alright guys I don’t have time to look through all these threads I haven’t been able to stay informed much, what are the basics here? (What changed in the past few weeks)

And other stuff you think I may have missed in the past few weeks certainly wouldn’t mind a DM or reply.

Massive U.S. equipment movement to the Middle East, second carrier strike group on its way to the region, multiple sources reporting possibility of strikes in the coming days or weeks, little to no diplomatic process towards a deal, and Israel moving home defense posture.

Judging by the Trump administrations track record, if we strike this week it’ll be between 4pm est Friday and Sunday. Otherwise we’ll be waiting at least another week