US just dropped Bombs on 3 nuclear sites. Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan.

[scourge165]

1 hour ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Other than terrorism how many FOREVER wars are we currently in? 

Well...technically, Korea. We're never signed a peace treaty, just a armistice and we're still in a "Military Engagement," with 8 or 9 Countries.  

But you know exactly what is meant by "forever" war. It's a quagmire in which we get bogged down with no discernible end game or clear end in sight. 

We JUST got out of two "forever" wars. We don't need to currently be in one to HOPE we don't "get into another forever war."

I think this is different than Iraq and Afghanistan was always just...historical ignorance. 

 

 

[GreatWhiteNorth]

6 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

... Trump's approval rating has PLUMMETED from this ... people don't like it, Trump cares about that. 

... So it's pretty simple. If Israel really wants to continue this, the USA can pull their support. You take away American support and not Israel becomes much more vulnerable and they risk EASILY their most important ally...

Trumps "approval rating"!? 

If Trump were to "easily" pull support for Israel - we'd be looking at the first very near zero rating ever.

The Orange Liar put himself between a rock and a uranium place. Putin played him, N'yahoo played him, and even the war hawks in our military played him (and his dope appointee Hegseth.) Trump had a full chessboard in front of him, but he didn't know how to play. It was a bad choice for him to fake it.

As said earlier...

1 hour ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Ya. Let’s see what happens if they don’t 

Trump's nearly 80 year old mush brain really put the US in a bad spot. I'm hoping for the best. We will see soon enough.

[VakAttack]

#Statesman

[GreatWhiteNorth]

15 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

#Statesman

Unfortunately, this one goes into the Hall of Fame of Most Desperate and Sad of all time.

Reflects power? No.
Reflects strength? No.
Reflects intelligence? No.
Reflects rational thought? No.

Reflects the oldest US President ever elected with mush for brains who thinks he can fake his way through it?

Yes.

[scourge165]

24 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

Trumps "approval rating"!? 

If Trump were to "easily" pull support for Israel - we'd be looking at the first very near zero rating ever.

The Orange Liar put himself between a rock and a uranium place. Putin played him, N'yahoo played him, and even the war hawks in our military played him (and his dope appointee Hegseth.) Trump had a full chessboard in front of him, but he didn't know how to play. It was a bad choice for him to fake it.

As said earlier...

Re; his approval rating, there are...a lot of antisemites in this country. I don't think it'd drop that much(though I get 0 was hyperbolic). 

 

I guess we just disagree on this issue. I mean, Trump DID put himself between a "rock and a uranium place," by pulling out of the deal in 2018. 

But...lets set that aside and break it down;

-Iran WAS building nuclear weapons. 

-We did NOT kill civilians, we targeted bunkers.

-Iran is really at the heart of everything that ails the Middle East. 

-Hamas, Hezbollah, the attack on Israel that set everything off. It's...all starting in Iran. 

-Iran WANTS us dead. They will hit back, they were going to hit back anyway, but their military is pathetic relatively speaking. They are impotent. They can't do anything. 

 

You say he had a whole chessboard...and I'd love to trash Trump. He's a moron and most world leaders mock him. But they can't mock the US Military and...frankly... I thought this was the right move. 

 

I believe he pushed BACK on the Hawks, he's not going to take out the Ayatollah. Iran doesn't have the ability to hit back. It kinda seems like this is...over. Israel should stop at this point, but this just isn't the massive military engagement it's being made out to be. 

Consequential, certainly. 

Will it draw the US into a protracted Miltary Engagement? I don't think so...

[GreatWhiteNorth]

6 minutes ago, scourge165 said:

Re; his approval rating, there are...a lot of antisemites in this country. I don't think it'd drop that much(though I get 0 was hyperbolic). 

 

I guess we just disagree on this issue. I mean, Trump DID put himself between a "rock and a uranium place," by pulling out of the deal in 2018. 

But...lets set that aside and break it down;

-Iran WAS building nuclear weapons. 

-We did NOT kill civilians, we targeted bunkers.

-Iran is really at the heart of everything that ails the Middle East. 

-Hamas, Hezbollah, the attack on Israel that set everything off. It's...all starting in Iran. 

-Iran WANTS us dead. They will hit back, they were going to hit back anyway, but their military is pathetic relatively speaking. They are impotent. They can't do anything. 

 

You say he had a whole chessboard...and I'd love to trash Trump. He's a moron and most world leaders mock him. But they can't mock the US Military and...frankly... I thought this was the right move. 

 

I believe he pushed BACK on the Hawks, he's not going to take out the Ayatollah. Iran doesn't have the ability to hit back. It kinda seems like this is...over. Israel should stop at this point, but this just isn't the massive military engagement it's being made out to be. 

Consequential, certainly. 

Will it draw the US into a protracted Miltary Engagement? I don't think so...

Agreed - we have different perspectives on this issue. I do not agree with yours.

Specifically:

• "Iran WAS building nuclear weapons." - this is, in no way, a fact. Per recent US Intelligence:

  Tulsi Gabbard left no doubt when she testified to Congress about Iran’s nuclear program earlier this year. The country was not building a nuclear weapon, the national intelligence director told lawmakers, and its supreme leader had not reauthorized the dormant program even though it had enriched uranium to higher levels.

• "Hamas, Hezbollah, the attack on Israel that set everything off. It's...all starting in Iran." - No evidence.
  These groups that run middle eastern countries are more like a bunch of connected mob bosses than anything else. Hamas, Hezbollah, the Ayatollah - do govern, but don't represent the citizens. To say it "started in Iran" is nonsense. Warlords and terrorist organizations have lorded over these countries for many decades. What ails the middles east is their existence. But to pinpoint that existence to Iran is ignorant.

• "Iran WANTS us dead." They will hit back, they were going to hit back anyway, but their military is pathetic relatively speaking. They are impotent. They can't do anything. 
  Here is where you're again wrong. Iranian citizens don't want us dead. But the proxies the Iranian government employs absolutely do. It's not the Iranians, it's the Houthi's, etc.
  Iran has a significant amount of military weaponry at their disposal. Much like the US has been the supplier of weapons to the west - Iran has been a major supplier to the east.  They are nowhere near impotent. Those they have been supplying to are being very vocal at the moment to defend Iran (ex: Russia.)

• "I thought this was the right move." I disagree. Just own it when we find you are wrong. I'll do the same. 

• "he's not going to take out the Ayatollah" He's not going to do anything that isn't served up to him on a silver platter by people who already made the hard decisions. Because he's a mush brain who isn't capable of any independent decision making - just following those he thinks he can trust (like Putin, at least at one point.) If someone talks to him the right way... he'll do something neither of us could imagine.

• "Israel should stop at this point, but this just isn't the massive military engagement it's being made out to be."
  Have you not been paying attention to what N'yahoo has been saying? Now that I think about it - you must not be paying attention. Israel isn't looking to cut and run. They're in it for the long haul. Read more. Think more. This is exactly the massive military engagement it is being made out to be. WW3 is a stretch, but not by much.

• "Will it draw the US into a protracted Miltary Engagement? I don't think so..."
  The US is committed at this point. We won't be "drawn in" - we already drew ourselves in. That is done.
  You must be young and full of positive energy to not see the sorry spot we're in.
  The truth is that this situation has all the earmarking's of a long, ugly, and potentially devastating event.

• Who will it be "devastating" to? That remains to be seen.
  But as is always in war, nobody wins, everybody loses. And it's all started by those with the least to lose.

[scourge165]

34 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

"Iran WAS building nuclear weapons." - this is, in no way, a fact. Per recent US Intelligence:

They were. The same group that determined they were not working toward Nuclear weapons when Trump pulled out in 2018 said they were now. That's more than enough for me.

-I only brought up Tulsi Gabbard because it showed the hypocrisy of the right, but...C'mon, they've been working toward it since 2019 and they have literally admitted to as much. They said they'd give up their efforts and re-engage in negotiations if the other parties upheld their end(Trump).

So they admitted it.

Also, the source we used in 2018 when Trump pulled out.

https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/iaea-director-generals-introductory-statement-to-the-board-of-governors-3-march-2025?utm_source=chatgpt.com

 

AGAIN I'd like to point out the difference between @Scouts Honor or @Caveira is my actually change when the facts chance. If you believed this in 2018, why wouldn't you believe it now??

 

• Quote

  "Hamas, Hezbollah, the attack on Israel that set everything off. It's...all starting in Iran." - No evidence.
  These groups that run middle eastern countries are more like a bunch of connected mob bosses than anything else. Hamas, Hezbollah, the Ayatollah - do govern, but don't represent the citizens. To say it "started in Iran" is nonsense. Warlords and terrorist organizations have lorded over these countries for many decades. What ails the middles east is their existence. But to pinpoint that existence to Iran is ignorant.

1-Are you kidding? The hell there isn't. 
We have ACTUAL PROOF of transfers of tens of millions of dollars a year from the Iranian Govt to these groups! No evidence? AMPLE evidence. 

2-The Ayatollah doesn't NEED to "represent" the Citizens, he has absolute control. But we didn't hit Civilian Targets. 

The MAJORITY of Iranians are in favor of Regime change, but the fact of the matter is, THIS is the regime we have to deal with. 

 

3-I didn't say it STARTED in Iran, I'm speaking present tense. If I was looking back, I'd look at Saudi Arabia...who we signed a peace treaty with at Camp David, or Jordan who signed at the Oslo Accords. Iraq is just trying to get by.

The POWER in the Region TODAY is Iran. I NEVER said it "started" there. My exact words;

Quote

 

Iran is really at the heart of everything that ails the Middle East. 

-Hamas, Hezbollah, the attack on Israel that set everything off. It's...all starting in Iran. 

 

IRAN is undisputedly the largest State Sponsor of Terrorism in the World. And we're going to allow them to get a Nuclear Weapon when they've already said they'll use it on Israel?

 

55 minutes ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

"Iran WANTS us dead." They will hit back, they were going to hit back anyway, but their military is pathetic relatively speaking. They are impotent. They can't do anything. 
Here is where you're again wrong. Iranian citizens don't want us dead. But the proxies the Iranian government employs absolutely do. It's not the Iranians, it's the Houthi's, etc.
Iran has a significant amount of military weaponry at their disposal. Much like the US has been the supplier of weapons to the west - Iran has been a major supplier to the east.  They are nowhere near impotent. Those they have been supplying to are being very vocal at the moment to defend Iran (ex: Russia.)

Oh nonsense. They can't even get past Israel's Iron Dome and we have a VASTLY superior air defense network.

2-I've REPEATEDLY spoken of the PEOPLE of Iran, those who've come here, the millions and millions(which is now tens of millions) who are living outside of Iran due to the Ayatollah. So you don't need to inform me it's not the "people of Iran." 

But if you have the POWER, you're the only one that matters. That's just...basic fact. 

The are impotent. Iran vs Israel+the US is like Eddie Hall(6'8 480LB world's strongest man) and a child. The power imbalance is comical. Unless... you irresponsibly let the Child have access to a gun. THAT is the equivalent of allowing Iran to have a Nuclear weapon. 

And finally, are you using Russia? Their Military is depleted and in NO position to equip Iran.

 

We destroyed their Navy on accident in an afternoon when there was a helluva lot more powerful Nations in the Middle East.

 

They can ONLY touch us through terrorist attacks and they were going to commit those either way. 

1 hour ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

"I thought this was the right move." I disagree. Just own it when we find you are wrong. I'll do the same.

What metric will you use to determine if I'm right or you're right?

 

1 hour ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

"he's not going to take out the Ayatollah" He's not going to do anything that isn't served up to him on a silver platter by people who already made the hard decisions. Because he's a mush brain who isn't capable of any independent decision making - just following those he thinks he can trust (like Putin, at least at one point.) If someone talks to him the right way... he'll do something neither of us could imagine.

Whatever... I'm not getting into this. Experts on Iran have cautioned against Regime Change as we may end up with someone who is even more of a hardliner.

I'm arguing facts on this. Not how much I hate Trump.

There's nothing substantial here about the veracity of taking out Iran's Nuclear facilities. 

 

1 hour ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

"Israel should stop at this point, but this just isn't the massive military engagement it's being made out to be."
Have you not been paying attention to what N'yahoo has been saying? Now that I think about it - you must not be paying attention. Israel isn't looking to cut and run. They're in it for the long haul. Read more. Think more. This is exactly the massive military engagement it is being made out to be. WW3 is a stretch, but not by much.

Do not condescend to me. I'm not Jimmy/Scouts or another jackass on here. I well aware of what is going on.

This was NOT a "massive military engagement." NOT on behalf of the US and Trump set a limit for the Cease Fire. 

 

And it would appear I AM paying closer attention to what Israel and Iran are saying; 

ISREAL SAID IT'S OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN MET. 

Iran said THEY'D agree to the ceasefire if Israel did likewise. 

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/iran-israel-us-latest-news/card/israel-confirms-ceasefire-CwJztfY5XEbBext6QWVa?utm_source=chatgpt.com

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/commodities/oil-price-sp500-futures-trump-announces-israel-iran-ceasefire-hormuz-2025-6?utm_source=chatgpt.com

 

So there's no "cutting and running," they've agreed to the cease fire. Period. BOTH sides have. 

 

1 hour ago, GreatWhiteNorth said:

"Will it draw the US into a protracted Miltary Engagement? I don't think so..."
The US is committed at this point. We won't be "drawn in" - we already drew ourselves in. That is done.
You must be young and full of positive energy to not see the sorry spot we're in.
The truth is that this situation has all the earmarking's of a long, ugly, and potentially devastating event.

Really? How many boots on the ground are there? 

What have we committed ourself to? WE bombed their Nuclear bunkers and they've agreed to a Cease Fire because they DO NOT POSSESS THE MIITARY CAPABILITY TO HURT US. 

Again, I would expect them to commit some cowardly acts of terror, but they would and have been doing that either way.

This bears NO resemblance to Iraq, Afghanistan or even Somalia, Syria. 

 

But keep talking to me like I'm some wet behind the ears version of Scout or Jimmy with no Historical understanding. I think that's comical. 

Quote

• Who will it be "devastating" to? That remains to be seen.
  But as is always in war, nobody wins, everybody loses. And it's all started by those with the least to lose.

 

 

It's actually not that confusing. It's rather simple. it's devastating to Iran. They got slapped around by the US who decimated their Nuclear programs.

Israel already decapitated their intelligence agency by taking out 20 high ranking officials. 

Iran TRIED to strike back in a futile effort and just as with Operation Praying Mantis, they were helpless to do anything. 

You want some history, understand the cap between Israel's Military power, then compare that to the US.

Then compare THAT to Iran...and it's a joke. 

Their leader is in hiding. 

I'm sure when there's some attack in the United States it will be devastating to those involved. 

 

This was a threat that HAD to be dealt with.

You would be FAR better off arguing Trump's rhetoric and decisions in 2018 to pull out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the JCPOA.

 

But we did. And I'm talking about RIGHT NOW. 

 

You're acting as though this is...Afghanistan 2.0 when in facts, it's not. It's over. Iran would be foolish to do anything else. They cannot defend their airspace, they cannot defend the Sea, they cannot defend their borders if we choose to invade(which we won't do, but hypothetically, if they wanted to, they simply lack the man power, the fire power...all of it). 

 

 

 

 

[Tripnsweep]

3 hours ago, scourge165 said:

Yeah, I just have a different opinion on this than you. 

When the Ayatollah took over, he took their most wealthiest business man and...strung him up like it was Rome. Let him hang. 80,000 Jews left, up to FIVE MILLION Iranians in total were ran from their homeland.

 

So yeah, not only do I NOT believe they'd be upset, I believe they'd be celebrating it. I don't use anecdotal examples on here because...it's always too convenient and it always fits a person's preconceived narrative(though...I'm not exactly a Trump apologist I think you'll admit)... but I've just seen and spoken with SOO many people who've said things like "Iran isn't your enemy, the "Islamic Republic," is.

 

The women there...not to keep going back to it, but they wore swimsuits and they drank and they went out and it was a prosperous country, Jews lived there without fear. They LOVED American Culture(hence the term "the White Revolution."

 

All of that was stolen from them or their parents. 

 

I don't think the Cubans in the South of Florida would be upset if we bombed industrial sites. I think they'd rejoice. This isn't just "we bombed their homeland," this is "we bombed the land that they were run out of because the State wanted to rule with an Iron Fist and control how you could live your life and if you speak out(or spoke out) you could expect to be...executed. 

While most exiles who left because of the revolution don't like the ayatollahs they also don't like the fact that another country is bombing their country at all. It is like how I may not like Trump, but if another country bombed us, I'd still be mad about it happening. Most Iranians don't like the government, but doing this is a sure way to help the ayatollahs consolidate their power.

[Tripnsweep]

Also Iran is basically impossible to forcibly invade for a variety of reasons. So they aren't helpless in a war, but trying to defeat them in a war would be extremely costly and they would make sure of that happening even without nukes. 

[Tripnsweep]

https://youtube.com/shorts/vBvIaUFEna0?si=KrjrMuq9bsur7al7

[scourge165]

5 minutes ago, Tripnsweep said:

While most exiles who left because of the revolution don't like the ayatollahs they also don't like the fact that another country is bombing their country at all. It is like how I may not like Trump, but if another country bombed us, I'd still be mad about it happening. Most Iranians don't like the government, but doing this is a sure way to help the ayatollahs consolidate their power.

Based on what?

This feels like an assumption. 

Lets take this a step further and say that Trump would have seized power through force(not hard to imagine)... and about ~30M people had to flee the Country. During that time, he executed Family who remained behind, he committed horrible atrocities on those who didn't get out including taking the eyes of women who protest.

And then a Country bombs some underground bunkers.

YOU'D be upset about that? Because you KEEP saying Iranian Ex-Pats "don't like the Ayatollah," which is silly, they HATE the Ayatollah, but they're still mad about the US bombing their Country. 

 

I'm asking WHERE are you getting that beyond a feeling? I could give you sources of people or again, share my own anecdotes as I told you, I know a very large, extended family who fled Iran, went to India and now live in the US and they VERY much would love to see a 30,000 pound bomb land on the entire Gov't of the Islamic Republic of Iran. 

 

But you're saying...you'd feel differently. Well... try and imagine a different set of scenarios beyond you WANTING to leave the US for...whatever reasons you mentioned. 

[scourge165]

12 minutes ago, Tripnsweep said:

Also Iran is basically impossible to forcibly invade for a variety of reasons. So they aren't helpless in a war, but trying to defeat them in a war would be extremely costly and they would make sure of that happening even without nukes. 

Well...nobody said we were going to invade, but, no, it's not "basically impossible" to "forcibly invade," Iran.

It's more difficult to invade Afghanistan and we did...

The DIFFERENCE...again, was the strength and support the Taliban supported there, the 14 different clans who united to keep fighting and Afghanistan NEVER had anywhere NEAR the support from the people for Regime change.  

 

10 minutes ago, Tripnsweep said:

https://youtube.com/shorts/vBvIaUFEna0?si=KrjrMuq9bsur7al7

Oh Christ, we just came in and dropped 14 30,000 pound bombs and 30 Tomahawk missiles on Iran and we got in and got out undetected and with absolutely no resistance. 

 

Their Navy is comically overmatched by the US Navy. They're NOT "virtually impossible," to invade when they can't protect their coasts or their sky. 

Now, with regard to their proxies, they've largely been neutralized. 

 

 

 

The US Navy handed a nearly decade long war to Iraq in an afternoon. 

 

 

But TO BE CLEAR... there is absolutely ZERO indication the United States is interested in ANY ground invasion. 

[Tripnsweep]

Unless somebody flattened Tehran, it's very unlikely they'll displace whoever is in charge externally. Even if they did that it would be like kicking a hornets nest. Iraq with their superior military had them on the run until they ran into problems that Iran presented. 

Also we never controlled Afghanistan. Another place that is next to impossible to invade and hold. 

[scourge165]

7 minutes ago, Tripnsweep said:

Unless somebody flattened Tehran, it's very unlikely they'll displace whoever is in charge externally. Even if they did that it would be like kicking a hornets nest. Iraq with their superior military had them on the run until they ran into problems that Iran presented. 

Also we never controlled Afghanistan. Another place that is next to impossible to invade and hold. 

And why is that? Why is it "very likely" at a time when Iranian Soldiers are joining in the protests despite being threatened with treason...why do you think it'd require someone to "flatten" Tehran in order for the Iranian people to execute regime change?

The Iran-Iraq War turned when we destroyed their Navy in '88. 

 

And we definitely took control of Afghanistan. 

 

But AGAIN...as I'm trying my best to articulate, comparing Persia, Iran to Iraq and Afghanistan is a foolish comparison to begin with. 

There's a WHOLE helluva lot more of an appetite to see a new Govt in Iran than there ever was in Iraq or Afghanistan. 

[scourge165]

 

[WrestlingRasta]

11 hours ago, mspart said:

https://abcnews.go.com/International/live-updates/israel-iran-live-updates-irans-khamenei-punishment-israel/?id=123109706

Trump announces a cease fire between Israel and Iran.   This is great news if it holds.

mspart

Unfortunately, there doesn’t appear to be much of a ceasefire. 

[scourge165]

55 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Unfortunately, there doesn’t appear to be much of a ceasefire. 

Yeah... the strongly worded Tweet didn't do the job...

 

I still remain positive this is going to die down. Still think he's a clown, but Israel isn't going to risk losing the support of their strongest ally. They pushed the boundaries... or crossed it? It's hard to tell. The whole, 'the Ceasefire begins in X hours,' doesn't make sense to me. 

It's like a countdown for you to get your last shots in. 

 

Again, don't like the guy, but he does not want to be known as the President who got the US into a War. He's not going to invade(we may support a rebellion, but I'd bet this dies down.

 

 

And AGAIN, I don't think this is going to ever turn into a land war on behalf of the US...but  for those saying Iran is nearly impenetrable... this is why I disagree(this isn't even counting those who are deserting from Irans's side). 

https://youtu.be/F_InUR13p4I?list=TLPQMjQwNjIwMjXfxkUPEw3cPg

[JimmySpeaks]

7 hours ago, scourge165 said:

Well...technically, Korea. We're never signed a peace treaty, just a armistice and we're still in a "Military Engagement," with 8 or 9 Countries.  

But you know exactly what is meant by "forever" war. It's a quagmire in which we get bogged down with no discernible end game or clear end in sight. 

We JUST got out of two "forever" wars. We don't need to currently be in one to HOPE we don't "get into another forever war."

I think this is different than Iraq and Afghanistan was always just...historical ignorance. 

 

 

In history class I learned that technically Korea was a conflict and not a war. But you’re soooooo smart you already knew that.  

[fishbane]

4 hours ago, scourge165 said:

And then a Country bombs some underground bunkers.

YOU'D be upset about that? Because you KEEP saying Iranian Ex-Pats "don't like the Ayatollah," which is silly, they HATE the Ayatollah, but they're still mad about the US bombing their Country. 

A lot of Americans don't like the president.  I am sure they wouldn't like another country dropping bombs here. 

Also you can't take the US bombing run in isolation.  Iran was in an active conflict with another country at the time that was bombing much more than a few bunkers.  The US attack makes it more difficult for Iran to defend itself in its conflict with Israel.  The US only bombed everything Israel was incapable of bombing at Israel's request.

Polling shows the US attack is unpopular with a majority of Americans.  Hard to imagine it would be more popular in Iran.

[JimmySpeaks]

4 hours ago, Tripnsweep said:

Also Iran is basically impossible to forcibly invade for a variety of reasons. So they aren't helpless in a war, but trying to defeat them in a war would be extremely costly and they would make sure of that happening even without nukes. 

They didn’t even know our planes were there until they were gone  

[Caveira]

7 hours ago, VakAttack said:

#Statesman

Don’t 

[Caveira]

2 hours ago, scourge165 said:

the Ceasefire begins in X hours

Don’t ceasefire’s always occur this way?

 

The Armistice that ended fighting in World War I was signed at 5:00 a.m. on November 11, 1918, in a railway carriage in the Compiègne Forest of France. The ceasefire was scheduled to take effect six hours later, at 11:00 a.m. Central European Time—the "eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month". 

Despite the agreement, fighting continued during those final hours. Some commanders, particularly in the American forces under General John J. Pershing, chose to press on with offensives until the last moment. This decision led to significant casualties on the war's final day.

Estimates suggest that approximately 11,000 soldiers were killed, wounded, or went missing on November 11, 1918. Of these, around 2,750 were killed.militarytimes.com+3history.blog.gov.uk+3legionmagazine.com+3militarytimes.comcwgc.org Notable among the last casualties were:

• Henry Gunther (USA): Killed at 10:59 a.m., just one minute before the armistice took effect, making him the last American—and possibly the last Allied—soldier to die in the war.

• George Lawrence Price (Canada): Shot by a sniper at 10:58 a.m., he is recognized as the last British Empire soldier killed in action during the war. 

• Augustin Trébuchon (France): Killed at 10:45 a.m. while delivering a message to his unit. His death was officially recorded as occurring on November 10 to avoid the embarrassment of acknowledging combat deaths after the armistice was signed. 

These final casualties underscore the tragic reality that, even with peace agreed upon, the war's toll continued up to its very last moments.

 

 

 

 

ww2 too

When was the ceasefire agreed upon?

• May 7, 1945 – At 02:41 am CE(S)T in Reims, France, Germany’s Chief-of-Staff, Col. Gen. Jodl, signed an unconditional surrender covering all fronts—land, sea, and air—under Eisenhower’s supervisiondefense.gov+15theguardian.com+15cmohs.org+15.

• May 8, 1945 – A second, diplomatic signing took place in Berlin at 22:43 pm CET, led by Field Marshal Keitel, to placate Soviet demands theguardian.com.

When did it take effect?

• The armistice came into force at 23:01 CET on May 8, 1945,

Edited yesterday at 01:46 PM by Caveira

[Caveira]

37 minutes ago, JimmySpeaks said:

They didn’t even know our planes were there until they were gone  

Iran has won the toss and elected to receive 

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1ChSG584YU/?mibextid=wwXIfr

[WrestlingRasta]

The true irony that cannot be lost in all of this is that we, the United States, literally started Iran’s nuclear program. 

[Caveira]

34 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

The true irony that cannot be lost in all of this is that we, the United States, literally started Iran’s nuclear program. 

And ended it apparently.   Funny how that works.