Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi spoke from Tehran in an exclusive interview with “NBC Nightly News” anchor Tom Llamas.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Thursday that his country is ready for a ground invasion by American troops as the war launched by the United States and Israel has quickly spread across the region. He also refused any negotiations with the U.S. and said that Iran had not asked for a ceasefire.

His comments came after the U.S. and Israeli militaries began a sweeping attack on Iran on Saturday, which decimated its military defenses and killed its top authority, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

  • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    9 hours ago

    Operation Iraqi freedom ended in a route so successful that the tanks had to stop to allow logistics to catch up. They went from initial invasion to Baghdad falling within like 20 days.

    Also the Americans were pretty pivotal in the D-Day landings that ended up with the liberation of Europe.

    They also pushed the North Koreans from the Pusan Perimeter in the south east pretty much all the way back to the Chinese border during the Korean war after the North Koreans invaded the south. Before the Chinese got involved of course and pushed the Americans back down to the 38th parallel at obscene expense.

    There’s probably more

    • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Arguably, WW2 is the last war the USA won, and they only won that one by swooping in at a time when the Nazis were already battered and at the edge of strategic defeat. The Korean war was a stalemate, and the second gulf war ended in a quagmire and a withdrawal. The USA is great at taking territory, terrible at holding it and doing counterinsurgency. They’ll win the invasion, but lose the war.

      • BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        They won because the highly motivated Russians were quickly moving toward them from the East, forcing the Germans to split their army into two different meat-grinder fronts.

        America did not win the war, it was very much a product of the Alliance, assisted by strong rebel resistance.

      • PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        i don’t disagree. the question was about invading though, not holding land.

        And from a military perspective they can hold land for as long as they want.

        They didn’t leave Afghanistan because they ran out of bullets/money/warm bodies to throw at it.

        They left Afghanistan because they ran out of political capital to continue

        • itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          9 hours ago

          political capital (or morale) is just as, if not more, important than bullets or money. And somehow, despite decades and decades of failures, the US empire fails to understand that

    • GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      9 hours ago

      Iraq - had a lot of help from allies
      D-day - had a lot of help from allies
      Korea - had a lot of help from allies

      Now do all the wars where the USA got their ass kicked. Especially the ones they fought by themselves. Americans are extremely bad at wars - historical fact.

    • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      Operation Iraqi freedom ended in a route so successful

      The war lasted nearly a decade. Come on bro.

      Before the Chinese got involved of course

      Oh so they were doing great up until a real military joined? Not exactly high praise.

      • PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        8 hours ago

        Toppling Saddams government is the war OP is talking about which went by very fast. The insurgency that came after (what you are talking about) because Bush’s admin mismanaged the whole thing by disbanding all government employees and the Iraqi army. Which was a bad idea because occupying a country with an incredibly high gun ownership rate and a bunch of unemployed soldiers with nothing else to lose was always going to be recipe for disaster. All of would not have happened if they had kept the Ba’athist government intact. It was all very dumb and stupid just like this new Iran war is.

          • PalmTreeIsBestTree@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            2 hours ago

            You could say it was that initial operation/invasion. No need to get into semantics. The original goal of the war was to topple Saddam and it succeeded at that, but failed at everything after and became a prolonged nation building war.

            • CarnivorousCouch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Yeah, I think there’s a worthwhile distinction between when wars fail because of unclear or impossible goals vs when the fighting force is unable to contend with the military might of the enemy.

              The US failed in Iraq and Afghanistan because the overall mission was poorly conceived and there was no long term vision or metric for success, just the amorphous quagmire of nation-building. The actual fighting force, however, dispatched the immediate and significant threats quickly.