Iran has threatened a wider war beyond the Middle East and warned that Americans will die as Donald Trump's ceasefire efforts collapse.

Iranian Parliament National Security Committee head Azizi said: " We're not afraid of fighting losers. The number of American casualties is already far higher than Trump confirms, and it will rise. This time, the war won't be limited to the region. We'll see what happens!"

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/2215893/iran-issues-chilling-threat-global/amp

Trump has painted a target on your backs you yanks are going to have to live with that for a lot of years looking over your shoulder

Oh no, all the sudden Iran wants to kill Americans.

1 minute ago, Yellowtail said:

Oh no, all the sudden Iran wants to kill Americans.

I hate to think what COULD happen at the World Cup games involving those two nations.

Post using an offensive and derogatory ethnic slur removed.

@Slowhand225 rule 15.You may not discriminate, use slurs, or post hostile or abusive comments based on personal characteristics such as race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, nationality, disability, medical history, marital or family status, gender identity, or sexual orientation. Posts breaching this rule will be removed, and posting suspension or account closure may result.

Right now Iran doesn't have nukes and look at the threats and trouble Iran is causing, just imagine if they did get nukes, like some forum members think they should have!

Then imagine what they could do?

We know Iran's missiles and drones will not reach America so the threat is from terrorist attacks. Unless there are embedded Iranian forces in the USA it is unlikely they can do much except shoot people if they manage to get in the country.

Easier is to attack American bases in the Middle East.

The Intercept has challenged the low number of American dead and wounded, but we won't know until family members speak out.

Edited June 11Jun 11 by Purdey

6 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

Right now Iran doesn't have nukes and look at the threats and trouble Iran is causing, just imagine if they did get nukes, like some forum members think they should have!

Then imagine what they could do?

I don't often agree with you, but here you're spot on. It's a tough call. On one hand, they are a sovereign nation, so who is the US to tell them they can't have a nuke. On the other hand, I would bet my bottom dollar they'd nuke Israel without a moment's hesitation.

9 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

Right now Iran doesn't have nukes and look at the threats and trouble Iran is causing, just imagine if they did get nukes, like some forum members think they should have!

Then imagine what they could do?

The only ones who dared to use the atomic bomb, causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands, were the Americans themselves.

9 minutes ago, Toc-Toc said:

The only ones who dared to use the atomic bomb, causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands, were the Americans themselves.

Using the nuclear bombs saved tens of thousands of American and allied lives.

19 minutes ago, Purdey said:

We know Iran's missiles and drones will not reach America so the threat is from terrorist attacks. Unless there are embedded Iranian forces in the USA it is unlikely they can do much except shoot people if they manage to get in the country.

Easier is to attack American bases in the Middle East.

The Intercept has challenged the low number of American dead and wounded, but we won't know until family members speak out.

If there are Iranian terror cells in the US, (I assume there are) I think better the find out sooner rather than later.

Of course, the Iranian regime is not a model of virtue, but this country has been living under the threat of heavily armed Israelis/Americans for decades. They also have the right to defend themselves, and terrorism is one of the only means at their disposal.

Moreover, they are 93 million fanatics, most of them. It's difficult to imagine another genocide using Netanyahu's methods.

26 minutes ago, Purdey said:

We know Iran's missiles and drones will not reach America so the threat is from terrorist attacks. Unless there are embedded Iranian forces in the USA it is unlikely they can do much except shoot people if they manage to get in the country.

Easier is to attack American bases in the Middle East.

The Intercept has challenged the low number of American dead and wounded, but we won't know until family members speak out.

iran could get long range weapons from russia or n korea before thay make their own

52 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

Trump has painted a target on your backs you yanks are going to have to live with that for a lot of years looking over your shoulder

Why do you think I so rarely leave my house, and then only at night, with a hat, speaking Chinese?

1 minute ago, 3NUMBAS said:

iran could get long range weapons from russia or n korea before thay make their own

Why would Russia give Iran long range weapons to hit America with? Its not as if we.....ah...hang on a minute.

The lefts love affair with NeoNazi Ukraine and Panana papers Little Z paying more dividends. Cheers lefties

Let's see....Iran threatens a wider war, which may well mean sleeper cells in the US.

Kash Patel is DirFBI....but he has a drinking problem and fired most of his counterterrorist staff, because they investigated the 6 January scumballs

Trump has named the little goofball Pulte to lead the ODNI, and not to run intelligence, but to hunt down people who investigated Trump's campaign cooperation with Russia in 2016. Pulte knows a sum total of zero about intel and terrorism

The new head of counterterrorism at the Dept of Defense is a pardoned 6 January insurrectionist, who was unemployed

The Chief of Counterterrorism in Homeland Security is a 23 year old former landscaper, who was gifted his position because he volunteered on Trump's 2024 campaign.

The Iran experts in the agency, like Paul Nevin, Ayatollah Mike, Mark Polymeroplous, Tom Rakusan and Mike Collins all were fired or quit.

Good Luck, America!

Edited June 11Jun 11 by Wingate

34 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

Why would Russia give Iran long range weapons to hit America with? Its not as if we.....ah...hang on a minute.

The lefts love affair with NeoNazi Ukraine and Panana papers Little Z paying more dividends. Cheers lefties

"NeoNazi Ukraine"?

Oh my, Sunny. Been sniffing the vapors again?

In your wildest fantasy you don't have a ounce of the courage Ukrainians have displayed taking on the invaders.

39 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

iran could get long range weapons from russia or n korea before thay make their own

Easier said than done besides why would either of those countries take such a risk.

4 minutes ago, Wingate said:

Let's see....Iran threatens a wider war, which may well mean sleeper cells in the US.

Kash Patel is DirFBI....but he has a drinking problem and fired most of his counterterrorist staff, because they investigated the 6 January scumballs

Trump has named the little goofball Pulte to lead the ODNI, and not to run intelligence, but to hunt down people who investigated Trump's campaign cooperation with Russia in 2016. Pulte knows a sum total of zero about intel and terrorism

The new head of counterterrorism at the Dept of Defense is a pardoned 6 January insurrectionist, who was unemployed

The Chief of Counterterrorism in Homeland Security is a 23 year old former landscaper, who was gifted his position because he volunteered on Trump's 2024 campaign.

Good Luck, America!

Please provide evidence (beyond an off the record hit piece) that Patel is a drunk. You can't, because it's a lie.

If Iran has sleeper cells, would it not be better to find them sooner rather than later?

7 minutes ago, Wingate said:

Let's see....Iran threatens a wider war, which may well mean sleeper cells in the US.

Kash Patel is DirFBI....but he has a drinking problem and fired most of his counterterrorist staff, because they investigated the 6 January scumballs

Trump has named the little goofball Pulte to lead the ODNI, and not to run intelligence, but to hunt down people who investigated Trump's campaign cooperation with Russia in 2016. Pulte knows a sum total of zero about intel and terrorism

The new head of counterterrorism at the Dept of Defense is a pardoned 6 January insurrectionist, who was unemployed

The Chief of Counterterrorism in Homeland Security is a 23 year old former landscaper, who was gifted his position because he volunteered on Trump's 2024 campaign.

Good Luck, America!

The above post is indicative of being completely out of focus and all over the random map without saying a single rational thing.

1 hour ago, 3NUMBAS said:

Iran has threatened a wider war beyond the Middle East and warned that Americans will die as Donald Trump's ceasefire efforts collapse.

Iranian Parliament National Security Committee head Azizi said: " We're not afraid of fighting losers. The number of American casualties is already far higher than Trump confirms, and it will rise. This time, the war won't be limited to the region. We'll see what happens!"

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/2215893/iran-issues-chilling-threat-global/amp

Well, the threat of peace is Trump by far.

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Oh no, all the sudden Iran wants to kill Americans.

While Trump 🤡 has threatened to wipe out the whole Iranian civilisation ,that will

not be on Faux News or Newsmax ,so you might not know

regards worgeordie

29 minutes ago, worgeordie said:

While Trump 🤡 has threatened to wipe out the whole Iranian civilisation ,that will

not be on Faux News or Newsmax ,so you might not know

regards worgeordie

Did you have a quote? No? I thought not.

I saw Trump "truthing" about it, so?

regards Yellowtail

1 hour ago, wil iam not said:

I hate to think what COULD happen at the World Cup games involving those two nations.

The Americans would rig it, by manipulating the visa process, and not admitting key members of the Iranian team.

The USA would need to finish top of their group.

The Iranians would need to finish second in their group.

Both would need to win their round of 32 matches. Then they would meet on July 5th in New Jersey.

The fix will be in. Iran will not be allowed to win that match. And actually, if both teams had gotten to that point, Iran would have had the harder route, and probably more deserved of progressing. We also have to remember that the US has purposely put Iran at a complete disadvantage throughout the tournament. All of Iran's group matches are on the West coast USA, but their visa conditions, which we have seen are subject to arbitrary and random change, allow them only 24 hours in the US. So in between matches, rather than a team bus to a nearby camp for recovery, training, they are going to be spending a significant amount of time waiting at airports, waiting in line to see hyper aggressive immigration officer, with possibly a 10-15 hour interview for each player per US entry. Their opening matches are likely their toughest.

The USA though are in a very soft group. Hoping Paraguay might pull off an upset.

13 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

The Americans would rig it, by manipulating the visa process, and not admitting key members of the Iranian team.

The USA would need to finish top of their group.

The Iranians would need to finish second in their group.

Both would need to win their round of 32 matches. Then they would meet on July 5th in New Jersey.

The fix will be in. Iran will not be allowed to win that match. And actually, if both teams had gotten to that point, Iran would have had the harder route, and probably more deserved of progressing. We also have to remember that the US has purposely put Iran at a complete disadvantage throughout the tournament. All of Iran's group matches are on the West coast USA, but their visa conditions, which we have seen are subject to arbitrary and random change, allow them only 24 hours in the US. So in between matches, rather than a team bus to a nearby camp for recovery, training, they are going to be spending a significant amount of time waiting at airports, waiting in line to see hyper aggressive immigration officer, with possibly a 10-15 hour interview for each player per US entry. Their opening matches are likely their toughest.

The USA though are in a very soft group. Hoping Paraguay might pull off an upset.

Cool story bro.

8 minutes ago, TedG said:

Cool story bro.

And people in the US generally do not give a happy-rat's about the World Cup.

11 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

And people in the US generally do not give a happy-rat's about the World Cup.

True.

1 hour ago, HappyExpat57 said:

I don't often agree with you, but here you're spot on. It's a tough call. On one hand, they are a sovereign nation, so who is the US to tell them they can't have a nuke. On the other hand, I would bet my bottom dollar they'd nuke Israel without a moment's hesitation.

Iran has had a potent arsenal of chemical munitions, including nerve agents, alongside likely biological agents for at least 30 years. They are one of the few countries with recent battlefield experience of chemical munitions, both defensively and offensively. The West hasn't experienced a nerve agent attack since 1918. Iran would have observed, and taken note, how Syria and their Russian allies, deployed chemical munitions. IRGC personnel were certainly involved in filling Syrian SCUDs with various special munitions. They had missiles with sufficient range for over 20 years, with iterative improvements in performance and reliability ever since.

Yet, Iran has never fired a chemical weapon laden missile at Israel, despite the likelihood it would cause mass casualties, with likely a longer tail, as a nuclear weapon. It has fired long range missiles from Iran and short range missiles from Lebsnon, generally in retaliation for some act.

Iran is not a mass suicide cult. An attack on Israel with a single nuclear weapon it knows would likely end the Islamic Republic of Iran, quite literally. Besides Israel having, in all likelihood, a maritime counter strike capability, they would assume that the US would join in, and possibly other countries.

Muslims, like Christians of Faith, believe in martyrdom; giving your life for the greater cause. For suicide bombers this has been twisted, by men and women being essentially hoodwinked by malevolent characters who are skilful in exploiting weak characters.

When the 911 attackers flew their planes into the WTC, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania, what did they expect they could achieve. It wasn't going to cause the USA to give up, and submit to Allah en masses. It wasn't going to destroy America. Maybe they thought like Barry the Convert in 4 Lions, that it would inspire the Umma to rise up. It didn't. Maybe someone told them that it would, and this is why they should kill themselves. Repeat for every pathetic loser who strapped explosives to their body.

An attack on Israel wouldn't destroy Israel, thanks to the topography. A lot of Israelis would die, but a lot would live. Iran know this.

Iranian nuclear weapons are part 2 of the Shah's willy waving. The Shah built up a huge military, because he had some bizarre idea to make Iran a superpower, essentially get one over the Arabs. The present government are much the same. Its about enabling waving a big stick in the region without suffering the usual drawbacks. MAD assured the survival of the Cold War powers. But post Cold War, we see that being a nuclear power against non-nuclear states gives you a ticket to ride. Would the US have invaded Iraq if the Iraqis actually had the Bomb. Similarly, Russia in Ukraine; they would never have invaded both Georgia and Ukraine if they weren't nuclear armed. They seem to think its an insurance policy against mistakes by the leadership, resulting in normally serious leaders doing stupid things.

Iran having a nuclear weapon or two or ten, doesn't mean Iran is zapping Tel Aviv next week. It does mean Iran leaning heavily on Baghdad over talks about access to the Shatt Al Arab, it means they might want Najaf one of the holiest places in Shia Islam, and the big one, who controls Mecca.

The control of Mecca is bigger than whatever happens to Israel. If you control Mecca, you control Islam, you control a large chunk of humanity. You obtain enormous influence, which is the objective of every single government on Earth. The US wants influences. The UK wants influence. Russia wants influence. China wants influence. Iran wants a seat at that table, and thinks it shouldn't be the Camel shaggers of Riyadh doing that representation.

The Saud family seized Mecca by force in 1924, and used that to establish their pre-eminence in the Arab world and in the West.

Previously , the Sherif of Mecca, which was overthrown in 1908/1924, was a line stretching back to the 900s, and acted as a sort of neutral guarantor of access to the holy sites, maybe not exactly like the Vatican, but you get the point. Iran wants either an Iranian Mecca or re-instituting the Sherif, take it out of Saudi control. You also have to remember the enmity between Sunni and Shia. Traditionally, the Shia were pretty hard done to; they were the poorer lot. They follow a person who famously died in battle, and they mark that loss by an annual gory self flagellation. Its easy to see how Iran wants to be seen as protecting the poor and weak, compared to the corpulant and profligate Sauds, in their Rolls Royces and gold plated jets.

So I think the West has Iran's motives all wrong, just like they were wrong about Pakistan's motives. Its about guaranteeing survival. Unilateral use of them guarantees destruction, with nne of the attendant "at least it was worth it". Nations do not think like screwed up incel crackhead bombers.

2 hours ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

Right now Iran doesn't have nukes and look at the threats and trouble Iran is causing, just imagine if they did get nukes, like some forum members think they should have!

Then imagine what they could do?

"Could do" is not the issue, "would" is. I think Iran is no more likely than any other nation playing nuclear chicken. Israel & Russia are nations waging wars. They both have nukes. Do you feel safe? I sure don't!

6 minutes ago, Roadsternut said:

Iran has had a potent arsenal of chemical munitions, including nerve agents, alongside likely biological agents for at least 30 years. They are one of the few countries with recent battlefield experience of chemical munitions, both defensively and offensively. The West hasn't experienced a nerve agent attack since 1918. Iran would have observed, and taken note, how Syria and their Russian allies, deployed chemical munitions. IRGC personnel were certainly involved in filling Syrian SCUDs with various special munitions. They had missiles with sufficient range for over 20 years, with iterative improvements in performance and reliability ever since.

Yet, Iran has never fired a chemical weapon laden missile at Israel, despite the likelihood it would cause mass casualties, with likely a longer tail, as a nuclear weapon. It has fired long range missiles from Iran and short range missiles from Lebsnon, generally in retaliation for some act.

Iran is not a mass suicide cult. An attack on Israel with a single nuclear weapon it knows would likely end the Islamic Republic of Iran, quite literally. Besides Israel having, in all likelihood, a maritime counter strike capability, they would assume that the US would join in, and possibly other countries.

Muslims, like Christians of Faith, believe in martyrdom; giving your life for the greater cause. For suicide bombers this has been twisted, by men and women being essentially hoodwinked by malevolent characters who are skilful in exploiting weak characters.

When the 911 attackers flew their planes into the WTC, the Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania, what did they expect they could achieve. It wasn't going to cause the USA to give up, and submit to Allah en masses. It wasn't going to destroy America. Maybe they thought like Barry the Convert in 4 Lions, that it would inspire the Umma to rise up. It didn't. Maybe someone told them that it would, and this is why they should kill themselves. Repeat for every pathetic loser who strapped explosives to their body.

An attack on Israel wouldn't destroy Israel, thanks to the topography. A lot of Israelis would die, but a lot would live. Iran know this.

Iranian nuclear weapons are part 2 of the Shah's willy waving. The Shah built up a huge military, because he had some bizarre idea to make Iran a superpower, essentially get one over the Arabs. The present government are much the same. Its about enabling waving a big stick in the region without suffering the usual drawbacks. MAD assured the survival of the Cold War powers. But post Cold War, we see that being a nuclear power against non-nuclear states gives you a ticket to ride. Would the US have invaded Iraq if the Iraqis actually had the Bomb. Similarly, Russia in Ukraine; they would never have invaded both Georgia and Ukraine if they weren't nuclear armed. They seem to think its an insurance policy against mistakes by the leadership, resulting in normally serious leaders doing stupid things.

Iran having a nuclear weapon or two or ten, doesn't mean Iran is zapping Tel Aviv next week. It does mean Iran leaning heavily on Baghdad over talks about access to the Shatt Al Arab, it means they might want Najaf one of the holiest places in Shia Islam, and the big one, who controls Mecca.

The control of Mecca is bigger than whatever happens to Israel. If you control Mecca, you control Islam, you control a large chunk of humanity. You obtain enormous influence, which is the objective of every single government on Earth. The US wants influences. The UK wants influence. Russia wants influence. China wants influence. Iran wants a seat at that table, and thinks it shouldn't be the Camel shaggers of Riyadh doing that representation.

The Saud family seized Mecca by force in 1924, and used that to establish their pre-eminence in the Arab world and in the West.

Previously , the Sherif of Mecca, which was overthrown in 1908/1924, was a line stretching back to the 900s, and acted as a sort of neutral guarantor of access to the holy sites, maybe not exactly like the Vatican, but you get the point. Iran wants either an Iranian Mecca or re-instituting the Sherif, take it out of Saudi control. You also have to remember the enmity between Sunni and Shia. Traditionally, the Shia were pretty hard done to; they were the poorer lot. They follow a person who famously died in battle, and they mark that loss by an annual gory self flagellation. Its easy to see how Iran wants to be seen as protecting the poor and weak, compared to the corpulant and profligate Sauds, in their Rolls Royces and gold plated jets.

So I think the West has Iran's motives all wrong, just like they were wrong about Pakistan's motives. Its about guaranteeing survival. Unilateral use of them guarantees destruction, with nne of the attendant "at least it was worth it". Nations do not think like screwed up incel crackhead bombers.

It is unfortunate that the "Sherif" of neutrality is not being employed in Jerusalem. It was open to Christians, Jews & Muslims. Now Christians and Muslims in the West Bank have no access. "Terrorism", you know.