We know what’s coming and we are prepared.
⚡️🇺🇸 The US has roughly around 50,000 troops deployed across the Middle East. With large bases from Syria to the Gulf. The Al-Harir Airbase in Erbil, Iraqi Kurdistan recently came under drone attack. Tashkil al-Waritheen claimed responsibility for the attacks. The US has also deployed 2 CSGs in the Mediterranean. (The USN map is from 4 days ago, we can assume the Eisenhower is on route to its destination in the Mediterranean)
@themediterraneanman
Azerbaijan: This Turkish country has destroyed more Christian monuments than ISIS.
Based off satellite data, Azerbaijan erased 108 Armenian monasteries, churches and cemeteries - in just one region.
By comparison, ISIS destroyed dozens of churches.
How is this okay?
@NoAgendaLara
UPDATE: Outrage erupts as there has been a SURGE in Islamists ATTACKING and vandalizing Japanese shrines
Security footage shows people wearing HIJABS storming up and unleashing on the Soya Shrine in Hadano City
🇺🇸Join👉 @SGTnewsNetwork
📎 X (Twitter)▪️Truth Social
— Hypothetically, if the U.S. wanted to carry out a naval landing in Iran, they would do it somewhere outside the Persian Gulf, most likely Chabahar or somewhere else in the flat open coasts of Sistan-Balochistan Province.
That way, they don’t need to risk their ships entering the Persian Gulf under heavy anti-ship fire and incoming drones while trying to land their soldiers on a rugged coastline full of fortified positions and artillery emplacements.
In Chabahar, they could bring their ships close enough to the shore with relative safety, under heavy air cover. U.S. jets, drones, and attack helicopters would suppress any anti-ship batteries heavily, and create sufficiently safe conditions for the initial ‘landing’. One also cannot rule out the possibility of deploying U.S. airborne forces to secure key sites before an amphibious landing is attempted.
This might be coupled with increased Balochi terrorist activity across the Iranian rear lines, complicating logistics and the transfer of ...
