Iran Warns of Retaliation Against Britain’s Diego Garcia Base Amid US Tensions

[jas007]

9 minutes ago, nauseus said:

 

It would be if they did. The fallout would contaminate European Russia too, where most of the Russians live.

There's no need for nukes in Ukraine.  Russia already won.  It's now just a matter of ending it.  Trump and Putin will make a deal.  Zelenskyy is merely an inconvenience. Why he's still there, I'm not sure. 

[AustinRacing]

5 hours ago, Old Farang said:

Google Iran Missile Range, contrary to this article and Iran boasting, the longest range missiles they have will travel just over 2000KM, never reach Diego Garcia.  If they fire them, they are signing their own death certificate.  Those stealth B-2 bombers will make Iran a glass factory.

And you have full knowledge of other countries’ military capabilities? USA doing Israel’s work have been wanting to attack Iran for decades. They haven’t and there’s good reason for that. The days of war mongering is coming to an end. 

[AustinRacing]

2 hours ago, BritManToo said:

5-6 nukes would do the job!

Only fools resort to using nukes or suggesting them. 

[Patong2021]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

 

It would be if they did. The fallout would contaminate European Russia too, where most of the Russians live.

 

No it would not. Chernobyl's radiation demonstrated this. When Chernobyl failed, the radiation drifted over Europe.

 

Alex Wellersteins Nukemap models various nuclear weapon detonations. In the event that Russia sends a nuclear cruise missile to Kyev;

 

Effect distances for a 150 kiloton airburst*:  

 

Fireball radius: 498 m (0.78 km²)

Maximum size of the nuclear fireball; relevance to damage on the ground depends on the height of detonation. If it touches the ground, the amount of radioactive fallout is significantly increased. Anything inside the fireball is effectively vaporized. Minimum burst height for negligible fallout: 407 m.

 

Radiation radius (500 rem): 1 km (3.17 km²)

500 rem ionizing radiation dose; likely fatal, in about 1 month; 15% of survivors will eventually die of cancer as a result of exposure.

 

Moderate blast damage radius (5 psi): 3.74 km (43.8 km²)

At 5 psi overpressure, most residential buildings collapse, injuries are universal, fatalities are widespread. The chances of a fire starting in commercial and residential damage are high, and buildings so damaged are at high risk of spreading fire. Often used as a benchmark for moderate damage in cities. Optimal height of burst to maximize this effect is 1,660 m.

 

Thermal radiation radius (3rd degree burns): 5.26 km (86.9 km²)

Third degree burns extend throughout the layers of skin, and are often painless because they destroy the pain nerves. They can cause severe scarring or disablement, and can require amputation. 100% probability for 3rd degree burns at this yield is 10.1 cal/cm².

 

Light blast damage radius (1 psi): 10.5 km (347 km²)

At around 1 psi overpressure, glass windows can be expected to break. This can cause many injuries in a surrounding population who comes to a window after seeing the flash of a nuclear explosion (which travels faster than the pressure wave). Often used as a benchmark for light damage in cities. Optimal height of burst to maximize this effect is 2,480 m.

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, jas007 said:

There's no need for nukes in Ukraine.  Russia already won.  It's now just a matter of ending it.  Trump and Putin will make a deal.  Zelenskyy is merely an inconvenience. Why he's still there, I'm not sure. 

 

It looks like the main inconvenience has been Putin. I'm not sure he has any right to be "there" over Zelensky.

[nauseus]

35 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

 

No it would not. Chernobyl's radiation demonstrated this. When Chernobyl failed, the radiation drifted over Europe.

 

Alex Wellersteins Nukemap models various nuclear weapon detonations. In the event that Russia sends a nuclear cruise missile to Kyev;

 

Effect distances for a 150 kiloton airburst*:  

 

Fireball radius: 498 m (0.78 km²)

Maximum size of the nuclear fireball; relevance to damage on the ground depends on the height of detonation. If it touches the ground, the amount of radioactive fallout is significantly increased. Anything inside the fireball is effectively vaporized. Minimum burst height for negligible fallout: 407 m.

 

Radiation radius (500 rem😞 1 km (3.17 km²)

500 rem ionizing radiation dose; likely fatal, in about 1 month; 15% of survivors will eventually die of cancer as a result of exposure.

 

Moderate blast damage radius (5 psi😞 3.74 km (43.8 km²)

At 5 psi overpressure, most residential buildings collapse, injuries are universal, fatalities are widespread. The chances of a fire starting in commercial and residential damage are high, and buildings so damaged are at high risk of spreading fire. Often used as a benchmark for moderate damage in cities. Optimal height of burst to maximize this effect is 1,660 m.

 

Thermal radiation radius (3rd degree burns): 5.26 km (86.9 km²)

Third degree burns extend throughout the layers of skin, and are often painless because they destroy the pain nerves. They can cause severe scarring or disablement, and can require amputation. 100% probability for 3rd degree burns at this yield is 10.1 cal/cm².

 

Light blast damage radius (1 psi😞 10.5 km (347 km²)

At around 1 psi overpressure, glass windows can be expected to break. This can cause many injuries in a surrounding population who comes to a window after seeing the flash of a nuclear explosion (which travels faster than the pressure wave). Often used as a benchmark for light damage in cities. Optimal height of burst to maximize this effect is 2,480 m.

 

If you want to compare power stations to missiles, then go ahead and be silly.

[safarimike11]

3 hours ago, jas007 said:

Supposedly, The USA now has some "low yield" nukes specifically engineered for the kind of strike the USA would do against the Iranian nuke facilities.  And I think that Trump might use them.  I also think that would be a mistake.  

 

This whole thing is a recipe for trouble.

They don't need "low-yield nukes"; what they need to do - and no-doubt will do - is drop repeated bunker-buster bombs on the exact same spot until they reach their target.

[safarimike11]

1 hour ago, AustinRacing said:

And you have full knowledge of other countries’ military capabilities? USA doing Israel’s work have been wanting to attack Iran for decades. They haven’t and there’s good reason for that. The days of war mongering is coming to an end. 

Hope so.

[safarimike11]

12 hours ago, Purdey said:

Britain should reevaluate whether it needs to hand over Diego Garcia to the USA. 

You appear to be exhibiting the symptoms of being intellectually-challenged.

[safarimike11]

7 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

All this coming from the guy who declared no new wars, if you elect me. So far he wants a war with Panama, a war with Greenland, a war with Iran, and let's see what other wars he can dream up.

 

The creep seems to be a warmonger after all. 

 

 

Donny doesn't need to do anything except to give Bibi the go-ahead.

[safarimike11]

6 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

I don't respond to you anymore, if you can form an intelligent question and you can make a slight attempt to be a bit more articulate, maybe we could have a discussion. But I have no interest in being baited by you, you're not interested in real answers and you love to twist around other people's words and ideas. 

He is obviously another one of those "low-IQ" members - such as myself.

[Screaming]

6 hours ago, mogandave said:

I think he’s actually pretty bright, he’s just blinded by his seething hatred for Trump. 

Funny actually, I think he has the syndrome that we cannot mention on this board. I was reading somewhere that the syndrome is now recognized by the American Medial Association. There is help available from what I read. On this subject maybe one of the moderators could answer, why is it not permitted to mention the full name of this syndrome on this site?

[thaipo7]

16 hours ago, Tug said:

That’s not a good idea we would flatten them but by the same token trump after Welching on the previous agreement has no business demanding anything.he does have every right to ASK to start renegotiating a deal.

Who welched on previous agreement?  What agreement?  The one with Obama that WAS NOT signed by anyone,  Do you ever put out correct facts?

[thaipo7]

5 hours ago, Tug said:

No one’s happy that Iran (most likely allready has) nukes.trump killed the nuclear deal .trump squandered every thing that was done over the years with N Korea just what makes you think anything would be different in Irans case?he’s an idiot proven time and time again.hes made the world a much more dangerous unstable place.all this talk is bluster pure and simple………untle it isent……then what ?……the guys an idiot.

What Nuclear deal?  The one with Obama?  Not signed by either party.  Sounds like a phone agreement like you.  IMHO

[jas007]

10 hours ago, nauseus said:

 

It looks like the main inconvenience has been Putin. I'm not sure he has any right to be "there" over Zelensky.

But it's not about who has a "right" to be there, is it?  It's about reality.  And the reality is that Russia has won the war, and with every day that goes by without a settlement, what's left of Ukraine becomes smaller and smaller.   For Ukraine, Zelenskyy is counterproductive.   

[nauseus]

44 minutes ago, jas007 said:

But it's not about who has a "right" to be there, is it?  It's about reality.  And the reality is that Russia has won the war, and with every day that goes by without a settlement, what's left of Ukraine becomes smaller and smaller.   For Ukraine, Zelenskyy is counterproductive.   

 

If that is true then, for Russia, Putin is even more counterproductive.   

[PomPolo]

On 4/1/2025 at 7:05 AM, Social Media said:

The threat follows comments from former US President Donald Trump

I wish

[Taboo2]

5555555555

 

Sure Iran, Americans are soooooo afraid of your massive airforce, based on the great performance you did against Israel....FAFO.  You do not have the range to get half the distance to that airbace more runs!

[Taboo2]

12 hours ago, AustinRacing said:

And you have full knowledge of other countries’ military capabilities? USA doing Israel’s work have been wanting to attack Iran for decades. They haven’t and there’s good reason for that. The days of war mongering is coming to an end. 

Nice try.  Iran is the POS that needs to be checked...since 1979, they have tried to export that stupid revolution and have been checked and they are going to FAFO.

[Mr Meeseeks]

The Yanks love a good indiscriminate bombing.

 

Here's a list of countries the US has bombed or conducted significant airstrikes in since 1945:

---

Asia:

1. China – (Korean War, 1950–1953; minor incursions during Cold War)

2. Korea (North) – (Korean War, 1950–1953)

3. Vietnam – (Vietnam War, 1964–1973)

4. Cambodia – (1969–1973, secret bombings during Vietnam War)

5. Laos – (1964–1973, part of the “Secret War”)

6. Thailand – (Accidental strikes during Vietnam War)

7. Indonesia – (CIA-backed rebellion support, 1958)

8. Philippines – (Counter-insurgency airstrikes in the 2000s)

9. Afghanistan – (2001–2021, War on Terror)

10. Pakistan – (Drone strikes since mid-2000s)

11. Yemen – (Drone strikes since mid-2000s)

12. Iran – (1980s: Operation Praying Mantis; recent covert strikes)

13. Iraq – (1991 Gulf War, 1998, 2003 invasion, and ongoing operations)

14. Syria – (2014–present, anti-ISIS operations)

15. Lebanon – (1983–1984, during Marine presence in Beirut)

---

Europe:

1. Serbia (former Yugoslavia) – (1999 NATO bombing during Kosovo War)

2. Bosnia and Herzegovina – (1994–1995 NATO airstrikes)

---

Africa:

1. Libya – (1986 airstrikes; 2011 NATO intervention; later anti-ISIS strikes)

2. Somalia – (1990s and again from 2007–present, drone strikes and air raids)

3. Sudan – (1998 strike on pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum)

4. Mali – (Drone support missions)

5. Niger – (Airstrikes against insurgents in recent years)

---

Latin America & Caribbean:

1. Guatemala – (1954 CIA-backed coup with some air involvement)

2. Cuba – (Bay of Pigs, 1961, limited air support)

3. Dominican Republic – (1965 intervention)

4. Grenada – (1983 invasion, airstrikes)

5. Panama – (1989 invasion, heavy bombing)

6. El Salvador & Nicaragua – (1980s, indirect involvement, covert support, some air action)

---

Oceania:

• No significant US bombings post-WWII.

[Yagoda]

2 minutes ago, Taboo2 said:

Nice try.  Iran is the POS that needs to be checked...since 1979, they have tried to export that stupid revolution and have been checked and they are going to FAFO.

5 B-1s with MOAPs should do the trick. The Israelis can clean up the rest and the Iranian folks can have their country back.

[Yagoda]

1 minute ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

The Yanks love a good indiscriminate bombing.

 

Here's a list of countries the US has bombed or conducted significant airstrikes in since 1945:

---

Asia:

1. China – (Korean War, 1950–1953; minor incursions during Cold War)

2. Korea (North) – (Korean War, 1950–1953)

3. Vietnam – (Vietnam War, 1964–1973)

4. Cambodia – (1969–1973, secret bombings during Vietnam War)

5. Laos – (1964–1973, part of the “Secret War”)

6. Thailand – (Accidental strikes during Vietnam War)

7. Indonesia – (CIA-backed rebellion support, 1958)

8. Philippines – (Counter-insurgency airstrikes in the 2000s)

9. Afghanistan – (2001–2021, War on Terror)

10. Pakistan – (Drone strikes since mid-2000s)

11. Yemen – (Drone strikes since mid-2000s)

12. Iran – (1980s: Operation Praying Mantis; recent covert strikes)

13. Iraq – (1991 Gulf War, 1998, 2003 invasion, and ongoing operations)

14. Syria – (2014–present, anti-ISIS operations)

15. Lebanon – (1983–1984, during Marine presence in Beirut)

---

Europe:

1. Serbia (former Yugoslavia) – (1999 NATO bombing during Kosovo War)

2. Bosnia and Herzegovina – (1994–1995 NATO airstrikes)

---

Africa:

1. Libya – (1986 airstrikes; 2011 NATO intervention; later anti-ISIS strikes)

2. Somalia – (1990s and again from 2007–present, drone strikes and air raids)

3. Sudan – (1998 strike on pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum)

4. Mali – (Drone support missions)

5. Niger – (Airstrikes against insurgents in recent years)

---

Latin America & Caribbean:

1. Guatemala – (1954 CIA-backed coup with some air involvement)

2. Cuba – (Bay of Pigs, 1961, limited air support)

3. Dominican Republic – (1965 intervention)

4. Grenada – (1983 invasion, airstrikes)

5. Panama – (1989 invasion, heavy bombing)

6. El Salvador & Nicaragua – (1980s, indirect involvement, covert support, some air action)

---

Oceania:

• No significant US bombings post-WWII.

Look at that. About 50% of the countries we bomb start doing better than they did before. Need to bomb more and get the success rates up.

 

It was 100% in WW2.  Should have done the same to the Chinese.

 

Nothing focuses the mind on the need for peace, love and civilizations more than a bombardment leading to total destruction. Look at the Germans LOL, afraid of their own shadows.

[EVENKEEL]

20 hours ago, FlorC said:

Like all those islands in the pacific , Diego Garcia looks like a

good place to test out first Iranian nuke .

It's not in the Pacific. 

[FlorC]

3 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

It's not in the Pacific. 

It wasn't implied.

[spidermike007]

18 hours ago, mogandave said:

I think he’s actually pretty bright, he’s just blinded by his seething hatred for Trump. 

It is quite extraordinary how dim some of the insults can be. @Mike_Hunt kind of takes the cake, on the one sentence replies, and his utter refusal to leave dogma aside, and devote more than 10 seconds to articulating a message. 

We do disagree on many things, but I am not dim. LOL. And I do admit I have some blindness when it comes to Trump. I have known him since the last 1970's in NYC, when I was in commercial real estate, and know too much about him to have any affection, nor any respect for the man. Thanks for the acknowledgement.

[sungod]

16 hours ago, jas007 said:

Is Trump bluffing?

 

All the military people and intelligence people I've seen online seem to think the USA cannot prevail in any kind of war with Iran. 

 

 

 

Putin has already played him, so why not Iran?

[quake]

Hope to see some very bright light  over Iran soon. 

[spidermike007]

12 hours ago, Screaming said:

Funny actually, I think he has the syndrome that we cannot mention on this board. I was reading somewhere that the syndrome is now recognized by the American Medial Association. There is help available from what I read. On this subject maybe one of the moderators could answer, why is it not permitted to mention the full name of this syndrome on this site?

I do know all about the syndrome. Trump deceives his supporters. LOL.

 

 

[jas007]

19 minutes ago, quake said:

Hope to see some very bright light  over Iran soon. 

Unfortunately, it's not the Iranian people so much as it is the small group that somehow rules the country. 

 

I guess that's pretty much how it works all over.  In the USA, the people don't want any kind of war, and yet the people running the show want one war right after another, non-stop.  Or, look at Europe.  The European people don't want war, but much of Europe's Globalist leadership can't wait. They'd stat a war tomorrow, if they could. 

[rough diamond]

21 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

I do know all about the syndrome. Trump deceives his supporters. LOL.

When I first read your comment above I thought it read;

"I do know all about the syndrome. Trump deserves his supporters. LOL."

 

I think both phrases are appropriate.