Strait Sh*t hitting the Fan

[AzariLoveIran]

.

this not about Iran, neither Muslim world

This about world economy and war braking lose


Iran lawmakers prepare to close Hormuz Strait

.

Iranian lawmakers have drafted a bill that would close the Strait of Hormuz for oil tankers heading to countries supporting current economic sanctions against the Islamic Republic.

­"There is a bill prepared in the National Security and Foreign Policy committee of Parliament that stresses the blocking of oil tanker traffic carrying oil to countries that have sanctioned Iran," Iranian MP Ibrahim Agha-Mohammadi told reporters.

"This bill has been developed as an answer to the European Union's oil sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran."

Agha-Mohammadi said that 100 of Tehran's 290 members of parliament had signed the bill as of Sunday.

.

well, folks

you ever heard Ayatollahs bluffing ? ?

me neither

so,

fasten your seat belts


.

[planctom]

Imagine that next morning someone from your neigbourhood comes over to your house and simply doen´t allow you going to work. I would be pissed off, so I guess the Ayatollahs have all the reasons to go bananas, altough I don´t know if closing the strait is the best option.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Imagine that next morning someone from your neigbourhood comes over to your house and simply doen´t allow you going to work. I would be pissed off, so I guess the Ayatollahs have all the reasons to go bananas, altough I don´t know if closing the strait is the best option.

.

Closing Hormuz just the opening salvo

next will come cutting Saudi , Qatari, Baku oil production .. 20 million barrel of production, Oil and Gas (Qatar), could be cut

Iran is not exporting , so bombing Iranian oil installations does not mean anything .. not so Saudi, UEA, Qatar and and and


this very similar to cutting oil to Japan .. Pearl Harbor ahead

Saudi, Qatar and Persian Golf Sheiks could be on last days of their mischief

Iran, like Germany of 1900, has legitimate claim, which are not addressed by west

well

A war will happen

and

things will change radically

Germany is now world power and achieved all the grievances that Germany had 1900

Same scenario might be in play

Brits lost all colonies .. Saudi & Shakes will lose their shirts


.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

This directly from horse's mouth


IRGC paper : TEHRAN, July 2 (MNA) – The Majlis National Security and Foreign Policy Committee has put forward a proposal to block the strategic Strait of Hormuz to prevent the passage of tankers that carry oil for the countries that have imposed sanctions on Iran



.

[Milo]

Umm, do the Ayatollahs know that the US Navy outguns and outnumbers theirs by more than 10x? And that Americans slaughtered Iraqis for the better part of a decade over oil price increases that were a fraction of what would happen over a Hormuz blockade?

The answer is of course they know all this, so they are bluffing, or fixing to get a bunch of their people killed... yet again!

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Umm, do the Ayatollahs know that the US Navy outguns and outnumbers theirs by more than 10x? And that Americans slaughtered Iraqis for the better part of a decade over oil price increases that were a fraction of what would happen over a Hormuz blockade?

The answer is of course they know all this, so they are bluffing, or fixing to get a bunch of their people killed... yet again !

.

If Vietnam could beat America, Iran can do it too

in fact, Iran's position is 100 fold better than Vietnam's was

and

Milo

If Americans thought they would win a war with Iran, they would have started a war long time ago

yes

they have 100 fold more guns

but

in case you (and the egghead necons) have not realized

guns win battles

and not wars

America, since WWII, won all battles .. and .. lost all wars

that includes Iraq and Afghanistan


BTW : from Chatham House, a must watch


aTpLUSyUXcQ

[Milo]

.

Umm, do the Ayatollahs know that the US Navy outguns and outnumbers theirs by more than 10x? And that Americans slaughtered Iraqis for the better part of a decade over oil price increases that were a fraction of what would happen over a Hormuz blockade?

The answer is of course they know all this, so they are bluffing, or fixing to get a bunch of their people killed... yet again !

.

If Vietnam could beat America, Iran can do it too

in fact, Iran's position is 100 fold better than Vietnam's was

and

Milo

If Americans thought they would win a war with Iran, they would have started a war long time ago

yes

they have 100 fold more guns

but

in case you (and the egghead necons) have not realized

guns win battles

and not wars

America, since WWII, won all battles .. and .. lost all wars

that includes Iraq and Afghanistan


BTW : from Chatham House, a must watch


aTpLUSyUXcQ

Everyone says that they won a war.

However, I was talking about the Iranian leadership once again getting a bunch of their people killed for no good reason.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Umm, do the Ayatollahs know that the US Navy outguns and outnumbers theirs by more than 10x? And that Americans slaughtered Iraqis for the better part of a decade over oil price increases that were a fraction of what would happen over a Hormuz blockade?

The answer is of course they know all this, so they are bluffing, or fixing to get a bunch of their people killed... yet again !

.

If Vietnam could beat America, Iran can do it too

in fact, Iran's position is 100 fold better than Vietnam's was

and

Milo

If Americans thought they would win a war with Iran, they would have started a war long time ago

yes

they have 100 fold more guns

but

in case you (and the egghead necons) have not realized

guns win battles

and not wars

America, since WWII, won all battles .. and .. lost all wars

that includes Iraq and Afghanistan


BTW : from Chatham House, a must watch


aTpLUSyUXcQ

Everyone says that they won a war.

However, I was talking about the Iranian leadership once again getting a bunch of their people killed for no good reason.

.

this between Iranian nation and west

nothing to do with leadership

Iranian people know the history of Europe, America, Imperial Russia, Ottoman against Persian Nation .. Iranian people know this

things would be same no matter who at power in Iran

It sounds funny, but Ayatollah's foreign policy is a continuation of Shah's foreign policy

Shah, last few years of his reign, had turned anti west .. that is why west removed him and replaced with Khomeini

But , Khomeini, double crossed America

Reason west can't get a traction against Ayatollahs, is, this thing between Iranian nation and west, nothing to do with Ayatollahs


.

[Milo]

.

Umm, do the Ayatollahs know that the US Navy outguns and outnumbers theirs by more than 10x? And that Americans slaughtered Iraqis for the better part of a decade over oil price increases that were a fraction of what would happen over a Hormuz blockade?

The answer is of course they know all this, so they are bluffing, or fixing to get a bunch of their people killed... yet again !

.

If Vietnam could beat America, Iran can do it too

in fact, Iran's position is 100 fold better than Vietnam's was

and

Milo

If Americans thought they would win a war with Iran, they would have started a war long time ago

yes

they have 100 fold more guns

but

in case you (and the egghead necons) have not realized

guns win battles

and not wars

America, since WWII, won all battles .. and .. lost all wars

that includes Iraq and Afghanistan


BTW : from Chatham House, a must watch


aTpLUSyUXcQ

Everyone says that they won a war.

However, I was talking about the Iranian leadership once again getting a bunch of their people killed for no good reason.

.

this between Iranian nation and west

nothing to do with leadership

Iranian people know the history of Europe, America, Imperial Russia, Ottoman against Persian Nation .. Iranian people know this

things would be same no matter who at power in Iran

It sounds funny, but Ayatollah's foreign policy is a continuation of Shah's foreign policy

Shah, last few years of his reign, had turned anti west .. that is why west removed him and replaced with Khomeini

But , Khomeini, double crossed America

Reason west can't get a traction against Ayatollahs, is, this thing between Iranian nation and west, nothing to do with Ayatollahs


.

Yes, well, there's no debating you is there?

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

Iran pre-emptively making attempt to close the straits (which, haha, they couldn't come close to actually doing... those Seersucker batteries around Bandar Abbas aren't going to do the trick, I'm sorry to say) would ensure a broad coalition against them, and would likely lead to regime change. Russia would never permit Iran to do such a thing, despite the short-term benefit to Russia in the form of higher oil prices.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Iran pre-emptively making attempt to close the straits (which, haha, they couldn't come close to actually doing... those Seersucker batteries around Bandar Abbas aren't going to do the trick, I'm sorry to say) would ensure a broad coalition against them, and would likely lead to regime change. Russia would never permit Iran to do such a thing, despite the short-term benefit to Russia in the form of higher oil prices.

.

All what west doing last 30 years .. supplying chemical, biological agent to Saddam, sanctions, Oil sanctions, boycott, killing Iranian scientists and and and

ALL

are

act of war

West already in war with Iran

American/Israeli cyber attack on Iran alone qualifies as ACT OF WAR .. even America said Cyber attack on America will be answered with military attack, let alone killing one's scientist and all the rest

in that sense

closing Hormuz would not be a

"pre-emptively"

and

Iran does not ask anybody, Russians or Chinese or West, what to do .. that is sovereignty

and

Russia needs Iran much more than Iran needs Russia .. Russia in reality a Muslim country and Iran holds the key to all those Russian Muslims (and not the Wahhabi) they were Iranian provinces not long ago, Russia knows this

re technicality of closing Hormuz, Iran can and will do it


WASHINGTON — The United States has quietly moved significant military reinforcements into the Persian Gulf to deter the Iranian military from any possible attempt to shut the Strait of Hormuz and to increase the number of fighter jets capable of striking deep into Iran if the standoff over its nuclear program escalates.


America can start swinging, but that would expand things to Saudi, Qatari, Kuwaiti, UAE, Baku and other oil fields .. just talk of it would make 150 $/b oil


The message: Launch airstrikes on our nuclear facilities, and rest assured we’ll hit you back. And P.S.: Your sanctions may hurt us, but they will never cause us to fold.


Look, guys

Iran said, either Iran can sell it's oil, or nobody in that space can sell oil .. and .. you bet the mad mullahs mean it

if things comes to clash .. when dust settles .. map of that space will change, to Iran's benefit

and

"Juggernaut "

it would make things more clear if you guys would watch that video above I posted, than, @least, you know what you talking about


.

[Endovelico]

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide, and would be a fitting punishment for American imperial policies. And I think Iran has the means to pull it off, as long as they decide on a first strike option. In addition, wiping out those carriers would make it a lot easier to destroy Saudi and Gulf States oil production for long enough to seriously threaten western economy. This conflict with Iran thing is definitely not a wise option...

[AzariLoveIran]

.

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide, and would be a fitting punishment for American imperial policies. And I think Iran has the means to pull it off, as long as they decide on a first strike option. In addition, wiping out those carriers would make it a lot easier to destroy Saudi and Gulf States oil production for long enough to seriously threaten western economy. This conflict with Iran thing is definitely not a wise option...

.

All those carriers are sitting duck .. America and Iran know this perfectly

and

Iran has said, if attacked, it will target ALL American bases and interest in that space

said many times, lowed and clear


Islamic Revolution Guards Corps practically started war games on Tuesday, launching missiles with ranges of 300, 500, 800, and 1,300 kilometers.

.

The missiles are fired at bases modeled on airbases of the extra-regional powers, which have been constructed in the heart of the Semnan desert in north central Iran.

.

if and when bang comes, all Oil & Gas Installations in Saudi, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE, Baku and and and
will be bombed .. cutting 20 m b/d



.

[monster_gardener]

.

Umm, do the Ayatollahs know that the US Navy outguns and outnumbers theirs by more than 10x? And that Americans slaughtered Iraqis for the better part of a decade over oil price increases that were a fraction of what would happen over a Hormuz blockade?

The answer is of course they know all this, so they are bluffing, or fixing to get a bunch of their people killed... yet again !

.

If Vietnam could beat America, Iran can do it too

in fact, Iran's position is 100 fold better than Vietnam's was

and

Milo

If Americans thought they would win a war with Iran, they would have started a war long time ago

yes

they have 100 fold more guns

but

in case you (and the egghead necons) have not realized

guns win battles

and not wars

America, since WWII, won all battles .. and .. lost all wars

that includes Iraq and Afghanistan


BTW : from Chatham House, a must watch


aTpLUSyUXcQ

Everyone says that they won a war.

However, I was talking about the Iranian leadership once again getting a bunch of their people killed for no good reason.

.

this between Iranian nation and west

nothing to do with leadership

Iranian people know the history of Europe, America, Imperial Russia, Ottoman against Persian Nation .. Iranian people know this

things would be same no matter who at power in Iran

It sounds funny, but Ayatollah's foreign policy is a continuation of Shah's foreign policy

Shah, last few years of his reign, had turned anti west .. that is why west removed him and replaced with Khomeini

But , Khomeini, double crossed America

Reason west can't get a traction against Ayatollahs, is, this thing between Iranian nation and west, nothing to do with Ayatollahs


.

Thank you Very Much for your post, Azari.....

Ayatollah's foreign policy is a continuation of Shah's foreign policy

Except that the Shah was wiser........ Didn't go in so much for the nutso Satan talk etc............. IIRC Had the Israelis cooperating with him on missile tech instead of getting ready to missile him with nukes........* Likewise for the Uz etc...............

*Though also IIRC there are indications that the Shah may be been prepping to betray the Israelis...........

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide, and would be a fitting punishment for American imperial policies. And I think Iran has the means to pull it off, as long as they decide on a first strike option. In addition, wiping out those carriers would make it a lot easier to destroy Saudi and Gulf States oil production for long enough to seriously threaten western economy. This conflict with Iran thing is definitely not a wise option...

Allah could start sending helpful lightning bolts at them and there is still no possibility of Iran taking out three US carriers. There is no possibility of Iran taking out one US carrier without the US being seriously generous with the ROE. You guys simply don't understand what you're talking about.

Az, I don't need to watch the video above. I am writing this post from an aircraft carrier in the Med right now. I work for the Department of Defense, I listen to people discuss Iranian caps and lims every morning at an ops/intel brief. I am perfectly aware of Iran's capabilities. You are seriously underestimating what 3 carrier strike groups can do. To begin with, there are anywhere from 3-6 pairs of F-18s at a standoff range of anywhere from 120-180 miles away, and nothing gets closer to the carrier than those planes allow it. The Iranians F-4s and SU-24s and the couple 27s they have are a joke for the Navy pilots, and the Iranians have no anti-ship capabilities that can reach anywhere near 150 nm. They could load a C-802 onto a civilian boat and try to sneak it close enough to take a shot at the carrier, but that would only be allowed once, wouldn't come close to sinking the carrier, and would result in the complete destruction of the nation of Iran.

In short, if Iran tries to attack the US fleet, then I am calling false flag at the top of my lungs, because otherwise the Iranians are as crazy as Bush and Spengler always tried to tell us.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

In all seriousness, if you do truly love Iran, all your prayers should be that no one near a trigger on either side gets too jumpy. Even Iran's best case scenario of doing some damage to US naval assets and regional bases still results in the complete and utter destruction of the nation of Iran.

[Alexis]

There is no possibility of Iran taking out one US carrier without the US being seriously generous with the ROE. You guys simply don't understand what you're talking about.

Quite.

China may already have developed, or may be in the process of developing, efficient antiship IRBMs.
No possibility that Iran would already have developed such weapons.
No possibility that China would provide them to Iran.

I am writing this post from an aircraft carrier in the Med right now.

So you are presently on the Ike.
And you may have recently met Jean-Dominique Merchet, then?

[monster_gardener]

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide, and would be a fitting punishment for American imperial policies. And I think Iran has the means to pull it off, as long as they decide on a first strike option. In addition, wiping out those carriers would make it a lot easier to destroy Saudi and Gulf States oil production for long enough to seriously threaten western economy. This conflict with Iran thing is definitely not a wise option...

Thank you Very Much for your post, Endo.........

Yeah...... Sure..........If successful, Remove the means to do it conventionally instead of by nukes..............

And maybe play right into the plans of the Neo Cons........

Successful or NOT....................

I remember Azari posting a conspiracy theory article that the Uz High Command wanted the Iranians to attack the old carrier "Enterprise" to give them a casus belli to go all out........

Don't know if it was correct but doing this might give the sub boyz to strut their stuff...........

And give President Choom Man the Dog/Iranian Eater *the boost he needs to get re-elected............

Maybe even declare martial law and implement all sorts of "socialist"/statist programs as "emergency" measures..... **

* aka Barack Obama..
**"No. you are not dropping out of the Medical system, Doc. Don't you know there's a war goin' on"

[Alexis]

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide

Surprise attack on naval assets, with three US carriers lost... where have I already read about that?

Ah, yes.

But it wasn't a loss of three carriers. It was loss of numerous cruisers and dreadnoughts, with three carriers having escaped because they weren't in port.

About this attack, a Japanese admiral had famously said that sometimes, one has to be ready to jump off the stage at Kiyomizu-dera. This referring to "an Edo period tradition that held that, if one were to survive a 13m jump from the stage, one's wish would be granted"
Didn't work out in this case.

If Iranian leaders want to try the Kiyomizu-dera procedure, I suggest they do it themselves. Without bringing their whole nation with them!

[AzariLoveIran]

.

.

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide, and would be a fitting punishment for American imperial policies. And I think Iran has the means to pull it off, as long as they decide on a first strike option. In addition, wiping out those carriers would make it a lot easier to destroy Saudi and Gulf States oil production for long enough to seriously threaten western economy. This conflict with Iran thing is definitely not a wise option...

.

Allah could start sending helpful lightning bolts at them and there is still no possibility of Iran taking out three US carriers. There is no possibility of Iran taking out one US carrier without the US being seriously generous with the ROE. You guys simply don't understand what you're talking about.

Az, I don't need to watch the video above. I am writing this post from an aircraft carrier in the Med right now. I work for the Department of Defense, I listen to people discuss Iranian caps and lims every morning at an ops/intel brief. I am perfectly aware of Iran's capabilities. You are seriously underestimating what 3 carrier strike groups can do. To begin with, there are anywhere from 3-6 pairs of F-18s at a standoff range of anywhere from 120-180 miles away, and nothing gets closer to the carrier than those planes allow it. The Iranians F-4s and SU-24s and the couple 27s they have are a joke for the Navy pilots, and the Iranians have no anti-ship capabilities that can reach anywhere near 150 nm. They could load a C-802 onto a civilian boat and try to sneak it close enough to take a shot at the carrier, but that would only be allowed once, wouldn't come close to sinking the carrier, and would result in the complete destruction of the nation of Iran.

In short, if Iran tries to attack the US fleet, then I am calling false flag at the top of my lungs, because otherwise the Iranians are as crazy as Bush and Spengler always tried to tell us.

.

Yes, I know many intelligence and defense people post here, said that B4 .. I remember that guy from Bagram base (Torture department) was posting

but

"Juggernaut" .. seems you not learned your lesson from Vietnam

people living from a bowl of rise a day and on plastic sandals beat you .. why you think Iran can not

America bombed Vietnam day & night, Laos, Cambodia and and and

and ? ?

this was the result


SYvHZL8-YjQ


All those F-18 and other stuff you mention can not win wars, otherwise America would have won
all those wars since WWII, which didn't

issue not whether America can bomb Iran, it can .. issue not even whether Iran can hit the carriers in Persian Golf, it can

issue what after all said and done

Iran can cut 20 million barrels of Oil a day .. in all Arabia .. in KavKaz .. for years

Can the west stomach this ?

NO

situation same as 1900s with Germany and Brits

in reality, Brits (that is you), Churchill (that is neocons now) lost the war, Germany won .. yes, lots of people died, but look where Germany is now and where the Brits

same thing can and will happen if war brakes out in that space

Iran will come out as the winner of the NEW Middle East .. with new border (those British made borders will be gone) along the civilization (Persian civilization and Persian nations) .. America will retreat, Europe will make arrangement with Iran (and Russia and China)

new reality

so ,

in that sense

"Juggernaut"

the carrier you are on

is worthless

in fact

counter productive

and

pls watch that video .. and let the crew on the carrier watch it


.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

There is no possibility of Iran taking out one US carrier without the US being seriously generous with the ROE. You guys simply don't understand what you're talking about.

Quite.

China may already have developed, or may be in the process of developing, efficient antiship IRBMs.
No possibility that Iran would already have developed such weapons.
No possibility that China would provide them to Iran.

I am writing this post from an aircraft carrier in the Med right now.

So you are presently on the Ike.
And you may have recently met Jean-Dominique Merchet, then?

Nope. I won't be on the Ike long. I deal with Aegis, and I think they are going to send me over to the Farragut or the Churchill later today. From there I'll probably bounce around to the different Aegis assets in the strike group.

Incidentally, the French put a fighter jet in the water about ten miles away from us yesterday. We pulled the pilot out with a helo. I haven't seen anything about it in the news.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

Ayatollah's foreign policy is a continuation of Shah's foreign policy

Except that the Shah was wiser........ Didn't go in so much for the nutso Satan talk etc............. IIRC Had the Israelis cooperating with him on missile tech instead of getting ready to missile him with nukes........* Likewise for the Uz etc...............

*Though also IIRC there are indications that the Shah may be been prepping to betray the Israelis..........

.

Iran has no issues with Israel neither with Jews (in contrary)

As said B4, Israel has neither the strategic dept, nor critical mass, nor national identity, nor a nation to play a key role in the New Middle East

Israel is not Iranian competitor .. in any respect

Israel just trying to fish in muddy waters, Rhubarb's speciality .. a mistake

Monster, pls watch that video from Chatham .. interesting


.

[Juggernaut Nihilism]

.

.

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide, and would be a fitting punishment for American imperial policies. And I think Iran has the means to pull it off, as long as they decide on a first strike option. In addition, wiping out those carriers would make it a lot easier to destroy Saudi and Gulf States oil production for long enough to seriously threaten western economy. This conflict with Iran thing is definitely not a wise option...

.

Allah could start sending helpful lightning bolts at them and there is still no possibility of Iran taking out three US carriers. There is no possibility of Iran taking out one US carrier without the US being seriously generous with the ROE. You guys simply don't understand what you're talking about.

Az, I don't need to watch the video above. I am writing this post from an aircraft carrier in the Med right now. I work for the Department of Defense, I listen to people discuss Iranian caps and lims every morning at an ops/intel brief. I am perfectly aware of Iran's capabilities. You are seriously underestimating what 3 carrier strike groups can do. To begin with, there are anywhere from 3-6 pairs of F-18s at a standoff range of anywhere from 120-180 miles away, and nothing gets closer to the carrier than those planes allow it. The Iranians F-4s and SU-24s and the couple 27s they have are a joke for the Navy pilots, and the Iranians have no anti-ship capabilities that can reach anywhere near 150 nm. They could load a C-802 onto a civilian boat and try to sneak it close enough to take a shot at the carrier, but that would only be allowed once, wouldn't come close to sinking the carrier, and would result in the complete destruction of the nation of Iran.

In short, if Iran tries to attack the US fleet, then I am calling false flag at the top of my lungs, because otherwise the Iranians are as crazy as Bush and Spengler always tried to tell us.

.

Yes, I know many intelligence and defense people post here, said that B4 .. I remember that guy from Bagram base (Torture department) was posting

but

"Juggernaut" .. seems you not learned your lesson from Vietnam

people living from a bowl of rise a day and on plastic sandals beat you .. why you think Iran can not

America bombed Vietnam day & night, Laos, Cambodia and and and

and ? ?

this was the result


SYvHZL8-YjQ


All those F-18 and other stuff you mention can not win wars, otherwise America would have won
all those wars since WWII, which didn't

issue not whether America can bomb Iran, it can .. issue not even whether Iran can hit the carriers in Persian Golf, it can

issue what after all said and done

Iran can cut 20 million barrels of Oil a day .. in all Arabia .. in KavKaz .. for years

Can the west stomach this ?

NO

situation same as 1900s with Germany and Brits

in reality, Brits (that is you), Churchill (that is neocons now) lost the war, Germany won .. yes, lots of people died, but look where Germany is now and where the Brits

same thing can and will happen if war brakes out in that space

Iran will come out as the winner of the NEW Middle East .. with new border (those British made borders will be gone) along the civilization (Persian civilization and Persian nations) .. America will retreat, Europe will make arrangement with Iran (and Russia and China)

new reality

so ,

in that sense

"Juggernaut"

the carrier you are on

is worthless

in fact

counter productive

and

pls watch that video .. and let the crew on the carrier watch it


.

If you say so, my friend. For the record, I am not cheerleading for a war with Iran. It's the last thing I want to see. But I don't want to see it because I don't want my country to kill another couple hundred thousand people needlessly.

[AzariLoveIran]

.

.

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide, and would be a fitting punishment for American imperial policies. And I think Iran has the means to pull it off, as long as they decide on a first strike option. In addition, wiping out those carriers would make it a lot easier to destroy Saudi and Gulf States oil production for long enough to seriously threaten western economy. This conflict with Iran thing is definitely not a wise option...

.

Allah could start sending helpful lightning bolts at them and there is still no possibility of Iran taking out three US carriers. There is no possibility of Iran taking out one US carrier without the US being seriously generous with the ROE. You guys simply don't understand what you're talking about.

Az, I don't need to watch the video above. I am writing this post from an aircraft carrier in the Med right now. I work for the Department of Defense, I listen to people discuss Iranian caps and lims every morning at an ops/intel brief. I am perfectly aware of Iran's capabilities. You are seriously underestimating what 3 carrier strike groups can do. To begin with, there are anywhere from 3-6 pairs of F-18s at a standoff range of anywhere from 120-180 miles away, and nothing gets closer to the carrier than those planes allow it. The Iranians F-4s and SU-24s and the couple 27s they have are a joke for the Navy pilots, and the Iranians have no anti-ship capabilities that can reach anywhere near 150 nm. They could load a C-802 onto a civilian boat and try to sneak it close enough to take a shot at the carrier, but that would only be allowed once, wouldn't come close to sinking the carrier, and would result in the complete destruction of the nation of Iran.

In short, if Iran tries to attack the US fleet, then I am calling false flag at the top of my lungs, because otherwise the Iranians are as crazy as Bush and Spengler always tried to tell us.

.

Yes, I know many intelligence and defense people post here, said that B4 .. I remember that guy from Bagram base (Torture department) was posting

but

"Juggernaut" .. seems you not learned your lesson from Vietnam

people living from a bowl of rise a day and on plastic sandals beat you .. why you think Iran can not

America bombed Vietnam day & night, Laos, Cambodia and and and

and ? ?

this was the result


SYvHZL8-YjQ


All those F-18 and other stuff you mention can not win wars, otherwise America would have won
all those wars since WWII, which didn't

issue not whether America can bomb Iran, it can .. issue not even whether Iran can hit the carriers in Persian Golf, it can

issue what after all said and done

Iran can cut 20 million barrels of Oil a day .. in all Arabia .. in KavKaz .. for years

Can the west stomach this ?

NO

situation same as 1900s with Germany and Brits

in reality, Brits (that is you), Churchill (that is neocons now) lost the war, Germany won .. yes, lots of people died, but look where Germany is now and where the Brits

same thing can and will happen if war brakes out in that space

Iran will come out as the winner of the NEW Middle East .. with new border (those British made borders will be gone) along the civilization (Persian civilization and Persian nations) .. America will retreat, Europe will make arrangement with Iran (and Russia and China)

new reality

so ,

in that sense

"Juggernaut"

the carrier you are on

is worthless

in fact

counter productive

and

pls watch that video .. and let the crew on the carrier watch it


.

If you say so, my friend. For the record, I am not cheerleading for a war with Iran. It's the last thing I want to see. But I don't want to see it because I don't want my country to kill another couple hundred thousand people needlessly.

.

Look, "Juggernaut"

there is not a single reason for animosity between America and Iran .. not a single one

matter of fact, only real friend America (and west) has in that space .. real friend to the bone, culture and civilization, is Iran and Persian people

all others, Arabs and Turks and Pakistani and and and .. they all, hate America and west because not same culture and civilization

last 33 years, America did so many bad things to Iran .. did Iran reciprocate ? ? NO

Without Iran America would be lost in all ME

and ? ?

well

that Chatham video interesting



.

[Endovelico]

If I were an Iranian leader and were ready to go to war, I would strike first at the three American carrier groups in the Gulf (or close by), before Americans had a chance to knock out Iranian missiles. The loss of three carriers would significantly impair US military capabilities worldwide, and would be a fitting punishment for American imperial policies. And I think Iran has the means to pull it off, as long as they decide on a first strike option. In addition, wiping out those carriers would make it a lot easier to destroy Saudi and Gulf States oil production for long enough to seriously threaten western economy. This conflict with Iran thing is definitely not a wise option...

Allah could start sending helpful lightning bolts at them and there is still no possibility of Iran taking out three US carriers. There is no possibility of Iran taking out one US carrier without the US being seriously generous with the ROE. You guys simply don't understand what you're talking about.

Az, I don't need to watch the video above. I am writing this post from an aircraft carrier in the Med right now. I work for the Department of Defense, I listen to people discuss Iranian caps and lims every morning at an ops/intel brief. I am perfectly aware of Iran's capabilities. You are seriously underestimating what 3 carrier strike groups can do. To begin with, there are anywhere from 3-6 pairs of F-18s at a standoff range of anywhere from 120-180 miles away, and nothing gets closer to the carrier than those planes allow it. The Iranians F-4s and SU-24s and the couple 27s they have are a joke for the Navy pilots, and the Iranians have no anti-ship capabilities that can reach anywhere near 150 nm. They could load a C-802 onto a civilian boat and try to sneak it close enough to take a shot at the carrier, but that would only be allowed once, wouldn't come close to sinking the carrier, and would result in the complete destruction of the nation of Iran.

In short, if Iran tries to attack the US fleet, then I am calling false flag at the top of my lungs, because otherwise the Iranians are as crazy as Bush and Spengler always tried to tell us.

You may be right. You certainly are at the right place to know. But then again, maybe you aren't. Imperial countries have this habit of consistently underestimating their adversaries' capabilities, and that causes surprises. I don't know whether the following has any meaning, on this context, but it is worth watching:

Gsnde1dtWj0

Iran Test Fires Advanced Anti-Ship Missile Near Straits of Hormuz
The Blaze – Mon, Jan 2, 2012

(The Blaze/AP)– Iran test-fired a surface-to-surface cruise missile on Monday during a drill that the country’s navy chief said proved Tehran was in complete control of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, the passageway for one-sixth of the world’s oil supply.

The missile, called Ghader, or Capable in Farsi, was described as an upgraded version of a missile that has been in service before. The official IRNA news agency said the missile “successfully hit its intended target” during the exercise.

No other details were released about Ghader. An earlier version of the same cruise missile had a range of 124 miles (200 kilometers) and could travel at low altitudes. There were suggestions it could counter the U.S. naval presence in the Persian Gulf.

Iran’s 10-day navy drill, which ends Tuesday, was Tehran’s latest show of strength in the face of mounting international criticism over its nuclear program. The exercise came amid conflicting comments from Iranian officials over Tehran’s intentions to close the Strait of Hormuz, and U.S. warnings against such an ominous move.

“The Strait of Hormuz is completely under our control,” Iran’s navy chief Adm. Habibollah Sayyari said after Monday’s test. “We do not allow any enemy to pose threats to our interests.”

The latest version of the Ghader was delivered in September to the naval division of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, which is assigned to protect Iranian sea borders. At the time, Tehran said the missile is capable of destroying warships.

“In comparison with the previous version, the highly advanced Ghader missile system has been upgraded in terms of its radar, satellite communications, precision in target destruction, as well as range and radar-evading mechanism,” said Rear Adm. Mahmoud Mousavi, a spokesman for the drill.

State TV showed footage Monday depicting the launch of two missiles, which were fired into the sky and which the TV said could hit targets “hundreds of kilometers (miles) away” from the point of origin. The broadcast said two more missiles, with a shorter range, were also tested Monday.

“We conducted the drill … to let everybody know that Iran’s defense and deterrence powers on the open seas and the Strait of Hormuz are aimed at defending our borders, resources and our nation,” said Sayyari, the navy chief.

The testing comes a day after Iran test-fired an advanced surface-to-air missile called Mehrab, or Altar in Farsi, which was described as medium-range.

Iran had said the sea maneuvers would cover a 1,250-mile (2,000-kilometer) stretch of water beyond the Strait of Hormuz at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, as well as parts of the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden.

A leading Iranian lawmaker said Sunday the maneuvers served as practice for closing the Strait of Hormuz if the West blocks Iran’s oil sales. After top Iranian officials made the same threat a week ago, military commanders emphasized that Iran has no intention of blocking the waterway now.

Mousavi on Sunday also emphasized that Iran has no plan to choke the strait. “We won’t disrupt traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. We are not after this,” the semiofficial ISNA news agency quoted him as saying.

Mousavi said the drill was “tactical” and meant to show Iran was capable of assuming full control over the strait in case this became necessary.

The West fears Iran’s program aims to develop atomic weapons — a charge Tehran denies, insisting it’s for peaceful purposes only.

http://news.yahoo.com/iran-test-fires-a ... 05245.html

Anti-ship missiles

The naval exercise earlier this week showcased two new assets:

The Qader is a domestically produced system with a range of 200 kilometres, designed to be launched from either sea or land to hit large surface vessels. It is a sea-skimming missile, is not ballistic and cannot carry a nuclear warhead.

The Noor missile is similar to the Qader: both are based on the Chinese C-802, although the Noor has a longer range. While the Noor in the latest case was launched from a ship, in the event of any hostilities in the Persian Gulf, Iran would most likely rely on its land-based missile assets.

Western naval vessels would have the defensive capabilities to cope with Iranian anti-ship missiles in a hypothetical engagement in open waters. However, the Strait of Hormuz is a different operating environment: missiles fired from shore-based batteries may be picked up late and counter-measures not deployed in time -- particularly if the target is operating close to land. Multiple launches may also overwhelm a ship's defences because of radar 'noise' from islands, fishing vessels, merchant ships and the like; these will degrade the performance of defensive radar systems.

The Qader's enhanced ability to skim the sea surface (at an altitude of 5-7 metres) would make it harder both to detect and down. This threat may even force the US Navy to operate its regional carrier battle group in the open waters of the Arabian Sea, rather than the tight confines of the Persian Gulf. The problem is that the farther away from its shores that Iranian missile defences can push any aircraft carrier, the less potent the carrier's air assets will be. Aircraft will have to attack from a longer range, which entails less time over targets and reduced ordnance payloads.

http://www.oxan.com/Analysis/DailyBrief ... ssets.aspx

b-PUiLjVRow