Iran Vows To Send Fleet Of Warships To Gulf Of Mexico "In The Near Future"

Tyler Durden's picture

Pretty soon the scenes of tiny Iranian speedboats taunting U.S. Naval Destroyers may not be confined to just the Persian Gulf as Iran's new naval commander has vowed to send warships to the Gulf of Mexico "in the near future."  Per NBC:

Rear Adm. Hossein Khanzadi said plans were being drawn up for vessels to be deployed to the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean "in the near future." They would also visit South American countries, he added.

 

Speaking at his first press conference since being appointed, Khanzadi promised his navy would "wave the flag of our country in the Gulf of Mexico."

 

He pointed out that "the appearance of our vessels in the Mediterranean and Suez Canal shocked the world and the U.S. also made comments on it."

Iran

Of course, this isn't the first time Iran's military has pledged that its ships would enter the Gulf of Mexico. Khanzadi’s predecessor Rear Adm. Habibollah Sayyari made similar threats in 2014 claiming that Iran planned to send vessels close to American maritime borders as a counter to the U.S. Navy’s presence in the Persian Gulf.   That said, Sayyari later cancelled the maneuvers “due to a change in schedule.”

Meanwhile, earlier this year in August, the Pentagon announced there had been 14 "unsafe" and/or "unprofessional" encounters between the U.S. and Iranian militaries during 2017...not to mention one of the most embarrassing "unsafe" encounters of Obama's Presidency that came after Iran captured 10 American soldiers and held them captive for 15 hours.  The soldiers were later release unharmed but only after after they were forced to issue apologies while be filmed kneeling by the Iranian Guard.  Here's a recap of that event for those who need a refresher:

On January 12, 2016, two United States Navy riverine command boats cruising from Kuwait to Bahrain with a combined crew of nine men and one woman on board strayed into Iranian territorial waters which extend three nautical miles around Farsi Island in Persian Gulf. Patrol craft of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Navy seized the craft and detained the crew at a military base on Farsi Island.

 

According to military sources the two RCBs were on a routine transit from Kuwait to Bahrain, which serves as the home port for Task Force 56 under the Fifth Fleet. They left Kuwait at 12:23 p.m local time and were scheduled to refuel with the U.S. Coast Guard Island Class Patrol Cutter USCGC Monomoy (WPB-1326) at 5 p.m. During the transit one RCB developed an engine problem and both boats stopped to solve the mechanical issue. During this time they drifted into Iranian waters. At 5:10 p.m the boats were approached by the two small Iranian center-console craft followed by two more boats. There was a verbal exchange between the Iranian and U.S personnel and the officer commanding the RCBs allowed the Iranian sailors to come aboard and take control. The Iranian forces made the sailors kneel with their hands behind their heads. The RCBs reported their engine failure to Task Force 56 and all communications were terminated after the report. A U.S. search-and-rescue effort was launched leading to "robust bridge-to-bridge communications" with Iranian military vessels, wherein the Iranians informed U.S. Navy cruiser USS Anzio at 5:15 p.m that “the RCBs and their crew were in Iranian custody at Farsi Island and were safe and healthy.”

 

The IRGC stated that they released them after their investigation concluded the "illegal entry into Iranian water was not the result of a purposeful act."

 

At first, it was suggested that a mechanical failure in at least one of the boats led them to the Iranian waters, then it was verified that both boats returned to base under their own power. However, American military officials could not explain how they had lost contact with both of the boats.

 

The commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards naval forces claimed that the US apologized to Iran for incident. However, the US Government has stated that no apology was made.

Of course, the current administration is unlikely to be quite as accommodating of Iran's provocations as the previous with President Donald Trump branding Iran's government a "murderous regime" and warning of its "sinister vision for the future."

Something tells us that if Rear Admiral Hossein Khanzadi tries for a repeat of previous provacations that were tolerated by the Obama administration he probably shouldn't expect a plane full of cash and/or an apology from the current White House.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
_ConanTheLibertarian_'s picture

But only the US should send ships to other countries and bully them.

zorba THE GREEK's picture

The Coast Guard needs the target practice.

JohnG's picture

Cajun Navy's got this.  No worries.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

Yeah, it's cool.  International waters and all.  Welcome to the Gulf of Mexico!

But if they stray into our waters...  Get proof and nab them.  Not that they would care, only yowl about it at the UN.

Deathrips's picture

International waters and.....you beat me to it Dochen

 

RIPS

InsaneBane's picture

There is nothing wrong with some jew hunting, I think the Persians snapped. I will line them up and test the waters...

NiggaPleeze's picture

 

Exactly, freedom of navigation, it's all the rage when US ships are provocative and threatening (whereas the Iranians vessels won't be).

Habibollah Sayyari made similar threats in 2014

Why is that a "threat"?  Is that the same language that's used when US naval vessels are in the Mediterranean Sea, Persian Gulf, or even Black Sea?  Oh yeah - American exceptionalism supremacism.  Now if Iran sailed a fleet of nuclear-capable destroyers within 30 miles of Miami (as US constantly does to other countres), we will see what "freedom of navigation" really means (namely:  US  exceptionalist supremacist "right" to terrorize and menace other countries).

As to harassment of US ships, most of that seems to come from barges striking them.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

Agreed, but with one exception. 

And that would be China in the South China Sea (perhaps the East China Seal as well) where China often messes with US planes and ships unprofessionally.  There are DOZENS of examples, many of them in a new book whose title I forget (I'm in Peru for a while).  The author, a US admiral I believe, discusses many of those incidents.

Recall the most famous incident (during W's reign I believe) of our UNARMED naval patrol plane brought down by a Chinese fighter pilot colliding with our plane.

All in international airspace and international waters.

NiggaPleeze's picture

 

And the Cuban Missile Crisis was about Cuba exercising its sovereign rights (and Russia dong what US had done to them by placing nukes in Turkey).

In the end it's always about US supremacism, couched in words that try to hide that fact by making it seem like a universal right - until someone exercises that universal right against US interests, at which point they are being "provocative" and must be terrorized into submission.

There are a few words to describe any violent supremacist:  hypocritical, selfish, unprincipled, dishonest, unjust, and self-deluded.  OK, let's throw in savage and terrorist to round it out.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

OK, your facts are true about Cuba and Turkey.

1960s...

China should not be messing with us in international waters and airspace in the present day.

Justin Case's picture

international waters doesn't mean only merica can excercise in them. Who moar than merica knows about freedom? Now Iran wants a piece of that freedom cake.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

All nations can exercise such navigation rights in international waters, including Iran. 

I never wrote otherwise.

bonin006's picture

Your statement was legitimate, but easily misunderstood since the USA is messing with many other countries in international waters. Nobody should be messing with anybody in international waters, but the USA is the most serious offender.

NiggaPleeze's picture

 

Right.  Like when the US threatens N. Korea with "fire and fury like the world has never seen" and then sends nuclear-capable aircraft carriers, submarines and aircraft within tens of miles of N. Korea ....

Let's reverse that shoe.  Say N. Korea threatened US with "fire and fury like the world has never seen" and then sent nuclear-capable aircraft, submarines and ships off the coasts of Miami and LA.  All OK, right, as it's only "freedom of navigation", US wouldn't raise a peep?

So the point is the US does not believe in freedom of navigation.  What the US believes in is what every supremacist believes in:  freedom of navigation for me.  The fact that the US uses extreme violence to enforce this supremacism is what makes it what I termed it above.  Peaceful, non-violent supremacism is perfectly fine.  Except for Whitees. (B/c some won't get it: that last part was /sarc!)

Conscious Reviver's picture

Terrific rebutal To DoChen and this mostly twisted article.

These last two articles are annoying in their Zino-bias.

"Of course, the current administration is unlikely to be quite as accommodating of Iran's provocations as the previous with President Donald Trump branding Iran's government a "murderous regime" and warning of its "sinister vision for the future."

Something tells us that if Rear Admiral Hossein Khanzadi tries for a repeat of previous provacations that were tolerated by the Obama administration he probably shouldn't expect a plane full of cash and/or an apology from the current White House."

end times prophet's picture

Free fire zone in international waters.  Cajan navy vs Iran.  Bring your toys 60 miles off shore and play.

GUS100CORRINA's picture

Iran Vows To Send Fleet Of Warships (PT BOATS) To Gulf Of Mexico "In The Near Future"

My response: Sorry, but when I read the caption, I could not stop ROFL!!

I guess the Iranians are looking for an invitation to President TRUMP's Mar A Lago resort home.

This world is insane ........................

Justin Case's picture

Maybe Trump, Clinton and the Iranians can hook up at jeffrey epstein's island and hook up with some 13 yr olds, just like the good'ol days.

Justin Case's picture

Recall the most famous incident (during W's reign I believe) of our UNARMED naval patrol plane brought down by a Chinese fighter pilot colliding with our plane.

All in international airspace and international waters.YADA YADA

 

Lets remember a few other things.

Iran Air Flight 655 was a scheduled Iran Air passenger flight from Tehran to Dubai. On 3 July 1988, the aircraft operating on this route was shot down by the United States Navy guided missile cruiser under the command of William C. Rogers III. More at Wikipedia

38BWD22's picture

 

 

I cannot argue with you about those facts re Iran Air.  A horrible tragedy/mistake.

Justin Case's picture

And that would be China in the South China Sea (perhaps the East China Seal as well) where China often messes with US planes and ships unprofessionally.

What business does merica have there? For China this is their exclusive economic zone. So how will you feel if Chinese ships appear in the Gulf? mericans won't send any aircraft right? Hassel free zone b/c it's all about freedom. Yoar full of shit.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

As I mentioned above, INTERNATIONAL WATERS.  Iran is welcome to the Gulf of Mexico.  Hope they enjoy themselves.  There is good fishing, I can attest to that.  China is welcome too.

I wish I had the title of that brand new book handy.  The author makes his case far better than I can.

And both the East China & South China Sea are INTERNATIONAL WATERS.  Freedom of navigation is ratified by essentially EVERY nation, that includes China.

Reading up on the South China Sea and its related geopolitical matters would do you some good.

Sir.

Jim in MN's picture

Let us also consider that these folks are Persian, and 'near future' might be anywhere inside the next century.

Long history.....

38BWD22's picture

 

 

They do have a long and great history.

I hope they DO come to the Gulf of Mexico, and enjoy their cruise.  Just stay out of our waters.

BarkingCat's picture

They came for a cruise with their navy to the shores of Greece some 2,500 years ago.

It was a one way trip. 

Justin Case's picture

Just stay out of our waters.

Hmmm, where did I hear that? Sounds familiar.

Justin Case's picture

Hope they get a warm welcome. Every country should sail around Cuba, Mexico, Trinidad etc. It's all international waters, c'mon over feel free to navigate in international waters. Exercise yoar freedom of navigation. Endorsed by merica, leader of the free world.

38BWD22's picture

 

 

Even you are welcome to navigate in international waters. It's your right.  Go for it, enjoy yourself.

Gead's picture

I happen to know a bunch of good ol' boy Florida crackers that'd just love to turn those ragheads into their chum(s).

Justin Case's picture

Less than two days after the US Navy revealed a third mechanical breakdown in a year of one of its $360 million littoral combat ships, the service has announced a fourth.

A 4-year-old Navy ship needs $23M in repairs
New $13 billion warship?
The USS Coronado was on its way back to Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, after suffering an "engineering casualty," a Navy statement said. It said it expected to reveal more about what happened after an inspection once the ship returned to port. The ship was heading to an independent deployment in the western Pacific when the mishap occurred.

The Coronado was under its own power but traveling with the escort of the tanker USNS Henry J. Kaiser on the trip back to Hawaii, the statement said.

Rather than just outsourcing terrorists, they should let China build their ships and fighter planes too. The F35 costs are over a trillion dollars already and still can't fly. They've killedmoar pilots than enemies.

Parrotile's picture

They won't be sending the boats in the photo; they already have devcent long-range operations vessels.

Bearing this in mind - https://thaimilitaryandasianregion.blogspot.com.au/2016/08/iran-to-buy-r..., and Russia's significant interest in developing (and selling) very compact yet highly - effective military vessels, it is not "that unlikley" that Iran might decide to buy some of these in the future.

"Distributed lethality" concept vs. "putting all your eggs in the one basket" High-cost US concept - https://thesaker.is/part-2-towards-a-corvette-centric-russian-navy/

 

peddling-fiction's picture

They will be packing Kalibrs.

If the U.S. starts a larger war, the continental U.S. will be hit hard with conventional weapons.

shining one's picture

Perhaps Russia should give them a few  Zircon missile to take with them, you know, just for laughs.

Ink Pusher's picture

Awesome, more artifical reef habitats in the gulf would be a good thing, bring it on.

rosiescenario's picture

Hopefully the Iranian navy will dispatch their armada around August......I would also hope that many of the wrecks end up around Cozumel...

Justin Case's picture

Question is, does the US navy have a ship that can sail that far without mechanical break down. Better have a tug in the shadows for the trip.

Justin Case's picture

Another Pearl Harbor in the Gulf?

Yen Cross's picture

  BTFnuclear ATH.  

Ms No's picture

I am not believing this until it comes from Iran, or it begins to happen because it would be a completely stupid move and I doubt Iran is that suicidal, or interested in feeding the narrative.

 

FORD_FIESTA's picture

Threats never work,,,,,If the Dog next door won't stop chasing the Cattle,,, just shoot the fucker. It's genetic.

Francis Marx's picture

Will not be fun camping out in small boats on the ocean for any leamgth of time.

AntiMatter's picture

"What's good for goose is good for gander" or

"What comes around goes around".....

Justin Case's picture

Pay back is always a bitch.

Rainman's picture

relax ...only one ( 1 ) Arleigh Burke destroyer would be necessary to sink the whole Iranian Navy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer

 

east of eden's picture

Of course you mean an Arleigh Burke warship that still had power, right?

east of eden's picture

I'll say it again. Every time the talk of war comes around, the little american weasels come out to tell us how fearsome they are.

Well, here is another news flash for you. In the battle of Gettysburg, one man, Chamberlin, saved little round top and changed the entire course of the Civil War.

But you know better, right?

shovelhead's picture

Don't say it again.

It was too dumb the first time.

Dumpster Elite's picture

OK, I realize that it makes for great MSM headlines, and the sheep will cower in fear, of course...but I'm more concerned about the Afghani Navy than I am of the Iranian Navy.