• Re: OT: US involvement in Iran/Israel war

    From TT@21:1/5 to All on Fri Jun 20 02:28:30 2025
    Sawfish kirjoitti 19.6.2025 klo 23.54:
    Dear Fellow-Sufferers,

    What is:

    1. the likely scope of initial US involvement?
    2. the odds of such involvement within the next week?

    I'll go first:

    1. B2 GPU 57 bomb strikes against the hardened Fordow nuclear enrichment facility.


    Yes

    2. 60/40 for involvement


    Hard to say... I'd think lower than that & Trump is just trying to scare
    Iran to total surrender whatever that means.

    I don't think "surrender" is coming. So it's either...
    1. Israel does the job alone
    2. Israel does the job with little help from US
    3. Iran regime gets kicked out by people
    4. Some sort of deal

    Then again, if the US is moving equipment already etc, usually that does
    mean action.

    On a personal level this is quite worrisome, no shit. Not in a moral
    sense, but more like a "what's this going to cost me?" sense. By cost, I
    mean personal risk, financial and physical.

    Physical risk? Financial perhaps but I think these sort of scares are
    short lasting in the market.

    Then there's the 9th of July tariff date and what have we. I'm not
    rushing to buy more stocks at the moment. Bought a bit developed world excluding-US too early, fortunately not much. Need to have more patience
    ffs.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Whisper@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Fri Jun 20 19:00:55 2025
    On 20/06/2025 6:54 am, Sawfish wrote:
    Dear Fellow-Sufferers,

    What is:

    1. the likely scope of initial US involvement?
    2. the odds of such involvement within the next week?

    I'll go first:

    1. B2 GPU 57 bomb strikes against the hardened Fordow nuclear enrichment facility.

    2. 60/40 for involvement

    On a personal level this is quite worrisome, no shit. Not in a moral
    sense, but more like a "what's this going to cost me?" sense. By cost, I
    mean personal risk, financial and physical.


    I'm moving to South west coast of Tasmania just to be sure : )

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *skriptis@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Fri Jun 20 12:24:08 2025
    Sawfish <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    Dear Fellow-Sufferers,What is:1. the likely scope of initial US involvement?2. the odds of such involvement within the next week?I'll go first:1. B2 GPU 57 bomb strikes against the hardened Fordow nuclear enrichment facility.2. 60/40 for involvementOn
    a personal level this is quite worrisome, no shit. Not in a moral sense, but more like a "what's this going to cost me?" sense. By cost, I mean personal risk, financial and physical.



    Why do you use euphemism?

    If it does happen, it won't be "involvement".

    You're already involved by supporting Israel, providing them intelligence data, military equipment and money.

    If you outrightly attack Iran then it's USA vs Iran war, another American aggression.


    I prefer linguistic and logical clarity, no?


    --




    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From *skriptis@21:1/5 to Sawfish on Fri Jun 20 23:16:40 2025
    Sawfish <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r
    On 6/20/25 3:24 AM, *skriptis wrote:> Sawfish <[email protected]> Wrote in message:r>> Dear Fellow-Sufferers,What is:1. the likely scope of initial US involvement?2. the odds of such involvement within the next week?I'll go first:1. B2 GPU 57 bomb
    strikes against the hardened Fordow nuclear enrichment facility.2. 60/40 for involvementOn a personal level this is quite worrisome, no shit. Not in a moral sense, but more like a "what's this going to cost me?" sense. By cost, I mean personal risk,
    financial and physical.> > > > Why do you use euphemism?Not intending euphemism, skript. I want to use a word that would encompass anything from negotiated regime change, to completely nuking Iran.> > If it does happen, it won't be "involvement".You're
    narrowing it to war. OK, let's talk about that.> > You're already involved by supporting Israel, providing them intelligence data, military equipment and money.Yes, and that's OK if it buys something. But with Israelis, it won't buy much, nor for very
    long.Which is another irony because getting to Iran primarily benefits Israel, not the US. Of course there's always been tremendous rhetoric here that Iran is an implied direct threat, but that's window-dressing. It is to support Israel so as to please
    the Jewish faction here.> > If you outrightly attack Iran then it's USA vs Iran war, another American aggression.Yes. No question there.> > > I prefer linguistic and logical clarity, no?If you want to focus on war, sure.Now, in giving Iran two weeks,
    Trump is attempting to settle it by means other than war. But that is not as solid a solution, from the Israeli viewpoint mostly, and that's because more of the nuclear capability would survive a regime change than would survive a successful war.I mean,
    oh, sure, you could get new leaders who are a bit less belligerent, but they could go back on it, or yet another hard-line regime could come to power (it's been pretty much one after another since the 80s, so why expect something else?) and still what's
    currently left of the nuclear program remains. But after a successful war, almost all of it could be sniffed out and destroyed.So Israel probably prefers a US fought war. The more fool us if we buy this.> >



    When you're not a Christian, not bound by anything Christian...


    https://t.me/c/1458395831/416923



    --




    ----Android NewsGroup Reader---- https://piaohong.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/usenet/index.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From TT@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jun 21 14:32:08 2025
    PeteWasLucky kirjoitti 20.6.2025 klo 3.22:
    I believe you are underestimating the impact and the consequences
    of everything.

    Could be. Then again it's hard to get too excited about forever wars in
    Middle East.

    If they block the Hormuz strait, maybe then.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)