You break it, you own it. Here we go again.

Yes the ayatollah was a horrible dictator.

I know of another world "leader" who is also doing his best to become dictator of the world.

8 minutes ago, JimCM said:

What kind of immoral being would join the US army ? Probably ones who can't get into university or get a decent job.

Does that comment only apply to the US Army or every country's army?

Why does Israel want another failed war?

Israel wants to destroy Iran, all this regime change is total BS

This professor explains it well.

The USA are the most aggressive country in the world, apart from Israel.

58 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

The draft has been suspended for many years, so everyone serving today is a volunteer.

Why are you telling me that ?

13 hours ago, DonniePeverley said:

Ex British influencers and tax dodgers trying to flee Dubai need to go to the nearest safe country to UAE to claim asylum.

The UK should not be bringing them back or putting up flights for them.

Why? its quite possible many of them paid more tax in their shorter life time than you have ?...

Additionally - when I travelled out of the UAE once covid broke, after boarders were closing - the repatriation flight cost £500 - it wasn't free.

They won't stop Israel is the greatest source of chaos in the Middle East. They spread chaos and death.

Yes, Naftali Bennett said “Turkey is the new Iran” on Feb 17, 2026, at the Conference of Presidents in Jerusalem. He warned Turkey + Qatar are gaining influence in Syria/region, with Erdogan seeking to encircle Israel and build a hostile Sunni axis (incl. potential Pakistan ties). The “Israel is a threat” part is the poster's take, not Bennett's words.

7 hours ago, Hawaiian said:

7 hours ago, JimCM said:

I notice you haven't replied, not shown any regret to the 100 schoolgirls killed in this unlawful attack. Any thing to say about that?

I don't recall anyone asking me about this incident. Horrendous, if true. And isn't this just as bad or worse as all the other atrocities committed by Hamas and other Iranian proxies.

It is horrific and tragic. Iranian state media report that around 100 schoolgirls were killed, while some Iranian officials have placed the figure closer to 148. If those numbers are confirmed, it would represent a devastating civilian loss.

What is less widely discussed is that a Revolutionary Guards facility is located next to the school and was the intended target. That raises serious and question - Who builds military infrastructure right next to a school ??? That decision in itself demands scrutiny - and the answers highlight the underlying mentality at play *human-shield.

At the same time, Iranian missile and drone retaliation has not been limited to US military assets, with residential areas throughout Gulf impacted by drones and missiles. Whether intentional targeting or the consequence of interceptions and poor accuracy, civilians across the region are bearing the cost.

First tanker down in Hormuz.

8 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

It is horrific and tragic. Iranian state media report that around 100 schoolgirls were killed, while some Iranian officials have placed the figure closer to 148. If those numbers are confirmed, it would represent a devastating civilian loss.

Theres a thread about it here

10 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

It is horrific and tragic. Iranian state media report that around 100 schoolgirls were killed, while some Iranian officials have placed the figure closer to 148. If those numbers are confirmed, it would represent a devastating civilian loss.

What is less widely discussed is that a Revolutionary Guards facility is located next to the school and was the intended target. That raises serious and question - Who builds military infrastructure right next to a school ??? That decision in itself demands scrutiny - and the answers highlight the underlying mentality at play *human-shield.

At the same time, Iranian missile and drone retaliation has not been limited to US military assets, with residential areas throughout Gulf impacted by drones and missiles. Whether intentional targeting or the consequence of interceptions and poor accuracy, civilians across the region are bearing the cost.

Trump/Israel started it and Trump/Israel is to blame.

22 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Trump/Israel started it and Trump/Israel is to blame.

Mum, he hit me first

45 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

At the same time, Iranian missile and drone retaliation has not been limited to US military assets, with residential areas throughout Gulf impacted by drones and missiles. Whether intentional targeting or the consequence of interceptions and poor accuracy, civilians across the region are bearing the cost

Are those countries allies of the USA?

If so, are they legitimate targets?

"Retaliatory attacks"?

Come on, Trump, ordered by Netanyahu, started a war on a peaceful country- these strikes are totally legit. What else does the Israeli society expect?

They have voted in a lunatic for most of the last 30 years, a man opposed to a 2 state solution. Insane society.

1 hour ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Trump/Israel started it and Trump/Israel is to blame.

The intellectual depth of that response is truly something to behold. To distil decades of proxy warfare, nuclear brinkmanship, regional power struggles, religious fault lines, sanctions, covert operations, missile programmes and great-power rivalry into a 'he started it' playground slogan takes a rare kind of mind.

The Middle East’s layered, centuries-deep geo-religio-political complexity apparently collapses into a neat one line verdict - Pure Genius.

If only international security, deterrence theory and regional history were that simple, we could swap diplomats for schoolyard referees and wrap this up by teatime. If only “they” had consulted you sooner.

57 minutes ago, JimCM said:

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

At the same time, Iranian missile and drone retaliation has not been limited to US military assets, with residential areas throughout Gulf impacted by drones and missiles. Whether intentional targeting or the consequence of interceptions and poor accuracy, civilians across the region are bearing the cost

Are those countries allies of the USA?

If so, are they legitimate targets?

The Gulf nations that were struck or directly affected by Iranian missile and drone attacks are:

UAE - a US security partner hosting US forces.

Qatar - hosts Al Udeid Air Base, a major US military installation.

Bahrain - hosts the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet and is a Major Non-NATO Ally.

Kuwait - long-standing US defence partner with US troop presence.

Saudi Arabia - strategic US partner with extensive defence cooperation.

Thus - on that basis any NATO country that hosts US forces is also a legitimate target, including the residential area's within them ?

Some of the 'residential' area's that have been hit in the Gulf Coast region are not near any US assets.

Posts with derogatory nicknames, intentional misspellings, or personal remarks will be removed. Spell names correctly for all sides of the debate.

1 hour ago, richard_smith237 said:

. Who builds military infrastructure right next to a school ??? That decision in itself demands scrutiny - and the answers highlight the underlying mentality at play *human-shield.

Most countries will have civilian infrastructure right next door to military installations. eg Whitehall. Someone built the Pentagon next door to a Popeye's Fast Food outlet. RAF Mildenhall used to be an airfield. Now its an airbase complete with kindergartens, elementary schools and high schools. Do you seriously believe those schools were placed on the base to act as human shields??

As for the precise location of the Iranian barracks; you have no idea where it is. You've been told there is one in Minab, a provincial capital of 73,000 souls. You've been told its next door to a school, but you can't actually show the location of either.

Ok, so what is the full name of the school? The Shajare Tayyebeh IRGC Navy Girls’ School. Clearly the Iranian version of a UK Forces School, or a DoD school. I went to both. St Andrews and St Georges were just across the road from the Osborne Barracks, which was the main British miitary logistics hub (and now has the same function for the PLA). Bahrain High School occupies a site that was previously a school used by the Royal Navy. The surrounding area is thick with military infrastructure. Are you saying the US military is committing war crimes by buiding and operating schools for its service members where they live?

The maps are from an Israeli source, so can't vouch for the accuracy. They show the school in the far corner of a compound, far from any obvious infrastructure. Perhaps they intended to take out the hospital instead?

3 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

Most countries will have civilian infrastructure right next door to military installations. eg Whitehall. Someone built the Pentagon next door to a Popeye's Fast Food outlet. RAF Mildenhall used to be an airfield. Now its an airbase complete with kindergartens, elementary schools and high schools. Do you seriously believe those schools were placed on the base to act as human shields??

As for the precise location of the Iranian barracks; you have no idea where it is. You've been told there is one in Minab, a provincial capital of 73,000 souls. You've been told its next door to a school, but you can't actually show the location of either.

Ok, so what is the full name of the school? The Shajare Tayyebeh IRGC Navy Girls’ School. Clearly the Iranian version of a UK Forces School, or a DoD school. I went to both. St Andrews and St Georges were just across the road from the Osborne Barracks, which was the main British miitary logistics hub (and now has the same function for the PLA). Bahrain High School occupies a site that was previously a school used by the Royal Navy. The surrounding area is thick with military infrastructure. Are you saying the US military is committing war crimes by buiding and operating schools for its service members where they live?

The maps are from an Israeli source, so can't vouch for the accuracy. They show the school in the far corner of a compound, far from any obvious infrastructure. Perhaps they intended to take out the hospital instead?

Thank you - thats a very fair argument.

In retrospect - I quite a agree with you - it was highly unfortunate the school was near the IRGC Asset, but unlikely planned as a 'shield' - my bias has clearly slipped through and removed objectivity.

So did the US target a girls school ? Did Iranian defences 'deflect' an incoming missile ?

Poor targeting ?

The same cam be argued of the Iranian attacks on the Gulf Coast Civilian facilities.

Though - what US Asset is Dubai Airport T3 close to ? what US Asset is an Apartment Complex in Seef Bahrain close to ? (its 6km from the US 5th Naval Fleet base by the way).

Are both sides 'aiming' aimlessly ?

It seems the US clearly made a tragic error hitting the school.

Is my bias getting the better of me and suspecting that Irans Shahed UAVs are targeting anything - after two apartment complexes and the Crown Plaza hotel in Bahrain were hit ? T3 Dubai Airport ?

40 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Thank you - thats a very fair argument.

In retrospect - I quite a agree with you - it was highly unfortunate the school was near the IRGC Asset, but unlikely planned as a 'shield' - my bias has clearly slipped through and removed objectivity.

So did the US target a girls school ? Did Iranian defences 'deflect' an incoming missile ?

Poor targeting ?

The same cam be argued of the Iranian attacks on the Gulf Coast Civilian facilities.

Though - what US Asset is Dubai Airport T3 close to ? what US Asset is an Apartment Complex in Seef Bahrain close to ? (its 6km from the US 5th Naval Fleet base by the way).

Are both sides 'aiming' aimlessly ?

It seems the US clearly made a tragic error hitting the school.

Is my bias getting the better of me and suspecting that Irans Shahed UAVs are targeting anything - after two apartment complexes and the Crown Plaza hotel in Bahrain were hit ? T3 Dubai Airport ?

There is a suggestion its a down defensive weapon that caused the damage. Not defending Iranian offensive policies. There is no information I have seen to indicate who was targeting that city; you seem to have insider information that it was the US and not Israel. Only Iran is saying it was the US.

Both sides are acting recklessly and without regard to civilian casualties. The onus is on the US and Israel, with their greater US provided targeting capabiities, to achieve a higher standard. The US should be near instant in expressing, in the strongest terms, regret at such incidents, as well as a commitment for root and branch investigation. There is no fog of war, because its not a war. These targets have been planned, gamed, planned, gamed for months.

4 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

There is a suggestion its a down defensive weapon that caused the damage. Not defending Iranian offensive policies. There is no information I have seen to indicate who was targeting that city; you seem to have insider information that it was the US and not Israel. Only Iran is saying it was the US.

Interesting - when you say “downed defensive weapon” are you suggesting it was an Iranian air-defence interceptor that came down on the school? Or are you referring to one of the other impacts in the area?

Initial reports suggested the school was struck by a US missile, allegedly aimed at a nearby IRGC facility. But as you’re implying, in a dense engagement environment it’s not always straightforward. It could have been a direct strike, an intercepted incoming missile, or even debris from an Iranian defensive system brought down mid-air.

In these scenarios, fragmentation and secondary impacts can travel significant distances. Difficult to truly establish.

We’ve already seen how messy this becomes. In the UAE, a civilian was reportedly killed by falling debris from an intercepted missile. The UAE's Ministry of Defense publicly stated it had intercepted over 130 missiles and 200+ drones.

According to official Bahraini sources, Bahrain’s air-defence forces intercepted 45 Iranian missiles and 9 Iranian drones - air-burst interceptions, Patriots engaging inbound drones or ballistic threats, have scattered debris over residential areas.

Once multiple systems are firing simultaneously, distinguishing between offensive strike, interception, and falling fragments becomes extremely difficult without detailed technical assessment.

4 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

Both sides are acting recklessly and without regard to civilian casualties. The onus is on the US and Israel, with their greater US provided targeting capabiities, to achieve a higher standard. The US should be near instant in expressing, in the strongest terms, regret at such incidents, as well as a commitment for root and branch investigation. There is no fog of war, because its not a war. These targets have been planned, gamed, planned, gamed for months.

Agreed... when you possess superior targeting capability and surveillance assets, the expectation is higher. If civilians, especially children, were killed, there has to be transparency. If it was US or Israeli ordnance, that should be acknowledged. If it was an interceptor, a malfunction, or even an Iranian defensive system gone wrong, that too needs to be established. Modern militaries collect vast ISR data - they will know far more than the public does.

The real issue is whether any explanation would be trusted in the current climate.

Where I differ is on the broader framing. From my perspective, and yes, bias is always possible, stopping the Iranian regime from advancing its enrichment programme toward weapons-grade capability may prevent a far larger conflict later. If Iran crosses from 60% to 90% and becomes a true nuclear threshold state, the deterrence equation changes overnight. That could trigger regional proliferation, miscalculation, or a confrontation under a nuclear shadow.

In short: The cost of inaction might be far higher than the cost of acting now.

That doesn’t excuse civilian casualties. It means the stakes are strategic as well as moral. If this is about preventing a nuclear-armed regime that has repeatedly threatened neighbours and armed proxies, then accountability and transparency are essential - not optional. But so is confronting the long-term risk.

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The intellectual depth of that response is truly something to behold. To distil decades of proxy warfare, nuclear brinkmanship, regional power struggles, religious fault lines, sanctions, covert operations, missile programmes and great-power rivalry into a 'he started it' playground slogan takes a rare kind of mind.

The Middle East’s layered, centuries-deep geo-religio-political complexity apparently collapses into a neat one line verdict - Pure Genius.

If only international security, deterrence theory and regional history were that simple, we could swap diplomats for schoolyard referees and wrap this up by teatime. If only “they” had consulted you sooner.

---

I'm available by PM for free consultations, but let me be clear: Trump and Israel started this, and they are to blame.

I'll admit this forum brings out my inner playground combatant I enjoy the unbridled chaos before the teacher confiscates the sweets and someone wets themselves. Even in my admitted juvenilia, I'm still several cuts above Trump who, I repeat, is to blame.

But seriously: sometimes a soundbite cuts through complex, dense, almost impenetrable argument and expresses a greater eternal truth. "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth" is obviously wrong, but it's a good direction of travel.

My admittedly simplistic mantra attempts the same clarity: This was an unnecessary war, an act of aggression, and illegal. The fallout is entirely down to them. Period.

14 hours ago, JimCM said:

Nothing wrong with supporting allies, like Hezbollah,the US does it with it's allies.

Terrorism is the wrong word, its freedom fighters, fighting against the evil Israel. Do you think the countries Israel blockades, annexes, genocides, should not fight back?

Ahh so that's why Iran has launched missiles at Bahrain, UAE and KSA civilian structures.

Top of the Pops Iran style - quite catchy ! Reminds me of the Palestian banger

25 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

Ahh so that's why Iran has launched missiles at Bahrain, UAE and KSA civilian structures.

US/Israel have launched an illegal war all flows from that action.

7 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

US/Israel have launched an illegal war all flows from that action.

OK, but Bahrain, Qatar, KSA and UAE did not. why is iran attacking hotels like the Palm Jumerah , Dubai International Airport, Zayed International Airport in Abu Dhabi which are all civilian use locations. The Palm is exclusively residential and is nowhere near a military installation. Why target non combatants in these countries? It is Iran that targeted these locations. Killing non combatants serves no purpose other than to illustrate how evil the Iranian regime is. And here you are to support and justify the killings.

15 minutes ago, Patong2021 said:

OK, but Bahrain, Qatar, KSA and UAE did not. why is iran attacking hotels like the Palm Jumerah , Dubai International Airport, Zayed International Airport in Abu Dhabi which are all civilian use locations. The Palm is exclusively residential and is nowhere near a military installation. Why target non combatants in these countries? It is Iran that targeted these locations. Killing non combatants serves no purpose other than to illustrate how evil the Iranian regime is. And here you are to support and justify the killings.

In asymmetric warfare where you cannot win by explicit military means, the strategy becomes fighting dirty with whatever hand you're dealt.

These Gulf States house US bases and have courted Trump with great fealty. Iran and the IRGC aren't just fighting for their lives they're fighting for their legacy as they see it on the Arab street.

If Iran balances competing armed warlords and factions, each pushing their own worldviews and positions, then exacting both revenge and cost on the aggressors becomes a logical calculus.

This is the brutal reality of a fox versus a wolf not a civilized game of chess.

Trump/Israel opened this pandora's Box - they own the outcomes good or bad.

https://archive.ph/WWc1T

Trump has no realistic plan for Iran’s future - The US president has not understood the lessons of past wars for regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan - Gideon Rachman -FT

The domestic political risks for Trump are considerable. After the trauma of 9/11, the American people were strongly in favour of both the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. The US public was around 90 per cent in favour of invading Afghanistan when the war began in 2001 and George W Bush’s approval rating surged to a similar level. Support for the Iraq war was around 70 per cent when it started in 2003. In both cases, there was strong bipartisan support in Congress.

By contrast, the Democrats and some Maga Republicans have been bitterly critical of Trump’s decision to attack the Islamic Republic. And just 27 per cent of Americans supported using military force against Iran, according to a YouGov poll last week.

The American people — if not its government — seem to have learned the lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan.

9 hours ago, JimCM said:

Why does Israel want another failed war?

Israel wants to destroy Iran, all this regime change is total BS

This professor explains it well.

9 hours ago, JimCM said:

Why does Israel want another failed war?

Israel wants to destroy Iran, all this regime change is total BS

This professor explains it well.

Everyone has their own opinion about Israel's true intent for attacking Iran.

5 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Interesting - when you say “downed defensive weapon” are you suggesting it was an Iranian air-defence interceptor that came down on the school? Or are you referring to one of the other impacts in the area?

Initial reports suggested the school was struck by a US missile, allegedly aimed at a nearby IRGC facility. But as you’re implying, in a dense engagement environment it’s not always straightforward. It could have been a direct strike, an intercepted incoming missile, or even debris from an Iranian defensive system brought down mid-air.

In these scenarios, fragmentation and secondary impacts can travel significant distances. Difficult to truly establish.

We’ve already seen how messy this becomes. In the UAE, a civilian was reportedly killed by falling debris from an intercepted missile. The UAE's Ministry of Defense publicly stated it had intercepted over 130 missiles and 200+ drones.

According to official Bahraini sources, Bahrain’s air-defence forces intercepted 45 Iranian missiles and 9 Iranian drones - air-burst interceptions, Patriots engaging inbound drones or ballistic threats, have scattered debris over residential areas.

Once multiple systems are firing simultaneously, distinguishing between offensive strike, interception, and falling fragments becomes extremely difficult without detailed technical assessment.

Agreed... when you possess superior targeting capability and surveillance assets, the expectation is higher. If civilians, especially children, were killed, there has to be transparency. If it was US or Israeli ordnance, that should be acknowledged. If it was an interceptor, a malfunction, or even an Iranian defensive system gone wrong, that too needs to be established. Modern militaries collect vast ISR data - they will know far more than the public does.

The real issue is whether any explanation would be trusted in the current climate.

Where I differ is on the broader framing. From my perspective, and yes, bias is always possible, stopping the Iranian regime from advancing its enrichment programme toward weapons-grade capability may prevent a far larger conflict later. If Iran crosses from 60% to 90% and becomes a true nuclear threshold state, the deterrence equation changes overnight. That could trigger regional proliferation, miscalculation, or a confrontation under a nuclear shadow.

In short: The cost of inaction might be far higher than the cost of acting now.

That doesn’t excuse civilian casualties. It means the stakes are strategic as well as moral. If this is about preventing a nuclear-armed regime that has repeatedly threatened neighbours and armed proxies, then accountability and transparency are essential - not optional. But so is confronting the long-term risk.

The danger of "long-term risk" is the catastrophe that may occur if preventive action is not taken soon enough. Since Iran had not recovered from previous attacks the timing was right to take this preventive action.