This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Guest Post: Iran: Oh, No; Not Again

Tyler Durden's picture


Submitted by

Iran: Oh, No; Not Again

In each of the years 2008, 2009, and 2010, significant worries emerged that Western nations might attack Iran. Here again in 2012, similar concerns are once again at the surface.

Why revisit this topic again? Simply because if actions against Iran trigger a shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz, through which 40% of the world's daily sea-borne oil passes, oil prices will spike, the world's teetering economy will slump, and the arrival of the next financial emergency will be hastened. Even if the strait remains open but Iran is blocked from being an oil exporter for a period of time, it bears mentioning that Iran is the third largest exporter of oil in the world after Saudi Arabia and Russia.

Once again, I am deeply confused as to the timing of the perception of an Iranian threat, right now at this critical moment of economic weakness. The very last thing the world economies need is a vastly increased price for oil, which is precisely what a war with Iran will deliver.

Let me back up. The US has already committed acts of war against Iran, though no formal declaration of war has yet been made. At least if Iran had violated US airspace with stealth drones and then signed into law the equivalent of the recent US bill that will freeze any and all financial institutions that deal with Iran out of US financial markets, we could be quite confident that these would be perceived as acts of war against the US by Iran.

And rightly so.

U.S. imposes sanctions on banks dealing with Iran

Dec 31, 2011

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama signed into law on Saturday a defense funding bill that imposes sanctions on financial institutions dealing with Iran's central bank, while allowing for exemptions to avoid upsetting energy markets.

The sanctions target both private and government-controlled banks - including central banks - and would take hold after a two- to six-month warning period, depending on the transactions, a senior Obama administration official said.

Sanctioned institutions would be frozen out of U.S. financial markets.


The impact of this law was quite pronounced and immediate, with the Iranian rial falling sharply against the dollar in the first few days after the bill was signed into law.

Iran's rial falls to record low on U.S. sanctions

Jan 3, 2012

Jan 3 (Reuters) - The Iranian rial fell to a record low against the dollar on Tuesday following U.S. President Barack Obama signing a bill on imposing fresh sanctions against the country's central bank.

The new U.S. sanctions, if fully implemented, could hamper the world's major oil producer's ability to sell oil on international markets.

The exchange rate hovered at 17,200 rials to the dollar, marking a record low. The currency was trading at about 10,500 rials to the U.S. dollar last month.

Some exchange offices in Tehran, when contacted by Reuters, said there was no trading taking place until further notice.

"The rate is changing every second ... we are not taking in any rials to change to dollar or any other foreign currency" said Hamid Bakhshi in central Tehran.


That represents a more than 70% decline in just a month. Assuming that Iran trades its oil in dollars, this will not necessarily cripple its economy, but the specter of hyperinflation looms large whenever a currency falls by that much. With hyperinflation comes economic, social, and political instability, and these are, of course, precisely the aims of the US in imposing the sanctions.  And of course, everything that Iran imports will become hideously expensive -- quite rapidly.

The US is deliberately poking and prodding Iran right now. Given the glacial pace of nuclear development, we must ask ourselves, why now?

The Story

As with most things today, there is a story created for public consumption that justifies waging war against Iran. The main narrative goes something like this: Iran is trying to develop nuclear weapons, and this is intolerable, so it must be stopped.

In November 2011, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) issued a report, long denied under the prior director's tenure (Mohamed ElBaradei), finally declaring that Iran was unequivocally trying to build a nuclear weapon:

U.N. Agency Says Iran Data Points to A-Bomb Work

November 8, 2011

United Nations weapons inspectors have amassed a trove of new evidence that they say makes a “credible” case that “Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device,” and that the project may still be under way.

The long-awaited report, released by the International Atomic Energy Agency on Tuesday, represents the strongest judgment the agency has issued in its decade-long struggle to pierce the secrecy surrounding the Iranian program. The findings, drawn from evidence of far greater scope and depth than the agency has previously made public, have already rekindled a debate among the Western allies and Israel about whether increased diplomatic pressure, sanctions, sabotage or military action could stop Iran’s program.


I've not yet read the report, but I am concerned about the gap between the headlines I've seen that say Iran is building a nuclear bomb and carrying out "activities relevant to the development of a nuclear device."  For example, much has been recently made of the fact that Iran has enriched some uranium to the 20% grade, but there is a huge leap between that and the 90%+ grade needed for a nuclear device.  Iran had told the world it needed the 20% grade for a medical reactor, and then created a fuel rod for that reactor.  To say that enriching to the 20% grade is the same thing as trying to build a bomb is not accurate and possibly deceptive.

As a signatory to the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) treaty, Iran has every legal right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes, such as making nuclear fuel rods for a research reactor, and Iran is claiming that all their current work is towards this end.

Maybe it is; maybe not. But even if a nuclear bomb is being pursued, there's nothing in the NPT that provides for military action to pre-emptively prevent any nation-state from carrying out such development work. In fact, if a preemptive strike is carried out, it will be done without the benefit of any international laws or treaties that could justify the action. 

Also left out of the narrative is any explanation of why it was okay for Pakistan to develop nuclear weapons or why North Korea is permitted to hold them.

The simple answer is because they don't have any oil. A quick view of the US military presence surrounding Iran, coupled with the Iraqi experience of being attacked for supposed weapons of mass destruction that did not exist (nor were used by Iraq to threaten the US), reveals why Iran may be so motivated to develop a nuclear weapon:

If Iraq had a nuclear weapon in 2002, it is quite doubtful the US would have invaded -- a lesson that has not gone unnoticed.

While I am not a supporter of the current repressive theocratic regime in Iran, I strongly believe that it is up to the people of any nation to decide for themselves what sort of system they will choose to live under. The Arab Spring, as messy as it was, is vastly preferable to the blunt instrument of an externally driven war. 

The Curiosity

The most curious thing about this story is the apparent lack of awareness among US officials about how the oil markets work. I know they know better, but the context-free repetitions in articles such as this next one almost literally drive me crazy:

Geithner to Seek China’s Support on Iran

Jan 9, 2012

U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner will urge Asia's two biggest economies to cut Iranian oil imports and seek to narrow differences with China on trade and currency disputes on a visit to Beijing and Tokyo this week.


The idea that the world can just stop buying Iranian oil, as though it were the same thing as boycotting McDonald's and buying Burger King instead, is just ridiculous. The world oil markets are far too tight for that.

How is it that China is supposed to cut its Iranian oil imports, exactly?  Oil is a fungible product. If China cuts its oil imports from Iran, it will simply have to buy the missing amount of oil from someplace else. The 2.6 million barrels a day that Iran exports cannot simply be instantly replaced at this time from other spare capacity elsewhere in the world. It doesn't exist at the moment. Where will it come from?

Perhaps Geithner is offering something behind the scenes, like providing China with extra petroleum from the US strategic reserve while events unfold (unlikely). But barring that, it is a remarkably naïve request as it stands and is curious on its own.

The Powder Keg

With the Persian Gulf being so small, and so many tense parties crammed into that tiny arena, the chance of some sort of mischief arising is quite high. One twitchy trigger finger -- such as the one that caused the USS Vincennes, thinking it was under attack by a jet fighter in 1988 during the Iran-Iraq war, to shoot down an Iranian passenger airliner -- and the hounds of war may be let loose.

And it's not just the US. Practically everybody who's anybody has naval assets positioned for whatever may happen next:

Western forces react to Iran's Strait of Hormuz threat

Jan 9, 2012

TEHRAN, Jan. 9 (UPI) -- A buildup of Western naval forces in the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea is a reaction to Iran's threat to close the Strait of Hormuz, military experts say.

U.S., Russian, French and British air and naval forces moved to the Syrian and Iranian coasts during the weekend, Israeli military intelligence Web site DEBKAfile reported Monday.

The Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov anchored earlier than planned at Syria's Tartus port on the Mediterranean Sunday, causing France to respond by consigning an air defense destroyer to the waters off Tartus, DEBKAfile reported. Canada also was sending a warship, the HMCS Charlottetown, to the Mediterranean where it would take over from the HMCS Vancouver.

Meanwhile, Britain has dispatched a missile destroyer to the Sea of Oman, due to arrive at the same time as the French Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier.

And the U.S aircraft carrier John C. Stennis and its strike group are cruising in the Sea of Oman at the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz after Tehran announced it would not be allowed to cross through.


With all those boats chugging around in those little bathtubs, and with various other forces that would definitely like to see a shooting war develop (a false flag attack is an option here), the risk is quite high of some form of incident that would trigger hostilities.

Of course, there are those in the war rooms of the various OECD countries who think they have a plan for the conduct of that war, but no plan ever survives first contact with the enemy. The one thing we can count on is the war being messier, longer, and more expensive by at least a factor of two than whatever is currently occupying the minds of the war planners.

Iran's Responses

Of course, Iran has been none too happy over the years at being surrounded, poked, prodded, and now finally sanctioned for having done nothing more than cloak its nuclear program in the exact same sort of secrecy that has surrounded literally every other nation's nuclear programs, including Israel and Pakistan, Iran's notable nuclear neighbors.

And now, with the aid of enhanced missile technology obtained from China and Russia, Iran has a credible threat to make:

Iran Has Ability to Block Strait of Hormuz, U.S. General Dempsey Tells CBS

Jan 9, 2012

Iran has the ability to block the Strait of Hormuz “for a period of time,” and the U.S. would take action to reopen it, Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman General Martin Dempsey said.

“They’ve invested in capabilities that could, in fact, for a period of time block the Strait of Hormuz,” Dempsey said in an interview aired yesterday on the CBS “Face the Nation” program. “We’ve invested in capabilities to ensure that if that happens, we can defeat that.”

Should Iran try to close Hormuz, the U.S. “would take action and reopen” the waterway, said Dempsey, President Barack Obama’s top military adviser.


The admission here by the US military is that Iran has the ability to block the Strait of Hormuz "for a period of time," which they do, is an extraordinary admission (even if it really is stating the obvious) by the US brass.

Anti-ship missile technology has come a long way, and an offensive missile is much cheaper than either a large ship or defensive measures. The Falklands war in the early 1980s taught me that the navy is an outmoded concept if the opponent is armed with semi-decent anti-ship missiles, and such devices have improved remarkably since then.

During the most recent Iranian war exercises, the US military test-fired (more of a demonstration, really) their Qader anti-ship cruise missile, which has a range of 200 km and can be fired from a small truck. To visualize the difficulty of defending against such a technology, just imagine how many hiding places for a small truck might exist within this 200 km radius green circle :

In order to neutralize the entire missile, full air superiority would have to be established and every mobile launcher found and destroyed. 

Further, Iran has a number of submarines capable of firing a new breed of torpedo that can achieve speeds in excess of 200 knots. As far as I know, these are extraordinarily difficult to defend against, let alone evade. 

Of course, China is paying close attention to the developments:

Iranian authorities reiterate threats to close Hormuz Strait if sanctions imposed on oil exports

Jan 8, 2012

TEHRAN, Jan. 8 (Xinhua) -- Iranian authorities reiterated threats to close Strait of Hormuz if Western countries impose sanctions on Iran's oil exports, local media reported Sunday.



Once again, regrettably and mysteriously, we find the developed world in lock-step in its eagerness to attack Iran. "Regrettably," because Iran has not threatened any other country, and war should never be used simply because the current art of diplomacy is inadequate. "Mysteriously," because this is a particularly horrible economic moment to go about risking much higher oil prices. 

While we judge the risks of a war, either precipitated by legitimate escalation of frictions or by illegitimate actors seeking to cause the same, to be very high, it is our view that such a war will not go according to plan.  Iran has many more powerful allies, namely Russia and China, than did the extraordinarily isolated Iraq at the beginning of the Iraq war. 

Is it too waggish to suspect that certain Western political powers would love to be able to both divert attention from the crumbling economy and have a scapegoat upon which to blame the next leg of the financial downturn? 

Regardless of such speculation, the risk to each of us and the economy in general from an attack on Iran that closes the Strait of Hormuz is large enough to warrant your attention. Should oil spike in price, you can practically set an egg timer for the beginning of the next leg of the financial downturn.

In Part II: Are You Prepared for $200 Oil?, we explore what likely havoc the high oil prices from a major conflict with Iran will wreak on the financial markets and our petroleum-dependent lifestyle. We also detail specific steps prudent individuals should be taking right now, in advance of such a crisis, to position themselves defensively.

Click here to access Part II of this report (free executive summary, enrollment required for full access). 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:34 | 2057339 Bob Sacamano
Bob Sacamano's picture

BHO gutting the missle defense budget was beyond stupid.  We could cut half of the military budget before cutting missle defense.

It does appear he has a death wish for the US.

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 21:17 | 2056888 blindman
blindman's picture
Sunday, January 1st, 2012 | Posted by Gordon Duff
Sunday Morning: Gossip and Intel and Welcome 2012
" A Little Talk Radio
…by Gordon Duff, Senior Editor
The joke of the day is Republican candidate Rick Santorum demanding that Iran be bombed.
His appearance pretending to be hunting in Iowa while looking absolutely terrified, I hope that gun he looks like he is holding is a prop, is the best part.
Now for some background. Over the last week, Iran has been threatening to close the Straits of Hormuz, the most vital oil passageway on earth, because of “sanctions.”
Talk like this on Iran’s part, considering their ill timed naval exercises and missile tests seem to indicate someone there has gone totally bonkers.
Think about it.
Santorum Bags 2 UFOs and Cameraman
All we hear all day long is one side telling us to bomb Iran while the other side tells us that there is no proof whatsoever they have any weapons program.
In fact, we have caught authors writing “bomb Iran” articles contacting friends to write opposing articles disproving everything they say. Why the controversy? Why indeed!!
There is no controversy. Iran is not going to be bombed. Rick Santorum is still a total ass as he always was but now has to hope that this photograph of him we are using will be lost in time.

It won’t.
Let me tell you a couple of very important things you don’t know, “for sure things” then we can get into the fun “conjecture and conspiracy” part.
I have to do this because some readers come from the Fox News side of things and have to have their daily fix. Maybe, just for them, we can talk flying saucers for a bit later on.
This week, the market in natural gas, the way Americans heat their homes, crashed. The reasons are extreme oversupply, a warm winter and a poor economy. Empty homes, 30 million of them, average size at around 1800 square feet need no heat.
Empty shopping centers don’t get heat either nor do empty factories or offices.
Natural gas is worthless and, were normal market prices to go info effect, without unwholesome protections some public utilities enjoy, the average gas bill for Americans would lower by 65%.
Technically most companies, be they public utilities or other marketing entities that work with natural gas are bankrupt. They have been “under water” for a couple of weeks now. This is a big deal.
Pipeline Infrastructure and Security Contracts are Big Money
One side of this is Europe. They usually get their gas from Russia and pay exorbitant prices for it, rigged prices.
Pipelines that would deliver new gas to Europe and elsewhere have been blocked.
One of the reasons for the Iran sanctions and the Afghanistan war was to derail or control excess supplies of natural gas.
Rigging natural gas prices is one of the biggest ways of looting the world economy, that and wars and, of course, America’s (read “CIA’s”) multi-billion dollar drug business, starting in Afghanistan and now expanding into Iraq and Kurdistan with help from “that special nation” we love so much.

Here is a problem. Nigeria, along with Cameroon and others, but let’s stick with Nigeria, has enough cheap natural gas to heat Europe for 300 years at a fourth the price Russia is doing it.

For this and other reasons explained here, Nigeria is slated for destruction. " ...

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 21:19 | 2056889 847328_3527
847328_3527's picture

Camel sales soaring over there I heard.

"Cash for Camels" program started this week. Turn in your old clunker camel for a New Camel and get a rebate.


Wed, 01/11/2012 - 21:25 | 2056912 anonnn
anonnn's picture

The author either doesn't understand "fungible" or "oil".

Crude oil is not fungible ["fungible" means one crude is as good as any other]. Most refineries cannot process crude oil that is heavy [a flow characteristic usu.  of very long chain molecules, such as Venezuelan or oil-sands bitumen] , too sour [excessive sulfur]  or contains catalyst poisons [vaanadium], etc. 

Further,  there are other characteristics of  crude availability that depend on geopolitics, terms of payment and other "side-letter" understandings unknown to other parties.

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 21:32 | 2056930 loveyajimbo
loveyajimbo's picture

No need for war... we just get with the Mossad and keep knocking all their key folks off with car bombs and IEDs like they did to us in Iraq and Afgani-sewer.  When we get to the guy who cleans the toilets... we can take a break.  Sanctions, apparantly... DO work sometimes, when coupled with high explosives.

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 21:54 | 2056989 alien-IQ
alien-IQ's picture

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: "We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that’s more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price–we think the price is worth it."

Sanctions an effective for of genocide that does not avoid war but instead, causes it.

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 22:33 | 2057076 Xkwisetly Paneful
Xkwisetly Paneful's picture

Sanctions work.

Just see the former Iraqi food for oil program.

500,000 kids died like my dick is ten feet long.

BTW when you quote someone it would be nice to actually include all the words so it makes sense.

Makes idiots like me suspicious that total imbeciles like you are getting creative with other's quotes.

What exactly happened to the word between for and of here?

Sanctions an effective for of genocide that does not avoid war but instead, causes it.

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 21:34 | 2056935 Yen Cross
Yen Cross's picture

 Hildebrands worthless wife, sells out! Come on SNB ? Ya toothless ( Name Giving) SCUM BAGS!

   Sell some KUKUU Clocks!

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 21:54 | 2056991 Georgesblog
Georgesblog's picture

It follows the pattern of commerce. Blockade and embargo are acts of war. If the Corporatist agenda could go to war, conquer the States and abolish them, and claim dominion by right of conquest, then it follows that no independent entity is safe from being targeted. It may start with Iran, but it won't end there.

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 22:09 | 2057034 LasVegasDave
LasVegasDave's picture

Yids rule the world

and you are an insignificant worm crawling around in a pile of their shit trying to find something to eat

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 22:13 | 2057043 non_anon
Wed, 01/11/2012 - 22:27 | 2057062 ricocyb13
ricocyb13's picture

don't worry guys, it is just Goldman Sachs who wants a higher oil price and another WAR, so they can benefit from it and get a nice big fat BONUS (of worthless USD)

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 09:36 | 2057883 Money 4 Nothing
Money 4 Nothing's picture

"don't worry guys, it is just Goldman Sachs who wants a higher oil price and another WAR, so they can benefit from it and get a nice big fat BONUS (of worthless USD)"


JP Morgan Chase want's the oil higher, there, fixed. Goldman Sachs want's the war, don't get it twisted or fucked up.

Who was the highest bid of our SPR in LA?


Wed, 01/11/2012 - 22:39 | 2057119 xcehn
xcehn's picture

"Obama Ready to Strike to Stop Nuclear Iran, Ex-Adviser Says"

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 23:05 | 2057185 devlin1984
devlin1984's picture

The whole premise of this article that Iran is a victim of big bad evil America is ridiculous. Total bullshit.

Wed, 01/11/2012 - 23:55 | 2057272 frostfan
frostfan's picture


People mostly comment here on Iran articles because they have AIDS or Anti Israel Derangement Syndrome.  They don't give a damn about Iran but when they can blame CIA Mossad USA and Zionists for all their problems, they do so and they seem to have congregated to Tyler since he mixes finance with politics to their liking and Tyler isn't stupid.  He's paid by his advertisers and he doesn't have a problem being an anti-semite magnet.  ZOG doesn't mind either since they get to find all their knuckleheads in one spot and keep track of them. 


Thu, 01/12/2012 - 06:15 | 2057627 Element
Element's picture

eeeeuuw! ... dats a conspiwacy!

Tyler is devil! ... he twicked us wiff doz pessky ZOG advertiserz ... now we gots AIDES?!!

so scarwy ... must find cave ... trufh too deadly, internet bad ju-ju ... fwree speech is twap!

Eeek! ... mus say nuffing! ... maybe suk up to bankster? ... do robotrade? ... get rich .. liev long .. smoke bong ...

but AIDES!!!  ... wot da fuk?!! ... noy AIDES! ... makes arse bleed! ...

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 07:02 | 2057639 Element
Element's picture

Er ... no.

The situation is Iran has the legal right to make as much HEU as it wishes and to be left in peace, unmolested, and to freely-trade where and when it wants, without obstruction.

The US has zero right to pompously make illegal and continual blood-curdling threats of war and to deliberately incite and stir-up the world to war, using false pretences and pure arrogance, at the behest of Jewish banksters, who should already have been guillotined out of existence.

The world is weary of the monumental global hissy-fits that occur each time the rest of the world says to Washington to piss-off, STFU and grow the fuck up you selfish conceited pratts.

The rest have had enough of this US stupidity, its endless excuses and blaming of others, its victim-making of innocents, its Hollywood-level idiocy of "goodies and baddies", its childish spoilt dead-end culture of programmed inner-desolation and worthlessness, its truly juvenile aims, its cheesy veneer of grandness over its short-sighted destructiveness, and above all, its abject meaninglessness.

Go fuck yourself Uncle Sam, you desperate deplorable loser.

You've become like a hopeless disgusting smelly crack-addict, after 40 years of bingeing on another's coin, just a sunken depressing shell of a degenerate wreck of a system.

A cautionary tale to the rest of us of the darkest vanities that come from best and brightest expressions, of the hollow and the lost.


Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:04 | 2057286 BLOTTO
BLOTTO's picture

A fuckin infant baby can see this one coming - I mean, how does anyone buy into any excuse they throw at us regarding Iran?

You can have CNN showing Ahmejaehaiadad holding and cutting Obumm's head and i STILL wouldnt believe it. I believe ZERO official verisions/stories of ANYthing.

With a little help from the illuminati controlled mass media - they are going to pump the shit out of this one...

Its on like Donkey Kong in Iran...

Life as we know it - is a big lie. Its that bad. Everything - all of it - a fabrication...

can you imagine that


Thu, 01/12/2012 - 09:10 | 2057812 Money 4 Nothing
Money 4 Nothing's picture

A direct quote from Karl Rove interview shortly after 9/11, and I quote..

"Reality is what we tell you it is"


Chew on that for a while and realize all MSM excluding 50% of RT reports are all psyops of the American public and beyond. Their (five sided puzzle factory in DC) are breaking their own 1st rule, never psyops the American Public, that was their standing rule for a long time, now it's all infiltrated and rogue. God bless the USA, were gonna need it.

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:04 | 2057287 The_Emperor
The_Emperor's picture

Can't each country mind its own business :)

But hey I guess USA needs to keep the troops moving ..... otherwise watchout the revised Jobless Claims :)

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:12 | 2057299 jonjon831983
jonjon831983's picture

My buddy reminded me of this weapon.  The missle referred to above is the supercavitation torpedo.  First designed by Soviets.  Old version of torpedo:  The US had to steal the technology, not sure how far it has developed.


Supposed Iranian copy:


Long time ago read about this in a Popular Science Magazine

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 04:42 | 2057557 Element
Element's picture

The Russians developed Shkval as 'golden-bullet' with which to shoot a fast nuke-tipped torpedo into the heart of a carrier battlegroup, and cripple/smoother/sink it, before it could fire back with its ~10-kiloton nuclear-tipped RUM-139 VL ASROC vertical-launched precision missile-delivered torpedo system.

It meant a Russian SSN could get in close to a Carrier group and fire one of these, with a 1 to 5 kiloton warhead, and rapidly follow up with one, two or three others, in a fan-like spread of nukes, so the US Carrier, Cruisers and Destroyers were attrited or knocked out of commission before they could respond and any remaining ship's systems and sonars in the area were wrecked, or degraded by several hours of noisy oceanic acoustic reverberations and noisy sinking-ship sounds. 

This offered the Russian SSN attack subs a real chance of survival and of escape.  It also made the extremely quiet diesel-electric SSK Kilo class subs super-dangerous ... and the Iranians have aquired those as well.

The sub has to remain well away from the high-intenity shock-wave region, which was tricky as this torpedo is relatively fairly short-ranging, so a  low-yeild nuke was required. So you ideally want to fire several, in quick sucession, out to maximum range away from the sub.

It should be a clue that the Iranians invested so heavily in acquiring this capability from the Russians.

Sat, 01/14/2012 - 14:19 | 2064697 Bob Sacamano
Bob Sacamano's picture

And you think Iran wouldn't be leveled if they actually did that??   I'll take that bet.

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:15 | 2057306 Sizzurp
Sizzurp's picture

You know I think the real problem here is fluids........ You ever seen an Iranian drink water? I thought so.  Obama has obviously uncovered an Iranian plot to infiltrate and impurify our precious bodily fluids, and dammit that is just taking it too far.

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:18 | 2057313 nuggetstoosmall
nuggetstoosmall's picture

Heres a thought. Any president in office during war or conflict, is always re elected. So, why not start a conflict, and act like hes the saviour?? Then gets reelected. Thats the only way he'd stay in office.

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:23 | 2057320 AC_Doctor
AC_Doctor's picture

Maybe all of Israel's nukes will blow up tonight and save our world trillions of extortion money instantly...

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:29 | 2057330 frostfan
frostfan's picture

Yes yes and suddenly all of the world's problems will go away.  Oh wait, there's still all those jews all over the rest of the world so nothing will change.....

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:56 | 2057377 AC_Doctor
AC_Doctor's picture

Nothing wrong with 99% of the Jews at all, just like in the good ole US where the 1% has their noses in the 99%s business and future...

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 00:26 | 2057325 frostfan
frostfan's picture

Threatened conflict with Iran is win win for a lot of people.   Iran, Saudi and Chavez win with higher oil prices and they all need high oil prices to maintain their way of life.   Obama and Bib win by looking tough and the losers are us who pay $3+ at the pump rather than $1.50.  Every day Iran is in the headlines, government waste is not so this headline will be milked for the rest of the year and all parties are only too happy to pile on while screwing us.

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 05:59 | 2057375 Element
Element's picture

Oh this is getting truly pathetic!


Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement and relevant provisions of Security Council resolutions in the Islamic Republic of Iran


Firstly:  Jan 6th 2012

The totally innocent but bumbling throat-cutting hypocritical fuck-head organisation who lost their pet RQ-170 over Iran on its mission to generate up-to-date precision targeting data for their pending air and naval missile assault(s), said:
Ex CIA Director Warns Iran on ‘Inexorable’ Path to Nukes

Friday, 06 Jan 2012 08:06 PM - By Paul Scicchitano and Fred Fleitz


Secondly:  Jan 8th 2012

Panetta comes right out and contradicts the supposedly retired (he ain't) CIA front man:

Iran not building bombs yet  -  Updated   1/8/2012 12:50 PM ET


Thirdly:  Jan 11th 2012

Then the stout Queen psycho-bitch from Hell (with the shiny new joo-bankster son-in-law ... and who just keeps saying she's not even interested in being the el-Presidente) reaffirmed that Iran has been building bombs all along.

Sorry if you doubled-down the other way and formed a whole convenient delusional verbal edifice around that most unlikely of assumptions which was never going to be true.  I personally had zero doubt Iran was and is building bombs ... yes they are ... what of it? ... I would ... so would you ... Iran would be crazy not to be building a-bombs -- already.  The only difference is I've little remaining doubt that they already have an a-bomb, and also have had a small but rapidly growing number of them for several years.

They are only going to 20% low-HEU grades now because they have the cover, the punch and the detailed planning and operations that will allow them to get away it, as queen bitch is about to discover, to the world's mutual horror. 

She so desperately wants it to be a war and that war will definitely have a nuclear edge to it ... see if I'm wrong ... I bet it turns out I'm not ... not that I want to be right about this ... but I can see that am.


Hillary Revives Dubious Iran Charge
January 11, 2012

U.S. hardliners on Iran keep making their case, ratcheting up the pressure for sterner and sterner action against Iran’s nuclear program. But some of the claims – though accepted by the major American news media – have dubious origins, as Gareth Porter reported for Inter Press Service.
By Gareth Porter
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton’s charge this week that Iran had intended to keep the Fordow nuclear site near Qom secret until it was revealed by Western intelligence revived a dubious claim the Barack Obama administration made in September 2009.
Clinton said Iran “only declared the Qom facility to the IAEA after it was discovered by the international community following three years of covert construction.” She also charged that there is no “plausible reason” for Iran to enrich to a 20 percent level at the Fordow plant, implying that the only explanation is an intent to make nuclear weapons. 
Clinton’s charges were part of a coordinated U.S.-British P.R. attack on Iran’s enrichment at Fordow. British Foreign Minister William Hague also argued that Fordow is too small to support a civilian power program. Hague also referred to its “location and clandestine nature,” saying they “raise serious questions about its ultimate purpose.”
The Clinton-Hague suggestions that the Fordow site must be related to an effort to obtain nuclear weapons appear to be aimed at counterbalancing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta’s statement only two days earlier that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons.
The Clinton and Hague statements recalled a briefing for reporters during the Pittsburgh G20 summit meeting on Sept. 25, 2009, at which a “senior administration official” asserted that Iran had informed the International Atomic Energy Agency about the Fordow site in a Sept. 21 letter only after it had “learned that the secrecy of the facility was compromised”.
That administration claim was quickly accepted by major Western media outlets without any investigation of the facts. That story line is so deeply entrenched in media consciousness that even before Clinton’s remarks, Reuters and Associated Press had published reports from their Vienna correspondents that repeated the official Obama administration line that Iran had revealed the Fordow site only after Western intelligence had discovered it.
But the administration never offered the slightest evidence to support that assertion, and there is one major reason for doubting it: the United States did not inform the IAEA about any nuclear facility at Fordow until three days after Iran’s Sept. 21, 2009, formal letter notifying the IAEA of the Fordow enrichment facility, because the administration couldn’t be certain that it was a nuclear site.
Mohammed ElBaradei, then director general of the IAEA, reveals in his 2011 memoir that Robert Einhorn, the State Department’s special adviser for nonproliferation and arms control, informed him on Sept. 24 about U.S. intelligence on the Fordow site – three days after the Iranian letter had been received.
An irritated ElBaradei demanded to know why he had not been told before the Iranian letter. Einhorn responded that the United States “had not been sure of the nature of the facility,” ElBaradei wrote.
The administration’s claim that Iran announced the site because it believed U.S. intelligence had “identified it” was also belied by a set of questions and answers issued by the Obama administration on the same day as the press briefing. The answer it provided to the question, “Why did the Iranians decide to reveal this facility at this time,” was “We do not know.”
Greg Thielmann, who was a top official in the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research until 2003 and was on the staff of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence during the 2009 episode, told IPS the evidence for the claim that Iran believed the site had been discovered was “all circumstantial.”
Analysts were suspicious of the Iranian letter to the IAEA, Thielmann said, because “it had the appearance of something put together hurriedly.”
But there is an alternative explanation: the decision to reveal the existence of a second prospective enrichment site – this one built into the side of a mountain – appears to have reflected the need to strengthen Iran’s hand in a meeting with the “P5 + 1? group of state led by the United States that was only 10 days away.
The Iranian announcement that it would participate in the meeting on Sept. 14, 2009, came on the same day that the head of Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, warned against an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities.
The idea that Iran was planning to enrich uranium secretly at Fordow assumes that the Iranians were not aware that U.S. intelligence had been carrying out aerial surveillance of the site for years. That is hardly credible in light of the fact that the Mujahideen-E-Khalq (MEK), the armed opposition group with links to both U.S. and Israeli intelligence, had drawn attention to the Fordow site in a December 2005 press conference – well before it had been selected for a second enrichment plant.
The MEK had also revealed the first Iranian enrichment site at Natanz in an August 2002 press conference, which had been the kickoff for the George W. Bush administration’s propaganda campaign charging Iran had maintained a covert nuclear program since the 1980s.
But when the MEK identified the Natanz facility, Iran’s only commitment under its safeguards agreement with the IAEA was to inform the agency of any new nuclear facility 180 days before the introduction of nuclear material. That date was then still far in the future.
In November 2003, the Bush administration engineered the passage of a resolution at the IAEA Governing Board meeting condemning Iran for “18 years of covert nuclear activity.” In fact, Iran had announced openly in 1982 that it intended to have the capability to convert yellowcake into reactor fuel. In 1983, Iran asked the IAEA to help it build a pilot plant for uranium enrichment, but the U.S. government intervened to prevent the agency from doing so.
It was that U.S. political interference that forced Iran to purchase black market centrifuge technology from the A.Q. Khan network in 1987. But Iran openly negotiated with China, Argentina and six other governments for the purchase of nuclear energy and facilities in the 1980s and 1990s.
Despite those well-known facts, the Bush administration charge that Iran had operated a “clandestine nuclear program” for “18 years” quickly become an accepted fact inserted in many stories by major newspapers such the Washington Post, New York Times and Los Angeles Times.
In asserting that there was “no plausible justification” for Iran’s enrichment to 20 percent, Clinton sought to refute Iran’s explanation that the 20-percent enrichment is supply fuel for its Tehran Research Reactor (TRR). “The P5+1 has offered alternatives for providing fuel for the TRR,” Clinton said.
The proposal made by the P5+1 in 2009, however, was explicitly aimed at stripping Iran of the bulk of its stock of low-enriched uranium – a prospect that was widely criticized even among critics of President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad, including Mir Hossein Mousavi , his rival in the contested June 2009 presidential election. The main reason for the resistance to the proposal appears to have been that Iran would have been deprived of its bargaining chips in relation to eventual negotiations with the United States.
When Iran agreed to a joint Brazilian-Turkish proposal for a swap in June 2010, the Obama administration rejected it, because it left Iran with too much low enriched uranium. It was after that rejection that Iran vowed to enrich uranium to 20 percent unless it obtained a supply through other means.
Iran also demonstrated at the 2011 IAEA Governing Board meeting that it was working on producing its own fuel plates for the TRR, according to former IAEA nuclear inspector Robert Kelley.
Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specializing in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the
Road to War in Vietnam, was published in 2006.


Edifying, no?

In under one week we have flip-flops upon the most basic facts and assessments of the situation.

CIA and State say Iran is making bombs while Defense says Iran is not making bombs - yet.

But it doesn't matter much, because we're all going to war anyway, because the US Treasury financial terrorism section has already kicked-off WWIII, via imposing unilateral US sanctions that will close the strait to USA, and NATO in the near-ish future as Iran has sworn that it will close the Strait to any state who imposes the new sanctions and trade restrictions on Iran.

What a farce! ... what a complete sham ... what laughable disgracefulness the Western world has degenerated into, under this sick and appalling murderous excuse for sorely-needed leadership, but who will instead drive us into the ground.  Who are nothing but a cabal of greed-obsessed snivelling cowards, and Rothschild zionist toadies.

These are the sort of scum who mug old ladies and steal their purse, only these vermin have nuclear weapons, to ensure they don't end up on the end of a rope.  They are going to order the cannon-fodder of the OWS generation, from US streets, to go get turned into chunks of scattered flesh for no high-reason or principle, whatsoever.


Tell them all to go to Hell!  ........................... .


PS:  Wake up!  About a dozen other countries are in various stages of building nuclear munitions capabilities right now -- as well as Iran. This is what complete NPT failure looks like in a world where the big players don't want to admit it, or to let go of their respective extractive apparatus .. and shut it down, and go home with their tail between their legs. The Banksters that be still think they can fight it out, and dominate, at all costs, and that is why there will be this huge war, and they don't care so much if they lose, because they intend to at least try to win, in any and every conceivable way possible, and that means more dead rotting flesh than you can possibly imagine -- unless they are brought down.

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 12:08 | 2058504 bill1102inf
bill1102inf's picture

The United States NOR Israel will use nuclear weapons against Iran.  It just will NOT happen.  

Fri, 01/13/2012 - 06:03 | 2060907 Element
Element's picture

You need to understand something very basic about strategic war.


That's a reference to old-school combative wrestling.

It means you can pluck out eyes, tear off testicles, smash rib cages by jumping on them, no limits, whatever it takes to win, until the other guy unconditionally yields, or dies.  And no one and nothing stops it, once it starts, it just takes its own unrestrained unpredictable course.

That is Strategic War.

That's what a REAL war is, not that pissant farce going on in the Middle East ... so far.

No holds barred is what happened on Aug 6th 1945, and in all the "thousand-bomber raids" on cities that went before it.

Robert McNamara famously went so far as to outright say to camera in the doco movie "Fog of War" that the only reason he himself, personally, and the USAF bomber command leadership were not all prosecuted as war-criminals, as a result of what they had deliberately done to civilian 'targets', is because the US won that war ... no other reason.

Fog of War excerpt:

Don't delude yourself that it won't happen, a strategic war is what this will (rationally!) develop into and anything can happen in a strategic war for survival.

It's what the Cuban Missile crisis was all about--a no holds barred fight for survival, if it got started.

The very idea that a country would, under a ruse of "the Good-Guys", ferment a Stratic war of Survival tells you about the totally untrustworthy state of mind of the psychos involved in doing that.

It's also why multiple countries are rushing to arm themselves with nukes.

They want to survive these insane cunts ... by deterring them with the prospect of an  effective counter-bombardment.

M.A.D. is back ... it never left.

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 01:44 | 2057447 prains
prains's picture

9 pages of shiite

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 05:33 | 2057606 The Heart
The Heart's picture

Obamnutz and Crony Capitalism March-ing off to War




January 11, 2012

Happy New Year?


And herein below lies the problem with Mittney and the corrupted election system. It is tainted like this and the people no longer matter because they do not act to matter. The crony capitalism and those who profit from having another war monger at the helm are acting. Here is a story of corruption in action. It is nothing less than the same old bovine excrement! Corruption a la royal.,0,424169.story

And another alarming fact came to light last night. What was sickening as heck to see was in the NH primary, there was the ridicules democRAT numbers of obamanutz still voting for the lying usurping lying warmongering globalist bankster socialist stooge puppet!




Not again!

Another coming vote for the lesser of two evils, one the obama thing, and the portended lesser and intended winner, mittney rom thing?

Same old bovine excrement.

Obamney, or obamney, come see, come saw. It will not matter who steers the ship into the ground nevermore to sail as the USs America again if either of these two cronies are the emperious head-puppet. These two bulls-balls are bought and paid for by the same wall street zionist banksters and war mongering population reductionist elite slop-buckets.

Of course, things could be different. For example, if all you good hearted folks really give heartedly LIKE IT IS THE LAST CHANCE FOR AMERICA to the Ron Paul Campaign so he can get his messages out, and many people are educated about his platform AND VOTE IN THE PRIMARIES AND CACUSES FOR RON PAUL, there is a slim chance we could see a President Paul surrounded with US Marines to be the strong arm of his implementation of the REAL sword of Truth and Justice.

Because the SS works for the IMF/UN/FR treasury, and were fully complicit in the murder of JFK and RFK and Everyone Knows it, they CAN NOT be trusted with President Paul's security. When REAL Justice makes the elder bush talk, we will all know how deep the nazi rabbit hole goes. (Hi Homeland Flunkies of death and destructionous evil!~)-(How's your Gestapo day going?)-(Just wait till the real courts get a hold of you for violations of the Constitutional Law of this Land)-(Remember those who said they were "just following orders" at Nuremberg?)-(You are all encouraged to follow your Heart, and not the easily fooled mind)-> Any three year old knows the difference between right and wrong.

Constant exposure of the profiterious moneychanging bankster MEDIA military industrial war machine and complex assorted minions and outright slop-bucket licking flunky's here and all over the net now will help bring back old America, God, and the Square Foundations upon which this Country was founded. Yes! On the square, and level with the people not only of America, but also the world. The corruption of George Orwell's 1984 madness, Protocols of Zion, and black is white, and up is down world is dead.

Onward all you REAL Soldiers who wield God’s Holy Double-edged Sword of Truth and Justice. It is way past time to house-clean this corrupted chaotic mess. The Force is with you ALL!

Ignorance is not is just plain stupid lifeless existence.



Thu, 01/12/2012 - 06:07 | 2057620 Shylockracy
Shylockracy's picture

The patience with which Crocketalmanac and many others here argue with the hasbara trolls is a sight to behold.

The hysteria displayed nowadays by Israel-firsters is impressive, even by their own apoplectic standards.

I confess I'm done with giving them the benefit of the doubt.

Methinks the little man behind the curtain has read the writting on the wall and is nearing a heart attack.

Mene, Mene, Tekel u-Pharsin


Thu, 01/12/2012 - 08:33 | 2057733 YHC-FTSE
YHC-FTSE's picture

Good article, except for this bit.

"Also left out of the narrative is any explanation of why it was okay for Pakistan to develop nuclear weapons or why North Korea is permitted to hold them."


Biggest omission in the narrative is any explanation of why it was okay for Israel to develop nuclear weapons.


As for the conclusion of using Iran to "both divert attention from the crumbling economy and have a scapegoat upon which to blame the next leg of the financial downturn", I concur, with the additional speculation that oil prices have been manipulated below market prices for the past few years (decades?), considering the inflated petrodollar, diminishing new fields, and depleted proven wells. Yes, there's still many years of oil left in the world, but without new finds, when it is gone, it is gone forever, and the market price should reflect that for a precious commodity in high demand. If the US finds that it lacks both the financial and political muscle to keep a lid on cheap oil, then the next best thing is release the pressure and blame the high cost on war. 

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 10:04 | 2057974 Element
Element's picture

why it was okay for Pakistan to develop nuclear weapons or why North Korea is permitted to hold them."


Yeah, noticed that too;

1) It was not "okay" for Pakistan to develop nukes. I monitored that closely as it developed, during the early to mid 1980s. By the late 1980s Washington warned Pakistan that it would "make an example out of Pakistan", if it did not stop a-bomb development immediately.  Of course they did not stop, it was already far too late, they had already sold the Tech to Iran by that time.  Any country that wants nukes does not give a toss what Washington wants because they have their own sovereign strategic defence imperatives that always and easily over-ride any of Washington's absurd sense of super-duper self-importance.

2) North Korea is not being "permitted to hold them".  Washington can't do a damn thing about it - period.  I monitored this situation closely also as it developed over the past 25 years.

Here are the notes I wrote from that time:


In mid-Sept 2006 George W Bush announced that North Korea was about to test a nuclear weapon. On October 4th 2006, North Korea formally announced it intended to test a nuclear weapon.  5th of October 2006, it was broadcast that the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State, Christopher Hill delivered an official U.S. diplomatic response directly to North Korea’s UN delegation in New York, with a warning that was as blunt and unambiguous as it was toothless and ineffectual.

1)        The U.S. will not live with a nuclear-armed North Korea.
2)        North Korea can have a future or it can have nuclear weapons but it can not have both.

The DPRK called that bluff. Effectively the U.S. has done nothing about the DPRK’s overt nuclear proliferation and testing, it merely sought to apply an ultimately unenforceable tokenistic economic sanctions regime. China refuses to take part in hardline sanction enforcements and both China and Russia entirely rejected backing them up with military actions or blockades. The U.S. now claims to be satisfied with this outcome, yet it clearly will not eliminate or prevent a fully nuclear-armed DPRK and the DPRK will indeed have a nuclear future.

* Note: 9th of Oct 2006, DPRK tested a plutonium implosion warhead of <1 kt yield. An efficient design should have produced ~10 times this yield, thus the initial design can be regarded as flawed. The DPRK also has a uranium enrichment program to produce U-235 weapons. It can be safely assumed this was not a U-235 test, as an initial U-235 test would surely have produced a much larger yield than 1 kt. A simple U-235 weapon could easily produce a yield of 10 kt.

Small DPRK test (seismic 3.8 magnitude or <1 Kiloton, 4.2 mag according to USGS) on 9th of October 2006, reveals the effective irrelevance of the NPT and CTBT and impossibility of entrusting strategic defence to such treaties, and impossibility of verification of compliance. 11th October 2006 PM John Howard emphatically and repeatedly stated that the event was a "huge test" of civil and diplomatic international mechanisms. In other words, if the UN Security Council mechanism continues to prove ineffective, Australia may abandon all confidence in it, as a worthwhile tool for dealing with nuclear proliferation, and effectively dispense with it. Australia has repeatedly emphasised and demanded effective actual collective action, but no effective action is feasible. As a result Australia will become a formally declared nuclear weapon state, once it becomes clear the NPT can not slow the acquisition of nuclear weapons by other regional states, and missile developments, once it’s clear such weapons have become credibly deliverable. i.e. ~2015 time frame. Howard seemed intent on marking this DPRK test and lack of effective meaningful international responses as a precursor for unstated changes in policy.

** Note: North Korea confirmed another underground nuclear test on Monday 25 May 2009 - North Korea said it had staged a "successful" underground nuclear test which was more powerful than its previous test. The North "successfully conducted one more underground nuclear test on May 25 as part of the measures to bolster up its nuclear deterrent for self-defence in every way as requested by its scientists and technicians", the Korean Central News Agency said. "The current nuclear test was safely conducted on a new higher level in terms of its explosive power and technology of its control," it said. The results resolved, "scientific and technological problems arising in further increasing the power of nuclear weapons and steadily developing nuclear technology".

*** Note: Thursday 28th May 2009 - The nuclear device detonated by North Korea this week was about five times more powerful than the country's maiden 2006 test. Scientists at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory said they based their conclusions on data collected from seismic stations including one in China. "The second test appears to have a significantly higher yield" than the one in 2006, said Paul Richards, an expert on seismic detection of nuclear tests.


In other words, nuclear proliferation is occurring no matter what any treaty regime claims to acheive and there is no way for any one to stop it.  All the treaties are hollow, and US 'power' amounts to almost nothing in both instances.

The same will occur this time with regard to Iran.  If anything Iran has much more geographic advantage, geopolitical leverage, military clout and a general lack of support for the US position, from the UN and even from close allies who realise what a stupid sham the US position is.

This does not mean the US isn't dumb enough to start WWIII over it, as they are certainly dumb enough, and judging from the antics coming from the US Treasury's financial terrorism unit it appears the Red Shield may want them to start a war with Iran.  

Thu, 01/12/2012 - 09:00 | 2057791 HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

If a Nation relies on Tanker traffic through which Iran controls the waters, and war is imminent; That Nation would be wise to stop using that source and arrange for another source of oil.

If no one bought oil from Iran specifically then Iran's own Government will be in danger from within because of falling revenue.

I have finally gone to the point of not giving a goddamn if Iran makes nuclear plants for Electric power because oil is running out soon.

You would think that Natural Gas within Iran's own resources would be immense. They can just run off that just as we and others are doing. But no, they are going to nuclear plants even as Japan, and others suffer ongoing nuclear fallout and ongoing meltdown.

But, no. Iran chooses nuclear power and with that, the Bomb.

My attention is focused towards the top of the World. There is open ocean now where once was ice. There is such massive resources being hunted as I type this by all Nations, especially Russia; in this effort.

In today's current world Energy by Oil or other means is everything. We have known how to get it off the sun, how the winds and seas make it and invented machines on a giant scale to harvest these.

Do we use them? Yes and no.

Let's face it. There are Peoples on this Planet who wish to make war. If they have nothing much and are motivated by the vision of a mighty Nation such as Israel, UK, USA or Russia/China prostrate and begging as millions die amid a uninhabitable land; that would be enough to pour massive effort to making sure they have the power to make it happen.

We are in a Election year. Everyone is taking advantage of that to our own disorganization and lack of collectively being able to steer the ship USA in one direction to a good purpose.

There is a house on my street which removed it's windows last week and last night was gutted to the wall studs and wiring. Laborers work through the night to build a new house from inside out. The building is 50 years old, yet the Owners deem it cheaper to rebuild what they have and add on to upgrade than to move and get a new home.

Does anyone care? No, it's not our money. Take a look at Haiti after the quake. It's been months and months. They must have good tents over there because all that manpower sitting around with a range of skills to build decent housing all waiting on the Government to do it.

If we the People are the Government of these United States, we would be very sure to maintain the integrity of the International Waters and commerce via Shipping as always with other Nations. That is the reason for a Navy.

Some of you have forgotten or never was taught that the USA paid tribute to Tripoli when it was Founded for the permission to commerce shipping in the area without being bothered. Finally the USA said ef it, and sent Perry and a group of warships to Tripoli and took care of that issue pernamently.

Even today Piracy and Tributes/ransom is never really solved. Take a look at Somalia. They have nothing. But when they grab a ship and hold it for a while and find themselves paid off with cargo to boot they go back to Somalia and spread the money around with each one competeing to go further and faster with more, always more.

You can send 400 frigates and have them patrol the 1000 mile by 600 mile box near Somalia and scrub it clean of pirates. Then go home.

Like weeds will Piracy return?

Iran is going to have a day where there is war. The rest of us stuck on MSM are ignorant of the fact that they too are part of this war. Some posters put forth a opinion based on possible uses of weapons. If a Russian Submarine is identified, caught launching a nuclear weapon or several and wipes out a Carrier with damage or destroyed ships with a nuclear weapon or three....

The United States will launch again Russia. Russia knows it. The US and Russian People dont. They are a generation or two away having forgotten the things we have learned during the Atomic age and also during the Cold war.

That is why they wont do it. Neither will we.

But if Iran launches the big one against Israel or any of our troops and sailors based in, afloat or ashore in the Lands surrounding Iran; there is going to be a very hot regional war.

I myself can say "Fuck it let the oil to 500 a barrel with desiel at whatever astronomical shit price that halts JIT and meat, food, produce and other vital cargo required by our cities in the USA every day.

Have you gone shopping in Walmart and mentally estimated the number of bags of Onions for example availible? 30 bags? A pallet with... 600 onions? vs a City of 20,000 surrounded by 80,000?

Growing season is over, now is winter wheat and nitrogen for next planting season.

Provided we still have a Nation to plant. If we suffer a Nuclear strike or exchange nuclear war acreage will drop and sickness, zombies and what have you will finish the rest.

What would be left is the old Wireless Morse and Ham Radio once the Atmosphere clears up a decade later.

Some of you cry WAR~! Others say NO! and the rest rail about the situation.


Sometimes I think all the nations of the world stuck somebody with the bag. And the USA is it. And it's all our fault.

Ask yourself what are you going to DO about it? Enlist? Prepare? Move out of the City?

Or go on with the rest of the sheep and let the adults deal with this?

Fri, 01/13/2012 - 06:06 | 2060894 Element
Element's picture


Some posters put forth a opinion based on possible uses of weapons. If a Russian Submarine is identified, caught launching a nuclear weapon or several and wipes out a Carrier with damage or destroyed ships with a nuclear weapon or three....

You were referring to this comment:

But it was not an "opinion" of near future events.

It was instead a description of HISTORICAL tactics the Russians envisioned for the employing of Shkval in combat to destroy the US fleets.  The Shkval is a Cold-War weapon, It is not new, though like almost all cold war systems it has been heavily upgraded to a much enhanced combat performance and range.  You've misunderstood and I probably should have been clearer.

I certainly am not for a moment suggesting the Russians would consider ordering their subs into the Arabian Sea to sink a US carriers on Iran's behalf, with a fan of nuclear Shkvals (but you can bet your Khyber-Pass that they are in the area, right now, and are indeed armed with Shkval, and many equally nasty weapons (Russian SSN subs have diabolical heavy firepower options--and lots of it).

Then pointed out that Iran has invested heavily in that devastating capability, and that this could be put to nuclear application, if necessary.

Plus they have one of the most ideal SSK sub platforms in the Kilo-class sub, with which to employ it against the USN within a shallow littoral environment surrounding the Iranian coast.

It's just one more reason why the US navy is in real danger if it steamed into waters that the Iranians have already warned them to stay out of.

And also warned that there would be no more warnings.

Fri, 01/13/2012 - 09:53 | 2061120 HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

In that context I recognize that the Russian Navy has studied us for a very long time and understand how to exploit our weaknesses.


In response to that new weapon and the Valid tatical method of using it in battle. (I accept your post.)

I thought ya know? Instead of taking years and consuming much craftmanship and resources launching a huge carrier, why not simply launch a small one.

Say one big enough to hold 12 F18's, 8 F35 and a few helicopters and what have you. Not much of a ship maybe 1/3 the size and probably more effective in numbers for the money spent.

50 or so of these little mini carriers all over the place  with thier small battle groups incorperating the new Railgun technology and other goodies has to be better than 12 money pits that probably can be lost within a day of a real war.

Some of you will hate me for saying this. But trust me, many more places around the USA will be able to handle construction and dry docking these things. Not just Norfolk.

Sat, 01/14/2012 - 05:22 | 2064302 Element
Element's picture

Say one big enough to hold 12 F18's, 8 F35 and a few helicopters and what have you. Not much of a ship maybe 1/3 the size and probably more effective in numbers for the money spent.


That's basically exactly what a US Marine Corp LHD is (Landing-Helicopter-Dock), they carry short range Harriers jets (soon to be replaced with much longer range and harder hiting F-35B), V-22 Osprey, many different choppers, plus an armoured battalion, with all its armour, and high performance landing craft, with an internal wet loading-dock, and an impressive close-in self-defence missile system.

Australia is also currently building two large complementry Spansih designed LHDs (capable of carrying F-35B as a capability expansion option) with most of the same sorts of amphibious land attack features.

Spanish Navy calls this design their, "strategic power-projection ships", which is what these small-carrier LHDs do:

There are only a handful of Navies with these sorts of 'carriers', and most of them are western.

The 12 US CNVs are all about providing overwelming tactical mutirole attack power and for the ship to be able to move VERY fast, from point A to point B, with virtually unlimited range and endurance.

The Marines LHDs can't compete with the CNVs.  And nor can anyone else's navy.

In my opinion these CNVs are almost impossible to sink from any attack originating above the waterline. The USN has been building an incredibly effective missile defence system since the mid-1950s.  It is silly to think a Ballistic missile attack will easily hit a carrier, cruiser or DDG. These have 5-layers of purely defensive Aegis capabilities; SM3, SM2, ESSM, SEARAM, Phalanx.

However, an attack originating below the water-line ... I am not so sure they can always survive such attacks ... though they are improving.


Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!