Will this affect CN's projects in Afghanistan?
....
Werent koreans like a minority ethnic group in PRC?
2025 Israel - Iranian conflict
- Thread starter Maikeru
- Start date
....
The mountainous terrain, which disrupts its radar coverage, and the relative scarcity of air defense systems relative to its considerable territory present serious problems for Iran's air defenses. The IAF has opened corridors to the northwest and then the western side of Iran, taking advantage of these weaknesses in Iran.
Armenia And Azerbaijan are the countries where global geopolitics truly become spaghetti.
You have Azerbaijan supported by: Israel, Pakistan, Some EU countries (except france) and Turkiye.
Then Armenia which is backed by: India, US, Russia and Iran.
Imagine if all the backers had military alliances with these countries and they declared war on each other, auto-ww3 /jk
Iran's terrain is such a fortress, they should move some of their sensitive factories etc to the east tho, Use the size for advantage.
If you were willing to acknowledge that online claims from the early days of the "12 Day War" alleging and Indian participation in clandestine ground operations against Iran were in fact false, we'd perhaps be able to move on to a more salient and interesting discussion concerning the role information operations has played in this conflict, especially with regard to who might have initiated and propagated such disinformation and to what end.
Yet you try to derail the conversation with nonsense like this:
It's totally 'OK' if you're ignorant of recent American clandestine ground operations that have occured in , , and , that have accompanied more overt efforts in the air, or how they contribute to American (mis)adventures.
In an era where visible "boots on the ground" have grown increasingly politically unpalatable with the American public, multiple administrations have shown a preference for clandestine ground operations over more overt alternatives that may invoke excessive domestic resistance. However, such preferences have inevitably come at the expense of developing and sustaining relatively more conventional capabilities.
This means certain military options against Iran, in particular a Iraq-style invasion, are completely off the table, absent the activation of a large number of reservists and/or significant foreign contributions of ground forces.
I can go on, but continuing any sort of conversation with someone as insistent as you of their utterly uninformed takes is just too tiresome . . .
Come on guys. Let’s be honest. Irans regime needs to boost their legitimacy and show an image of strength towards its people and militias/proxies in the region. So their leaders have no choice but to engage in such rhetorics just like they have always done. It has always been the modus operandi of the Islamic regime since the revolution and it won’t be stopping anytime soon. Except there is complete change in the regimes system and policy , which is unlikely obviously.
Agree, Iran should carry on with their current policies. It has served them well so far.
Huh…. Yeah but what has that have to do with Persians?lol. It’s only because the mullahs/islamists took over power in Tehran, else Iran will be like all non Arab countries (just an observer and verbal critic) .
The thing is that Iran knows the US wants to focus on China/Asia pacific and doesn’t want to get involved in any middle eastern war. Plus the US public and even some in the system are against getting into any wars in the Middle East (barring a major attack and threat against the US). So Iran is playing on this. We can say Iran has to thank Chinas rise for giving them enough leeway against the US, since without the coming threat from China(and past military DEBACLE IN IRAQ)the US would have been getting involved much more actively against Iran , they would have probably have gotten the iraqs Saddam treatment.