Forum Klix.ba

Rejhana wrote: ↑24/03/2026 13:53

alijagoro wrote: ↑24/03/2026 14:33
Kakav prolazak

skupljac_zeljeza wrote: ↑22/03/2026 13:20

Billy The Pljuc wrote: ↑22/03/2026 13:07 Ma šta god neko napisao kontra Irana meni savjest ne dozvoljava biti protiv istih, čak se usudim napisati da bih bio daleko gori od njih u odgovorima na ono što im se dešava pa makar svijet sutra prestao da postoji kao i ja s istim.

Većina se slaže da Iran vodi daleko čišći rat nego agresori mada bi bilo logično da ne biraju sredstva da se spase. Znali su od početka da će to biti rat raketama i da neće biti kopneni. Oni su konzistentni od prvog dana...pogodite nam grad, mi gađamo Izrael, pogodite nam energetiku, gađat ćemo vam energetiku...na 5. minuti.

Naučio sam vremenom da tzv. bh političari imaju baš baš debelu kožu i da im nije problem biti munafikom jer da vjeruju u Boga onda bi se istog i bojali. Kako su oni samo slika nas samih tako sam sve uvjereniji da smo neuk, da ne napišem glup narod, malo nas je zla satralo da bi bili ispravni, stoga nam se istorija ponavlja i opet će.

Nakon Iranske revolucije, Zolghadr se pridružio Mojahedinima Organizacije islamske revolucije i pripadao njenoj desničarskoj frakciji, prethodno je bio član gerilske organizacije Mansouroun. Zolghadr je služio kao zamjenik komandanta IRGC-a. Zolghadr je imenovan za zamjenika načelnika generalštaba iranskih oružanih snaga za poslove vezane za Basij.

Hajlac wrote: ↑24/03/2026 14:53 Ovako rade mudri i inteligentni ljudi:



A koliko smo mi inovirali u vojnoj industriji od rata na ovamo?

Proizvodimo granate, metke, eventualno neke haubice iiiiiiiii

Ono kao sta cemo se zajebavat, OTAN NATO ce nas stititi od Srbije i Hrvatske

Porodice Foht wrote: ↑24/03/2026 14:46 Ali taj Izrael, ljudi, decenijama sve radi i ulaze na konfrontaciju i neprijateljstvo s komsijama Arapima i prekrajanje granica i sirenje zemlje, evo godinama u ratu u Gazi, Zapadnoj obali, Libanu, napadi na Siriju, sedmicama brutalni napadi po 200 eviona na Iran, pa to su milijarde koje se tesko mogu namaknuti iz budzeta. Mora da postoje crni fondovi bogatih Jevreja iz Amerike koji to mogu podmiriti iz godine u godinu jer moralo bi se odraziti na ekonomiju. Kakva banda krvoloka koja ims love za sto god pozeli u vojnim opcijama.

Bossona wrote: ↑24/03/2026 15:00

Dobri ljudi u zlim vremenima,......

DaysleepeR wrote: ↑24/03/2026 15:03 Ovo će razljutiti mnoge u Turskoj.

Arnaud Bertrand
@RnaudBertrand
·
6h
I don't think people realize just how extraordinary what we're witnessing with Iran is.

I was arguing with a dear journalist friend of mine yesterday who was telling me that Iran was winning, yes, but only on the strategic level, not tactically.

The type of thing a skinny kid getting stuffed in lockers in highschool tells himself to make himself feel better: "These people will BEG to work for me in ten years. Everyone knows jocks peak in highschool. They'll literally beg."

I think that's precisely wrong, and that's what makes the Iran war different. As of now, Iran is in fact holding its own tactically too.

Think about other U.S. wars of aggression these past few decades. Take Vietnam, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Serbia, etc. (the list is unfortunately very long). The pattern was roughly always the same with an immense power differential between aggressor and victim. These wars were, by and large, imperial: the empire attempting to crush a much weaker people whose only realistic recourse was guerrilla resistance. And that is when they actually had the will to resist: some - like Libya - barely even bothered, just resigning themselves to their fate (despite being, at the time, the richest country in Africa).

As spectators of these wars, if you had any moral sense, the dominant emotion was a kind of helpless disgust: you were watching a giant stomp through someone else's house.

Sure, the U.S. actually lost many - if not most - of these wars, famously replacing the Taliban with the Taliban or being expelled with their tail between their legs from Vietnam, but the power differential was no less real for it.

It's just that power doesn't always guarantee victory: sometimes the giant can't kill everyone, and eventually tires of trying. But the “victories” won this way were always pyrrhic at best: the people endured, yes, but what they were left with was a country in ashes that takes decades to rebuild. Meanwhile, in the grand scheme of things, the giant walked away with little more than a bruised ego.

Iran is - remarkably - proving to be an entirely different beast: when others were merely surviving a giant, Iran appears to be able to compete with one.

What just happened over the past 48 hours is the best illustration of this. You had the President of the United States issue a formal ultimatum: reopen the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours or we "obliterate" your power grid.

Iran's response was essentially: we dare you, if you do this we'll make all your Gulf allies uninhabitable within a week.

And, as we saw, Trump backed down: pretexting non-existent "VERY GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS" with Iran, he said his ultimatum no-longer applied (or, rather, became 5 days). Adding he now envisaged the Strait of Hormuz being “jointly controlled by me and the Ayatollah.” To the amusement of Iran’s diplomacy (

That, folks, is a textbook tactical victory. It is, remarkably, Iran demonstrating in this instance that it had escalation dominance over the United States of America. That is, the ability to credibly threaten consequences so severe that the US - for perhaps the first time since the Cold War - found it preferable to stand down.

That's no skinny kid being locked in a locker dreaming of revenge fantasies. That's the kid grabbing the bully's wrist mid-shove and watching his face change.

And it's not the only tactical victory in this war so far. Take the episode over the Israeli attack on Iran's South Pars gas facility. Iran had warned that if that happened U.S. allies in the region - including Israel - would face a symmetrical response.

And they delivered: famously devastating Qatar's Ras Laffan facility - which produced roughly 20% of global LNG supply - and leading, according to Qatar themselves, to a $20 billion loss of annual revenue for the next 5 years (https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News ... n-LNG.html).

Not only that but they also managed to hit Israel's Haifa refinery (https://aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/19/is ... jor-damage), one of the country's most strategic and protected sites.

The result was Trump distancing himself from the South Pars attack, saying that Israel had "violently lashed out" unilaterally and that "NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL pertaining to this extremely important and valuable South Pars Field." Israel then said it wouldn't strike Iran energy sites anymore (https://bloomberg.com/news/articles/202 ... ields-burn).

From where I stand, that's another tactical victory. It is, at least, Iran demonstrating that is can fight back **symmetrically** against the U.S. and its allies. Not through asymmetric resistance with IEDs hidden in the roadside or traps hidden in the jungle, but eye for eye, and against some of the most heavily protected sites on the U.S.'s side.

That's qualitatively different from any other adversaries the U.S. has directly fought in recent wars.

There's plenty more, such as the pretty relevant fact that Iran has gained control of the single most strategic energy chokepoint on earth and the U.S. is finding it impossible to break that control.

To the point where Trump has been reduced to publicly begging China - of all countries - for help, which given Trump's ego mustn't have been easy to do. Only to be told no. By China. And by everyone else he asked.

This is the topic of my latest article: how this is, in fact, the first genuine "multipolar war."

First, in the narrow sense: because Iran is revealing itself to be a genuine pole of power - not a superpower, but an actor that cannot be submitted, which is all multipolarity is.

And second, because the war itself is accelerating multipolarity everywhere else: the U.S. has never been more isolated, never looked weaker and its security guarantees have never been more hollow.

In my article I lay out the full scoreboard - military, economic, political - and explain why this war has already changed the world, regardless of how it ends.

Enjoy the read here: https://open.substack.com/pub/arnaudber ... Share=true