This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Iran Military Practicing Straits Of Hormuz Closure

Tyler Durden's picture


And just in case a brutal reminder that nothing is solved in Europe is not enough, here comes Iran:


And some more from Reuters:

Iran army declines comment on Hormuz exercise

A member of the Iranian parliament's National Security Committee said on Monday that the military was set to practise its ability to close the Gulf to shipping at the narrow Strait of Hormuz, the most important oil transit channel in the world, but there was no official confirmation.


The legislator, Parviz Sarvari, told the student news agency ISNA: "Soon we will hold a military manoeuvre on how to close the Strait of Hormuz. If the world wants to make the region insecure, we will make the world insecure."


Contacted by Reuters, a spokesman for the Iranian military declined to comment.


Iran's energy minister told Al Jazeera television last month that Tehran could use oil as a political tool in the event of any future conflict over its nuclear programme.


Tension over the programme has increased since the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported on Nov. 8 that Tehran appears to have worked on designing a nuclear bomb and may still be pursuing research to that end. Iran strongly denies this and says it is developing nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.


Iran has warned it will respond to any attack by hitting Israel and U.S. interests in the Gulf and analysts say one way to retaliate would be to close the Strait of Hormuz.


About a third of all sea-borne shipped oil passed through the Strait in 2009, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), and U.S. warships patrol the area to ensure safe passage.

As a reminder from Wikipedia:

The strait at its narrowest is 54 kilometres (34 mi) wide.[1] It is the only sea passage to the open ocean for large areas of the petroleum-exporting Persian Gulf. About 13 tankers carrying 15.5 million barrels (2,460,000 m3) of crude oil pass through the strait on an average day, making it one of the world's most strategically important choke points. This represents 33% of the world's seaborne oil shipments, and 17% of all world oil shipments in 2009.[2]


A series of naval stand-offs between Iranian speedboats and U.S. warships in the Strait of Hormuz occurred in December 2007 and January 2008. U.S. officials accused Iran of harassing and provoking their naval vessels; Iranian officials denied these allegations. On January 14, 2008, U.S. naval officials appeared to contradict the Pentagon version of the Jan. 16 event, in which U.S. officials said U.S. vessels were near to firing on approaching Iranian boats. The Navy's regional commander, Vice Admiral Kevin Cosgriff, said the Iranians had "neither anti-ship missiles nor torpedoes" and that he "wouldn't characterize the posture of the US 5th Fleet as afraid of these small boats".


Iranian threats


On June 29, 2008, the commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, Ali Mohammed Jafari, said that if Iran were attacked by Israel or the United States, it would seal off the Strait of Hormuz, to wreak havoc in oil markets. This statement followed other more ambiguous threats from Iran's oil minister and other government officials that a Western attack on Iran would result in turmoil in oil supply.


In response, Vice Admiral Kevin Cosgriff, commander of the U.S. 5th Fleet stationed in Bahrain across the Persian Gulf from Iran, warned that such an action by Iran would be considered an act of war, and that the U.S. would not allow Iran to effectively hold hostage nearly a third of the world's oil supply.[7]


In July 8, 2008, Ali Shirazi, a mid-level clerical aide to Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was quoted by the student news agency ISNA as saying to Revolutionary Guards, "The Zionist regime is pressuring White House officials to attack Iran. If they commit such a stupidity, Tel Aviv and U.S. shipping in the Persian Gulf will be Iran's first targets and they will be burned."[8]


An article in International Security contended that Iran could seal off or impede traffic in the Strait for a month, and an attempt by the U.S. to reopen it would likely escalate the conflict.[9] In a later issue, however, the journal published a response which questioned some key assumptions and suggested a much shorter timeline for re-opening.[10]

More as we see it.


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:02 | 1969542 gojam
gojam's picture

Practice makes perfect.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:04 | 1969548 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

I expect Iran to be the exception that proves the rule.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:26 | 1969616 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Why schmuck? You think they'll be less than perfect?

I think the drone down incident is giong to be a tell/sign when the final story on this ugly chapter on human life is finally written.

And the thing that few understand is the US wars CAN NEVER END. Bringing home the post Vienam PTSD'ed vets was all one needs to remember about bringing uniformed killers "home" and then disarming them.



Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:06 | 1969730 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



I guess you think China is as well a threat to the Unites States?

or maybe India's Navy is a threat?

what color is the sky in your world?

you can not! even grasp the scope and scale of the destruction that can be brought forth on a moment’s notice. you dont want to, you want to be blind so you can run around spewing shit all over everyone waving your arms above your head..

i promise that your entertaining the crowd does nothing to deter the greatest force the world has ever known.

iran, could team up with china, india, brazil and the russians.. and it still would not take more than 30 days..

but these wars are a distraction.. a way to kill off the brave.. brain washing intelligent people.. to keep their focus on other things.. than the FACTS at home.

you are in a 3rd world country.. living a 3rd world lifestyle.. enjoying a river of American dollars being poured into your shit hole of a country for a decade tax free.. which gave you the ability to be online now.. you fucking monkey, you are one internet connection from being back in the forest with baboo the bear.. fucking jungle boy and dont you forget it..

china didnt drag your people out of the jungles..

iran may provide you with some of your energy but not all!

so you would do well to remind your ignorant self who allows you to have a real life.. and who would be happier to see you back ignorant and in the jungle.

and if at any time you think the USA is the bad guy in your life.. I want you to pinch yourself.. you are dreaming.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:10 | 1969754 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

Everyone likes pointing at the other guy. He's the bad guy so I must be good. He's pointing at you and it turns out you are both half right.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:12 | 1970265 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture




Uploaded by on Sep 12, 2011 -------------- 16 US NAVY SHIPS IN THE BOTTOM OF THE PERSIAN GULF

"During the summer of 2002, in the run-up to President Bush's invasion of Iraq, the US military staged the most elaborate and expensive war games ever conceived. Operation Millennium Challenge, as it was called, cost some $250 million, and required two years of planning ... it was set in the Persian Gulf, and simulated a conflict with a hypothetical rogue state. The "war" involved heavy use of computers, and was also played out in the field by 13,500 US troops, at 17 different locations and 9 live-force training sites. All of the services participated under a single joint command, known as JOINTFOR. The US forces were designated as 'Force Blue', and the enemy as OPFOR, or 'Force Red'. The 'war' lasted three weeks and ended with the overthrow of the dictatorial regime on August 15."

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:15 | 1970272 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



Tanker Wars 1984-1988 : 25 Years of Direct US Military Intervention in Iraq Begins

The War in Iraq started during the Iran-Contra era, 9/11 was used as pretext to finish it because Saddams sanctions were about to end. Part of the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980's the Tanker War attracted much international interest and US intervention. With Iran blocking Iraqi exports of oil via the Shatt-al-Arab waterway the war against Iran was turning against the Iraqis. Syria closed Iraq's pipeline to the Mediterranean and it looked like economics would straggle the Iraqi war effort. Despite the unpopularity of Iraqs government the other Arab states feared the fundamentalism of Iran much more and came to Iraqs rescue. Jordan opened Aqaba to Iraqi imports (mainly weapons) and new pipelines were constructed across the desert to the Red Sea and to Turkey. Iraqi exports went through Kuwait also and the Arab states also directly funded Iraq to the sum of about $60 billion.
The Tanker War started properly in 1984 when Iraq attacked Iranian tankers and the vital oil terminal at Kharg island. Iran struck back by attacking tankers carrying Iraqi oil from Kuwait and then any tanker of the Gulf states supporting Iraq. The air and small boat attacks did very little to damage the economies of either country and the price of oil was never seriously affected as Iran just moved it's shipping port to Larak Island in the straights of Hormuz.

In 1987 Kuwait persuaded the US to offer protection to its tanker fleet dragging the USA directly into the war. US warships soon began patrolling the gulf and on 17th May 1987 an Iraqi super-Etendard aircraft fired two exocet missiles at the USS Stark thinking she was an Iranian warship. Embarrassingly for the Americans the Stark's defences did not function and 37 US sailors died. Iraq apologised for the incident and this was accepted. To ensure a repeat of the incident didn't happen again US, Iraqi and Saudi forces collaborated . Iran with some justification accused the US of helping Iraq and this was not helped when on 3rd July 1988 an American warship shot down and Iranian airliner in error. Iran then started sowing the Gulf with anti ship mines and several ships were hit, including the USS Samuel B. Roberts in April 1988. Once again the US retaliated by destroying Iranian warships and patrol boats further demonstrating to the Gulf states the American support of Iraq, embittering Iran, and illustrating how vulnerable military and civilian shipping is to attack in the Persian Gulf.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:17 | 1970283 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



??????? ????????? USS Stark ??? 1987?

maybe the fucking Navy will stop worrying about thier pretty white pants and concern themselves with the job at hand, this time?

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:20 | 1970301 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



Iran's Revolutionary Guards test fired missiles during War Games - 25 April 2010

Uploaded by on Apr 25, 2010

Reuters report 25 April 2010

Iran said the purpose with the War Games is to show the countries naval strenght and its capability to close the Strait of Hormuz if attacked.

The strait at its narrowest is 54 kilometres wide.

It is the only sea passage to the open ocean for large areas of the petroleum-exporting Persian Gulf.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, an average of about 15 tankers carrying 16.5 to 17 million barrels of crude oil normally pass through the strait every day, making it one of the world's most strategically important choke points.

This represents 40% of the world's seaborne oil shipments, and 20% of all world shipments.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:24 | 1970619 Triggernometry
Triggernometry's picture

Don't forget Syria just unveiled an anti-ship missile.  It would seem prudent to expect significant sharing of military capabilities between Iran and Syria.

Thu, 12/15/2011 - 18:31 | 1985230 HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

We have advaced beyond the Gatling gun point defense and rail mounted reload Air to air systems of those days.


The spin airframe RAM missiles should do a good job of countering the antiship missiles at a great enough distance to keep the warship from being shredded with shrap.


I am more concerned with the newer Russian systems such as the Onyx or the Sapphire. Those things are damn fast. Wonder if it is somewhat faster than the onboard/networked data center in Battle Center can handle in real time.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:44 | 1970717 Harlequin001
Harlequin001's picture

You have not the first fucking clue what your military is capable of, or not.

That much is clear.

'you can not! even grasp the scope and scale of the destruction that can be brought forth on a moment’s notice.' er yes we can and clearly you can't. Perhaps you have forgotten that despite your huge military spending you needed RAF Tornado Fighter bombers to do your low level bombing in Iraq and Kuwait, because your air force wasn't capable.

You and your ilk need to wise up and stop watching transformers. Your military is capable of firing missiles and nothing else. You can do nothing without specialist help from those other Europeans that are far better trained and have considerably more experience in the art of war than you do. You should understand that other countries have missiles too, and that any act of provocation against these will see you annihilated in a fight you can't possibly win. You can't win.

and this was a stunner.

'china didnt drag your people out of the jungles..'

Assuming that ORI is actually an Indian, are you inferring that it is was the US that dragged India from the Jungle. You really would need to be an uneducated shit head to believe that. India was civilised long before the US even existed

it's twats like you spouting this kind of bullshit that put my children at risk... Do us all a a favour and STFU.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:58 | 1970775 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



England enslaved.. India...

America provided capital to India.. (it is the first thing that poped up.. but the list is so very long, this will just have to do.)

as for your tornado's? you can keep them (all 142 of them) and your 1,000% debt to GDP..

I will suffer along with my A-10's and Apache's for close air support just fine, Thank You Very Much!


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 14:16 | 1970874 Harlequin001
Harlequin001's picture

You do that, and we'll watch intently how you get on...

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 02:05 | 1972926 Mauibrad
Mauibrad's picture

How do they "practice" that?  Sounds more like a bluff to me to rattle the markets, and so far it hasn't.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:19 | 1970598 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

JW n FL noted:

The 'war' lasted three weeks and ended with the overthrow of the dictatorial regime on August 15.

Sorry, JW, I'm going to have to disagree on this one. The "war" ended with the overthrow of the dictatorial regime only after the sunken fifth fleet was magically refloated.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:41 | 1970705 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture


That was pasted from the video information.. not my stuff.. I should have put it " ... "'s

Sorry about the confusion.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 21:18 | 1972264 thewhitelion
thewhitelion's picture

I think the current game in Afganistan cost more than that.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:21 | 1969803 goldenrod
goldenrod's picture

You forgot to take your medication today racist boy.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:11 | 1970254 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



The personal attack does not change any of the facts.

You ignorant fucking sheep who don’t have the comprehensive capability to grasp a children’s puzzle should not be allowed to speak when grown ups are talking.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:55 | 1970462 goldenrod
goldenrod's picture

Funny that you should accuse others of making personal attacks so soon after your racist diatribe.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:37 | 1970603 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



The Jungle Book is Racist?

do you feel like you are reaching?

you must be one of those pissed off Talmud people spinning.. and let me tell you, the work so far that you have accomplished is note worthy.. so much so lets hope that it makes it into at least some history books.. so future generations do not have to EVER suffer the spinning again!

the guilt.. O me.. O my! what will I do.. I can barely walk under the weight of the guilt..


anything but the facts..

so India.. has bathed in U.S. Dollars (for longer than a Decade) and built the Country from this Tax (India Tax) Free River of Capital.

it is a Fact.

India.. has enjoyed the support of the United States, in FULL!

Economic Relations

The United States is also one of India's largest direct investors. From 1991 to 2004, the stock of FDI inflow has increased from USD $11.3 million to $344.4 million, totaling $4.13 billion. This is a compound rate increase of 57.5% annually. Indian direct investments abroad were started in 1992. Indian corporations and registered partnership firms are allowed to invest in businesses up to 100% of their net worth. India's largest outgoing investments are manufacturing, which account for 54.8% of the country's foreign investments. The second largest are non-financial services (software development), which accounts for 35.4% of investments.


so.. the Facts are.. the United States Dragged India out of the Jungle Book.. thru the use of U.S. Dollars.


as for Russia.. wanting problems in the MID-EAST.. as the World 2nd Largest Oil Producer? Russia can only benefit from any instability in the region.

and Iran.. who fought with Iraq for the better part of a decade.. is NO! threat to the United States.. we just need Irans Oil.


So, Spin that Mr. Talmud!

Baba Kamma 113a. Jews may use lies ("subterfuges") to circumvent a Gentile.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:25 | 1970633 JOYFUL
JOYFUL's picture

Amazing. You just made one of the most over the top personal attacks ever dumped onto this site, and then follow it up with a rabid snarl at everybody and anybody reading this thread. And you're oblivious to it all. 

Totally over the line bud.  You need to find some other outlet for your frustrations.  Nobody is here on your sufferance, nor needs suffer your distemper. I hope you find it in yourself to apologize.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:43 | 1970718 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



which part was extremely racist? and over the top, for you?

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 07:00 | 1973124 JOYFUL
JOYFUL's picture

where did you read the word racist in what I wrote? I'll save you a moment. You didn't(but please check anyways-if I wanted to call you a racist, I would have). You made it up to suit your answer to my critique.

Maybe you are feeling a bit of contrition about your screed !?!

As to your second question:

you are in a 3rd world country.. living a 3rd world lifestyle.. enjoying a river of American dollars being poured into your shit hole of a country for a decade tax free.. which gave you the ability to be online now.. you fucking monkey, you are one internet connection from being back in the forest with baboo the bear.. fucking jungle boy and dont you forget it..

china didnt drag your people out of the jungles..

iran may provide you with some of your energy but not all!

so you would do well to remind your ignorant self who allows you to have a real life.. and who would be happier to see you back ignorant and in the jungle.

in it's entirety.  Unmitigated bullshit.  Sorry, before I went to great pains to be polite.  The intentional misquoting of my response and a rereading of just how pathetic was your orignial diatribe requires that I drop that and just say that if the pathetic loser narcissist creator of that quote is in any way indicative of how Amerikans are looking out at the world right now, you haven't a chance in hell of even going to war, let allow winning one. 

A successful sold?er has always been he who respects h?s "enemy" - at this point, I doubt you even respect yourself, let alone anyone else. 

Carry on screaming.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 17:51 | 1971732 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

I don't always agree with JW n FL but he makes this site fun. And that is what this place is all about.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 22:35 | 1972515 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



Thanks for remembering this is "FIGHT CLUB"!!

it is NOT!! Politically Correct, Regurgitate Corporate News Meme's Land!


Tue, 12/13/2011 - 00:46 | 1972795 thefatasswilly
thefatasswilly's picture


Tue, 12/13/2011 - 07:05 | 1973128 JOYFUL
JOYFUL's picture

and just in case you still don't get it, I didn't tag you out for 'political correctness' deficit, I don't play that're out for slagging somebody about where they live, rather than for the ideas they express.  Your defense in inadmissable.  You totally lost it and need to man up and admit it.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:26 | 1969824 Oh regional Indian
Oh regional Indian's picture

Hmmmmmm................. won't join you in the name calling barrel bottom you so clearly dwell in JW.

Your wake up call as to your manifest destiny superiority is going to be hard on you I think.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:17 | 1970007 Iwanttoknow
Iwanttoknow's picture

ORI,He is the chosen people.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:39 | 1969878 quintago
quintago's picture

Many here are missing the point. If and once war breaks out no insurance carrier will provide coverage for any transporting carrier in the region. That alone will drive things crazy.

They also have a large coastline. They can keep things off and invisible to radar until the last second when they spot a ship to target. You can see across the strait from Iran to the UAE and everything which floats in between.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:12 | 1970263 CrazyCooter
CrazyCooter's picture

Yup, I read somewhere there is a large volume of torpedos in Iran ... land based torpedos. They basically put high speed propulsion on them, they are fast and noisy as hell. The navy will see them as soon as they launch, but if the sheer volume of simultaneous launches is the advantage, as only so many can be neutralized.

If the US Navy sails into those straights, I will be both very shocked and clearly ill informed. Land based torpedos are going to have range issues, so one would want to stay far enough at sea to keep launches limited to other vessels only. The shores would have to have been secured by boots on the ground, for many miles of shore line, to prevent this sort of thing.

Further, they could sink the oil carriers if they wanted to go that route, so either way, they can shut it off until such a time as they no longer exist or change their minds. I believe that was recently discussed as the "oil armageddon" scenario not long ago on ZH in a publication from PIMCO.



Thu, 12/15/2011 - 18:37 | 1985249 HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

Well there is some merit in that.

Long ago I had to play a game on Commodore that used a Ageis system on a warship to deal with a saturation attack of dozens upon dozens of missiles.


I finally just learned to target the missiles against my ship and that of the carrier and allow the rest of the task force to target accordingly. 100 missiles is not enough for air defense. In those days the Tomcats with the Phoenix was in use as well. Hopefully catching the USSR bombers before they launched.

What good is a well managed barcap and vampire trap when the computer positions a Carrier killing Sub with cruise missiles launching behind your carrier presumely on a safe axis away from the threat.

In real life training or actual experience involving life or death in the past, I know that the human is capable of processing three to 6 issues at a order of priority. It is the one extra oh shit pop up that breaks the camel's back.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:48 | 1969906 tmosley
tmosley's picture

lol, you think that because the US has had some marginal military successes in third world countries that they can take on world powers on their home turf no problem.

I climbed three flights of stairs to get to my office when the elevator was too slow, I guess I'm ready to climb Mt. Reineer.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:09 | 1970243 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



I think that you are talking about occupying..

I am talking about destroying the military capability(s) of.

So.. lets understand that occupying is a distraction, a long term fix.. too keep attention away from whatever else is going on..

verse.. cutting the balls off of a Country.

I would have expected better from you, honestly. but band wagons are fun to ride on!

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:17 | 1970284 CrazyCooter
CrazyCooter's picture

Not to get in the middle here ... but ...

I often try to explain to people that the job of the US Military is two fold; (1) kill people and (2) blow shit up. Those who serve either train to do this, or support those who train to do this.

They usually make a funny face.

That is all the military does. This occupation crap is a misuse of the military.

So, if the US wanted to level Iran, it could easily do so. However, given that Iran produces so much oil, and lets all agree this is about oil, this wouldn't really solve a lot of problems as this production would be offline, potentially for years.

I don't even want to contemplate invading and occupying Iran. I would rather junk my car and ride a horse to work; it would make more sense.



Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:35 | 1970669 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

Maybe you own a little gold and silver and you think you are protected from WW III.

Avoid the rush. Start a trend. Start early. Go ahead and buy a horse.

Nobody, that I know of is suggesting occupying Iran. However, Israel WILL most definitely attack and destroy the nuclear capability of Iran just like they did with Iraq.  And it will happen before next July. Get used to the idea because it is coming.

It would be nice for the US to have a little intelligence on the intentions and capabilities of Iran, but that will not happen.

Hope you have a bomb shelter.

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 00:52 | 1972808 thefatasswilly
thefatasswilly's picture

I don't doubt the USA's complete military superiority, but the thing is, it is very, very expensive in terms of real resources (oil) for the military to operate on literally, the other side of the world.

America will do what is has always done: sit back while the Eurasian powers duke it out, then sail in on the side of "justice" after a few years of feigned neurality. Obviously, such a strategy guaranteed its victory twice, but will it again?

Think big, man. Who has all the oil? Even assuming complete NATO naval superiority, tankers are going down by the dozen in an all out war (and that's assuming ME countries even continue to sell us oil). The ocean is a huge fucking place.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:43 | 1970402 natty light
natty light's picture

Wouldn't it take just one tanker or transport ship being damage to set off pandemonium in the world oil markets?

Thu, 12/15/2011 - 18:38 | 1985263 HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

If we fight a proper Nation to nation like USSR for example... there is going to be alot of hurt on both sides.


Much more so than these little piddling squabbles in the dirt of third world nations overseas.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:02 | 1969951 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

If Iran is this agressive without a nuclear weapon imagine how they will be WITH one. Cue Israel with live TV coverage please this time.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:14 | 1969995 Optimusprime
Optimusprime's picture

Yeah, it is really aggressive to let people know you will defend yourself from attack.  A blind man should be able to see who the aggressors are in this situation, and who ALREADY has nukes!  The US has already used them, and the Israelis refuse all inspections, indeed all contact with the IAEA, which currently under US/Israeli domination is pointing fingers at Iran.


Wake up, doofus.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:06 | 1970522 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

What attack, An unarmed drone that automatically landed when it's GPS signal was jammed by Russian supplied equipment??? 

Are you saying we should turn a blind eye to Iran? I say we should KNOW what they are up to before it's too late.

Last time I checked, their OFFICIAL line is: We will obliterate Israel! We will cause harm to the entire world!

And they HAVE attacked Israel (the only democracy in the region) through any proxy pit bull they can find.

And they do it on almost a daily basis.

Oh I see you are saying we should ignore it until real damage is done and then respond with WW III.  It's plain to see who the dufus is.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:24 | 1970618 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

You do know that you can't believe everything you see on television, don't you?


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:37 | 1970686 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

You don't know me at all. You have no clue what I know.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 17:46 | 1971715 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

Nah, I think we all know that you know nothing at this point. Don't worry about it.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:43 | 1970392 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

How can you be so sure Iran hasn't bought some nukes from someone else?  It appears that Israel bought their first ones -- maybe through official channels, but they go bang nonetheless -- in the U.S.  With enough money, and Iran has money, just about anything can be bought somewhere.  And there are nuclear states that need money.

Mutual Assured Distruction works both ways.  Israel is a small country.  Does America really want to get into a possibly nuclear slugfest in the Middle East?  I hope not!

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 14:01 | 1970812 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



with the MID-East off line..

Russia is the ONLY Large Scale Oil Game in Town!


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 14:22 | 1970910 DionysusDevotee
DionysusDevotee's picture

Ding Ding! We have a winner! 

Recent report reveals that China has 3000 nuclear warheads not 400 as previously thought.  Also a "vast array of tunnels located strategically along borders."

The Iranian nuclear program is likely no more than a smokescreen to save appearances.   Cause China would NEVER, no NEVER sell a couple nukes to "An attack on them is an attack on China" Iran.  And, besides, if China DID sell say, 100 nukes to Iran; We would totally know about it.  Just like we were off on how many nukes China had, by 2500+

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:33 | 1970082 BigJim
BigJim's picture

By jingo!

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:33 | 1970085 Tangurena
Tangurena's picture

what color is the sky in your world? 

It is blood, blood, lovely blood. Kill them all, Cthulhu knows His own!

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:45 | 1970724 Mark701
Mark701's picture

You're all over the place with your commentary. What point are you making? That we have a kick-ass military supporting a third world USA? I'm having trouble following your logic. We MIGHT prevail in a conflict with Iran and China but at what cost? Still it will never come to that. Why? Because China ALREADY OWNS us. Thanks to the Bush Adminstration Communist China owns 1.5 TRILLION dollars worth of US securities. That's money we have to pay them back, with interest. Thanks to "US" Corporations, the majority of our manufacturing base and weallth generation capacity, has been shipped there. Third, and this already happened about 2 years ago, all they have to do is infer that they are going to get rid of thier reserves of US dollars in exchage for a different currency and the markets will rout. They wouldn't have to fire a single shot because they already have us by the balls.

You see, China was smart. Instead of wasting trillions of dollars on military equipment and unnecessary wars, they spent their money building their economy. They correctly saw that wars are fought for markets and money. So if you control the markets and money, no one is going to stand in your way. And that's what they set out to do, not militarily, but with guile. Ever wonder why China, which spends a measly 80 billion a  year on their military (compared to our 1 TRILLION) is kicking the entire west's ass? Something to think about. Peace.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 14:07 | 1970791 El Viejo
El Viejo's picture

I made only a three points:

Iran has been very agressive with rocket attacks through proxies. It has cost lives and loss of property. They have kidnapped and murdered. Their official line is that they will destory Israel. All of this BEFORE obtaining a nuclear weapon. These are undisputed facts. Israel has never attacked Iran.

A US drone was forced to land by satellite signal jamming. That is how they got it intact. Intrusion across borders have occurred since the 50's by Russians into our borders, the various Scandinavian borders as well as others. We have done likewise to China and N. Korea with the SR-71.  A drone crashed in the Soviet Union many years ago. It is hardly an attack.

Israel will defend itself from Iran. They will attack and destroy the nuclear ambitions of Iran. It's a given. It may start WWIII since Iran is an ally with the Russians who have invaded, coerced, raped and tortured for real its various neighbors, many of whom were able to escape.

Maybe you should get your facts straight. China does not own us. Most US treasuries are owned by pension funds in the US. China, Japan and other countries own US treasuries, this is true, but they all come running to buy more when any crisis occurs. AND we don't even need to sell treasuries. We could just print and spend. There is no requirement to sell bonds like in Europe. We are the owner of the US Dollar unlike the 17 nation states of Europe. They are trapped. Just like we will be to gold if Ron Paul wins.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 15:17 | 1971129 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

El Viejo stated:

Their official line is that they will destory Israel.

I'm disputing it. Do you have anything more to go on than the whole discredited "wipe off the map" bullshit?


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 18:08 | 1971777 fnord88
fnord88's picture

" Just like we will be to gold if Ron Paul wins."


Bullshit. Ron paul is not advocating the Gold Standard, which would be stupid beyond belief. He is advocating using gold and silver as a competing currency to the FRN. Which is all that is really needed. OVer time people would see gold retains it's value better than FRN's, and they would save gold and spend FRN's. Most people here love to carp on about how stupid and evil governments are. As far as i can see, their stupidity is only possible because the sheeple are even stupider.

We do not need or want a gold standard. We do not need or want to get rid of fractional reserve banking. All we need is to stop spending and saving in the one currency.

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 00:58 | 1972820 omniversling
omniversling's picture

With respect, maybe YOU should get your facts straight. Ahmadinejad has not said FIRST that  Iran will destroy Israel. You'll find an account of the controversy that blew up in '05 when he referred to a statement that his predecessor the Ayatolla had made.

There is a a large measure of dissent about the TRANSLATION and INTERPRETATION of what he actually said (whist referencing the speech of the Ayatollah), AND INTENDED TO SAY.  He is on record since denying the accusation 'that he said he wants Israel destroyed. I believe the (disputed) quote was "wiped off the map".

Are you sure that you are not unwittingly repeating the Zionist/US/MSN/Fox narrative, which HAS surmised and publicly stated that he wants Israel destroyed? This is also known as 'perception conditioning' and is used to amp the population to froth for war. Like Colin Powell's kids drawings of Saddam's 'tankers full of mobile germs' that he frauded the UN with before launching 'Shock and Awe'. And Tony Blair's 'dodgy dossier on WMD that could strike London in 15 minutes. It's fiction my friend. It's proven fiction now..

Ahmadinejad claims he wants justice for the Palestinians, (as do I, which doesn't mean I agree with the Iranian REGIME) and is apparently one of the few leaders in the region that puts 'money where the mouth is', at least somewhat more visibly than the Palestinian's surrounding muslim 'brethren'.

So Israel has never attacked Iran? Are you speaking about 'officially'? Obviously not about the covert ops going on there right now...and leaving out the attacks on the 'proxies' that you refer to, who fire desperate home-made unaimable retaliatory RPGs into Israel (usually after Israel has broken some tenuous agreement or 'surgically' assassinated someone/s in a refugee camp from the air, out of range of retaliation in a wholly unfair contest of F-16's and Apaches against sticks). Those often indiscriminate attacks on 'rebels/insurgents/guerillas - call the 'freedom-fighters' what you want, come at a cost of 1000's yes 1000's of 'collateral' innocent civilian lives and maimings.

If you bring up the 'proxies' in this war, let's talk about that proxy theatre, the utterly disproportionate technology of the tools vs weapons that are deployed there, and the actual costs in blood and life.

It's a little off topic, but many threads on this remarkable and unique blog are referencing the subject now, so: I'm watching with interest how the attitudes of some of you 'soft hardliners' will change when the entire US (apart from the designated 'colour of the ex-fiat currency' GREEN ZONE SAFE AREAS for the Owners and Corporatocratic neo-Aristocracy) is an open prison like Gaza. Will you be with the Zionazis, or growing a pair to wave AT a drone that has facial recognition software and Hellcats, as a decoy so your family doesn't get blown to scraps?

Yes, go ahead...print and spend so USgov can engorge the MIC even further...then what? ...bring all those battle hardened vets back to use on the people? Peace...

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 23:49 | 1972670 Lord Koos
Lord Koos's picture

Violence is the first choice of the incompetent.

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 11:37 | 1974048 Big Slick
Big Slick's picture

JW - no one is saying that US is not a force for good, nor that the US couldn't wreak massive pain on an enemy.

I think the point is... if my kid brother knocks down my Lego Tower, sure I can beat the stuffing out of him... but my Tower is still in pieces on the ground.

Iran/China/Russia/etc can cause us big problems, up until the point we wipe them out.  Then we're still left with a burning apartment post-kegger.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 17:24 | 1971634 Barbarians_R_Us
Barbarians_R_Us's picture

"And the thing that few understand is the US wars CAN NEVER END. Bringing home the post Vienam PTSD'ed vets was all one needs to remember about bringing uniformed killers "home" and then disarming them".

Nonsense. SWAT teams all over the country have been practicing for years now how to kick in the door and light up former military. Even trained "killers" can be taken out at a grogy 3:00am with enough FMJ rounds sprayed.

Thu, 12/15/2011 - 18:43 | 1985282 HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

Rifle rounds will go through ordinary house walls. It's easy just to shoot up the place. 10 swat with a Rifle and 10 rounds each can in a few seconds turn anyone and everything into a Spagetti water drainer.


I seem to remember when we ran Saddam's sons into a house that they were firing Vehicle anti tank TOWs into the second floor of the place and that they had to fill up a stairwell and invade the final room the sons and grand son was in. I hear the 14 year old went down firing at US troops.


Compared to the Bin Ladin kill, it was a all day, noisy and dirty affair.

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 00:09 | 1972710 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

@Oh Reg

"Why schmuck? You think they'll be less than perfect?"

Yes, that is what I meant to imply. In a 'military' seaborne engagement the US can flatten any would-be blockade boats. Note I said boats, not ships. Ships wouldn't present much of a problem either but I'll focus on boats because I think the main thrust of an Iranian attempt to obstruct shipping through the strait would necessarily rely most heavily on civilian craft/speed boats/fishing, rather than risk hard-naval vessels that cost a hell of a lot of money, and are virtually irreplaceable (for Iran concurrent with hostilities).

I can conceive of Iran being successful in their goal, but not through practice, or brilliant tactics, or genius admirals. Rather I think Iran could achieve a victory through the moral indignation of the world if the US Navy kills a few thousand fisherman(innocents)/sailors(combatants)/terrorists(US designation of convenience for either one). Mostly a lot of fisherman would die I think, mistaken for... well whatevers.

Hard/Soft Diplomacy, Strategic victory is the only type available to Iran. And I don't think they need any more practice after a couple thousand years in that particular Center of the globe.

But a naval victory? Please.

Just the way I see it. Junk on...

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 00:15 | 1972729 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

One other thought: when the USSR had the US spy plane back in the 70s(?) the world didn't end. These things happen...

WWIII is probably further off than some imagine.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:31 | 1969628 CPL
CPL's picture


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:08 | 1969738 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture



two (2) wrongs dont make a right..

3 lefts do.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:49 | 1969677 wojtekj
wojtekj's picture

Iran is a big country and it's hilly - you should think of Iran in terms of Afghanistan.  I've been to Iran a couple of times and what they have is French, Chinese and Russian technology - they're not really bad.  The morale in the nation is bad but not bad enough to guarantee an easy war.

And they're really active in that straight.  I don't believe they'll close the routes as they'd cut of China though.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:14 | 1969763 Element
Element's picture

But in any post-war regime-change China would loose that oil anyway, so why not go all in to preserve Iran, for China's long-run interests?

It's not just the USA that needs allies there, China needs them too, and I think china will very aggressively claim them.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:29 | 1970066 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

China lacks the ability to project force. They are all bluster. We could never invade or take the battle to them, but it requires a blue water naval force and long range air force to project power. No major power will use a nuclear option.

So, we have bases and the means to secure the Straits while carpet bombing Iran. Iran is full of horse doo-doo. 

It sounds good to their people, but then, all propaganda does. That is the purpose.

It seems the bankers want a diversion in the wings just in case. 

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 17:35 | 1971667 Element
Element's picture

So you've not heard of China's role in Korea and Vietnam?

Or how they kicked the UN/US arse there?

Or how they US carpet bombed them both back to rubble.

Or how the US failed to win.

Or how the US withdrew from Hanoi in complete disgrace, defeated by pissed of rice farmers with Chinese and Russian arms.

The hubris, absurdist over-confidence and the total failure to think outside the box never ceases to amaze.

I'll spell it out, Afghanistan and Iraqi uprising is backed by China and Russia weapons channelled Pakistan, Iran and Syria, who are all proxy supported via China and Russia and every form of economic, political, financial, and military support.

Without any doubt the imperious ultra-aggressive USSA that has terminally pissed-off everyone in sight will lose any proxy war of that nature no matter what it takes or how long it takes.

Iraq was just a minor entre to what is developing - and the US started it all.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 18:42 | 1971849 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Korea and Vietnam have contiguous borders with China. The Himalyas are a bit of a problem. Like I said, we will never attempt a direct land battle, but Iran would nort be that. Proxy battles are only useful when you have an advantage in the environment (jungle/ mountain caves) or a large force of people willing to be cannon fodder. Iran has none of these things.

Further, closing the Straits of Hormuz would give the US a legitimate reason to process the war at any level of power necessary because of oil. They would have the full backing of almost everyone.

The legitimacy of the wars in Iraq and Afganistan have always worked against the US and its' ability to use force. Iran would not be the same.

As for thinking outside the box, you actually think that the US, Europe, Russia and China do not operate under the same powerful Elites? Your naivete is amusing.

Your unwillingness to address force projection illustrates your ignorance on military matters.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 23:31 | 1972024 Element
Element's picture

You're completely wrong and clearly do not have a clue what you're talking about.

Russia has a long border with Iran and they are actively building logistic transport links.

Plus China has a long border with Russia.

Pakistan is clearly re-aligning in China and Russia's direction, and they have a long shared border and active border crossings. They have had them for decades, as this 1992 video demonstrates.

Pakistan and Iran's interests are more and more aligning also and they have a long border.

On top of the direct ground and maritime links in the Caspian, they also share over-lapping contiguous airspace links, and traffic. All the elements for a long-drawn out proxy confict and its logistic support are in place.

Proxy battles are only useful when you have an advantage in the environment (jungle/ mountain caves) or a large force of people willing to be cannon fodder. Iran has none of these things.


This is just beyond stupid, proves you're a complete fucking idiot.

Look up the Zagros Mountains you complete and utter fucking imbicile

Then look up the Iran-Iraq war ... fucking moron!

Iran was heavily militarised by the USA under the Shah, and it was militarised even more after the US hostage rescue mission failure in 1979. Then Iran MASSIVELY militarised during the long bloody war with Iraq, then militarised much more intensively as Tehran watched the US and Britain's 12 year process of starving and smashing Iraq repeatedly, before invading  and slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Iraqis--a massive and still unpunished series of galling war crimes, dressed up as anti-terrorist peace-making. A country that never once attacked the US or NATO!  So Iran militarised all the more again as Israel and the USN continued to threaten it and even occasionally attacked and infringe on Iran's territory, so Iran drew up plans to militarise even more intensively, and actively sought Russian assistence to do so. And the Russian's began to provided it in larger and larger amounts as they fully realised what Bush was doing in the ME.

Iran is a country that has spent the last 33 years facing a complete military wipe-out, and in that time they have been learning and training in the art of modern warfare, via actual hard-core combat experience, and building a broad range of combat skills and capabilities, and developing formidible proxy militias, and a powerful national military capability, and a doctrinal approach that is designed to stop the US and Israel in their tracks if war ever started. They also believe they will succeed, because for them there is no other choice, if it's to be a strategic war. That is a no-holds-barred war to the death. They will more than happily fan and support and participate in an alliance of regional proxy-war forces, and they will be massively supported by Russia and China. They already are!

Russia and China have already openly and directly said they will support Iran if the US and NATO attacks. And the Russians even went so far as to point nuclear tipped missiles at the US and NATO and warned them not to attack Syria or Iran.

Russia warns USA against striking Iran

Russia preparing for war in case of another US aggression in Syria

Then a few days later:

Meeting with the leadership of the Armed Forces


And make no mistake, Pakistan took note of all this and it will cosey up to both China and Russia to help get US and NATO out of the area.

There will be escalating proxy-conflict - because here already is a proxy conflict.

Your unwillingness to address force projection illustrates your ignorance on military matters.


I've addressed Iran's "force projection" capabilities all throughout this thread you tedious fool - they are undoubtedly global in effect and cataclysmic if used.

You're just far too mentally impaired and intellectually under-provisioned to realise any of this.

You're so clearly wrong, in all respects, that I don't think you merit any more replies to your unforgiveable levels of error, and flagrant breath-taking stupidity of 'analysis'.



Tue, 12/13/2011 - 00:12 | 1972695 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Which country has a blue water fleet? Russia, China or the US? 

Which country has an air force capable of moving men and materials to bases already established in the region? The US only.

Which country produces the most weapons and armaments? The US.

Which country has the best Air Force fighters, bombers and C3? The US.

Would Russia or China risk all out war to protect Iran? Never.

What part of the Zagros mountains are at the straits of Hormuz? 

China's border  with Russia is a little north of the conflict zone...

Ship through Pakistan via dirt roads? Great supply line.

Too young to have lived through the cold war? Russia makes threats all the time, unfortunately for Iran, the follow through leaves much to be desired. Russia couldn't contain Afganistan and they were right there.

Pakistan? They might be able to shot themselves in the foot. A useful ally? Hell, they aren't useful to us, why would they be for anyone else?

You are confusing talk with walk. You quote references to weapon movements as if they dictate policy. They don't. Weapons are a business, they pay for a countries own development and supply of armaments. Would a country tell a nation they will stand behind them to insure continued sales? Absolutely. 

Your naive and ignorant of security and policy issues and how they are resolved. 

Force projection requires that you are capable to bring sufficient forces TO THE THEATRE. Understand? Dragging weapons over land or shipping on a maritime freighter is not sufficient. It is also vulnerable to attack or blockade. The Russians did NOT point nuclear weapons at the US- they said they might consider it. Bluff.

Iran has ZERO long range ballistic missiles. How do they become GLOBAL? Because they can hit Israel? Sorry, what state in the union is that? 

You realize that Iraq was supposed to be battle hardened as well, the revolutionary guards and all that? 

You are totally ignorant of how warfare and diplomacy is conducted. You think because banks make money from war, it makes everyone equal on the battlefield. You read a few articles and you think you understand warfare? 

The Iranians are just another country of brown people that will be disposed of according to banker/elite dictate. The Russsians will play along until the last minute as will the Chinese. Do you really think that Iran is as important in any significant way as the US is to the world economically or militarily? 

Have you ever heard of Mahan? Chokepoints? Sea lanes of communication? Do you really think the US has not planned how to handle this? They have been planning for 80 years or more. 

Grow up.

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 01:00 | 1972799 Element
Element's picture

You said;

Proxy battles are only useful when you have an advantage in the environment (jungle/ mountain caves) or a large force of people willing to be cannon fodder. Iran has none of these things.


You ludicrous dissembling cretin; you clearly said Iran has no, "mountain caves".

You also said Iran did not have the, "willing cannon fodder".

You actually claimed; "Iran has none of these things."

Then you have the unblinking gall to come back with this staggeringly dumb and completely moronic fucking kindergarten level questioning;

"What part of the Zagros mountains are at the straits of Hormuz?"


I'll put aside for a moment the fact you said Iran has no mountains, when the whole country is covered in a major mountain belt.  But this question would have to be the dumbest lamest thing I've seen on zh. And right after I posted a link to a high-resolution topographical map of Iran and the straight area, showing that the entire Iranian side of the Strait and of the eastern Gulf is fringed by spectaculer en-echelon walls of mountain ridges;

And if you understood anything at all about that terrain, you would realise that the entire Persian Gulf is a DIRECT result of a crustal structural subsidence, exhibited as a surface depression, abutting right up against the very foot of this massive area of very active mountain uplift, and that the Strait itself is in fact a DIRECT crustal structural response to the IMMEDIATE PROXIMITY of a major deformation zone within that FRINGING mountain belt! Indeed, the entire central Iraq valley is the result of it.

So how much closer could these mountains physically be to the areas of deepest subsidence in the Strait?


These are in fact immediately juxtaposed, with respect to each other, as a contiguous structural crustal and topographical unit!

You fucking dope, you're a joke!

And you expect me to take anything you say seriously, in any way shape or form, regarding policy or strategy or force projection, consequent to this enduring and breathtaking display of monumental stupidness? You take turgid intellectual imbecility to a whole new level! 

You are dismissed, is what you are.


Tue, 12/13/2011 - 09:58 | 1973380 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Again, no response to the use of strategy and policy. 

Well, lets look at the Zagros mountains. Examine the topography:

The first 300 kilometers goes from 50 meters to a high of 1000 meters. This is hill country. Not including the larger southern section that becomes desert and creates a high plateau within the mid section of the country. While there are some mountain peaks , they are part of a ridge that forms well within the country and FAR AWAY from the Straits of Hormuz.

All easy satellite targets. Unless the Iranians are going to haul effective missile systems into the woods on the higher slopes and keep them bunkered, there is nothing here to slow air forces or even ground forces. They can hide in the swamps by Iraq, but that will not close the straits.

The mountains along their north and eastern borders make the movement of materials from Russsia or Pakistan especially difficult and easy to disrupt. The movement of larger  forces to counter western offenses will be made difficult by the same terrain you love to champion. This leaves guerilla warfare- which will not close the Sraits of Hormuz or feed their population.

The US doesn't have to conquer Iran, just control the Straits. You have provided nothing that shows Iran can interdict. Further, with the continued loss of armaments and the loss of easy shipments from China and Russia, it becomes a police action in little time.

More probable is the removal of hardliner and a return of moderate muslim rulers in the western mold. This will end the police action. China will get thrown a bone with oil leases and Russia will get new arms sales.

Let me put it this way: you are saying Iran can defend the entire California coastline from the crest of the Sierra Nevadas. You might want to look at a TOPOGRAPHIC map.

You really don't understand modern warfare do you?


Wed, 12/14/2011 - 07:35 | 1977955 Element
Element's picture

I'm very familiar with methods of modern combat. And I've watched a couple of times during my life, as the US got its very superior arse kicked by peasants, or else, totally failed to meet objectives it set, in the way it said it could or would do something. I saw the 'high way of death', and the Shock and Awe bastardry, and the lies for pretext, and all your techno weaponry gob-shite.

And guess what?

So did the Iranians.

You assume they did nothing about this. Just keep assuming that.

Nice drone thingie by the way - getting a clue?

My familiarity with contemporary warfare of all types leads me to say this; The US is completely out of touch, and possessed of an insane hubris and homicidal intent (yet again), and it is about to get kicked very hard in its strategic nut-sack, in front of the whole planet.

And don't expect any sympathy, you won't get it.

Sycophantic govts may publicly offer shoulder-to-shoulder support, for a time, but the people won't.

And that will be the end of any global alliance with the US, and the sudden onset of full-scale threshold-state nuclearisation.

The rest of the world knows the US policy/strategy schtick - inside and out.

The Russians showed exactly what to do with that US crap, you place scores of H-bombs 90 miles off the US mainland, on IRBMs, and in subs and say, "try it cunts, and we'll glass the entire eastern seaboard, inward to Kansas"

The whole would knows that this is the ONLY language the Pentagon and White House and those Israeli turds understand.

And this is why people who want nothing to do with the NWO's way of doing things, are standing aloof (i.e. 'rogues') and building nukes and long range delivery systems, ASAP.

And extremely specialised and very credible people like Richard Garwin are adamant these systems will always fairly easily overcome any missile defence erected, and will make it to their intended targets.

And if I was them, I would do exactly the same things in response to US policy, strategy and power projection capabilities.

Just as the Russians did.

Of course, the US wouldn't even be concerned if Iran was buying them from LockMart, but because they make their own ... well, that must not stand!

And if you attacked me with nukes, even if it took 50 years to achieve it, I'd fry the ten biggest cities in the US as payback.

And they will.

You're a fool for thinking you will win a battle, or even a campaign of battles, and then you have 'won' a war, because that sort of end of war finality is not going to be possible with the blood debt the US has built. The US has consumed on a massive blood debt, as well, and you will not get to just default on this one sport.  The country you attack is not going to be finished with you, nor all the countries like it.

And even your 'friends' will abandon the US over time, because no one can trust a demonstrated psycho with zero sense of moral conscience of right, and truth, and integral goodness. US actions speak louder than your laughable words.

And the fact that you spend so much on weapons, with respect to the rest of the world, is a pretty clear indication that you realise the world may increasingly turn against you.

Gee, I wonder why they would do that?

And why the Pentagon and Washington in general seem to expect it?

Wed, 12/14/2011 - 07:48 | 1977968 Chump
Chump's picture

Oh give it a fucking rest already you whiny bitch.  Wah wah we'll default and you'll like it.

The US military is essentially a race car with a regulator set at 45MPH.  It's cute you think you have a chance, in a sad sort of way.

Thu, 12/15/2011 - 03:34 | 1982357 Element
Element's picture

No, the US military is your koolaide ... and you're the chump taking a slurp.

Those swine in 1962 were balancing-up if they were prepared to swap a few tens of millions of Americans, to wipe out Cuba and incinerate the Soviet Union with a pre-emptive strike.

Look around, you think the US military is your protector still?

The US military is the US people's greatest threat ... and not just financially, literally.

Thu, 12/15/2011 - 05:21 | 1982433 Tompooz
Tompooz's picture

"The Iranians are just another country of brown people that will be disposed of according to banker/elite dictate."


'scuse me!  I was going to stay out of this discussion, but this goes beyond the normal ignorance I can accept.

Iranians are no more brown than californians and have a lot more dignified history behind them. The ignorant arrogance of thinking that a great people like that  can be "disposed of" will harvest its due karma.

Respect for Iran's people does not imply  support for its current revolutionary Islamic regime. The Iranians themselves will free themselves of it in due time, were it not for Israel and the US doing their utmost to preserve the status quo.

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 01:13 | 1972839 omniversling
omniversling's picture

+1  good post, thanks for the info & good references

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 23:10 | 1972596 binky
binky's picture

The US does not fight wars over oil. The US controls the worlds supply of oil via the reserve currency a.k.a. the almighty dollar $$$. The US fights wars to protect the dollars status as reserve currency. 

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 01:09 | 1972836 omniversling
omniversling's picture

sir, I believe your willingness to discuss the projection of force without including the weaponisation of space, direct energy weapons and HAARP in the reference illustrates your ignorance on contemporary military matters.. 

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:07 | 1969554 achmachat
achmachat's picture

that sounds as weird as saying that the US is practicing how to bomb Tehran.... by dropping bombs on Tehran.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:13 | 1969571 gojam
gojam's picture

It will be very interesting to see what Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, and Oman have to say.

I think the Saudis are the only ones with an alternative oil export route.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:18 | 1969587 achmachat
achmachat's picture

i don't think Iran was planning to make friends with the other oil exporting countries of the region.

it's easy to close the strait for oil tankers, but it's a whole different story to keep it closed if it turns to open military conflict. Even in that case, passage for oil tankers would be impossible for weeks, if not months.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:39 | 1969612 gojam
gojam's picture


I think people are going to find out soon that Diego Garcia is not a Ben & Jerry's icecream flavour.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:04 | 1969959 Ahmeexnal
Ahmeexnal's picture

"When Stalin says dance, a wise man dances."    Krushchev

"When Ogolfer says bomb Iran, the Arab League bombs iran."

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:44 | 1970131 Eally Ucked
Eally Ucked's picture

"And have islamic revolutions in their countries the same day" says Ahmeexnal

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:26 | 1969613 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

I'm leaning towards days, if not hours.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:42 | 1969648 johny2
johny2's picture

I think if the things were that simple, Iran would have already had "regime change". 

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:44 | 1969657 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

And will the recovery pay for itself (again), Assclown?!

Any other stupid uses for billions you'd lke to splurge on while being broke?

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:18 | 1970012 Chump
Chump's picture

Yeah, I could use a wheelbarrow full of cash.  Wouldn't even cost a billion.

Tue, 12/13/2011 - 18:35 | 1976263 Schmuck Raker
Schmuck Raker's picture

Put the mirror back on the wall and calm your gun-jumping ass down 'G'.

Where do you see me talking about budgets?

Where did I express support for anything you seem to think I did?

Knee Jerk...

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:24 | 1969611 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

funny that you say that, Iran's preferred alternative route used to be the pipeline to Syria and the pipeline to the Black Sea

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:32 | 1969631 CPL
CPL's picture

Yes and that route is riddled with Somali pirates if I recall.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:09 | 1969753 Element
Element's picture

Yes, and so far they are not even being particularly aggressive, but are tying up massive naval resources. Imagine if they actually started to make serious coordinated attacks.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:36 | 1969636 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

gojam said:

I think the Saudis are the only ones with an alternative oil export route.

Even if it remains undamaged, that pipeline's maximum flow rate is not enough to make up for an interruption in tanker transport.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:34 | 1970089 Tangurena
Tangurena's picture

The alternative route is a port on the Red Sea. It can only handle about 10% of Saudi's oil exports.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:03 | 1969727 francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

"We sittin' here... I supposda b franchize playa... & we in here talkin' bout PRACTICE... Not the GAME"...

~Allen Iverson

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:24 | 1970623 12ToothAssassin
12ToothAssassin's picture



We talkin bout PRACTICE?

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:39 | 1969642 jekyll island
jekyll island's picture

This just in:  The US will send the John C. Stennis through the straits of Hormuz to make sure it can still fit through the passage. 

In other news, the Fed will practice printing more FRN$, just in case someone will need them soon. 

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:04 | 1969547 DanDaley
DanDaley's picture

Exogenous events, endogenous events...which is which?

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:56 | 1969704 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

Hegemony implies zero distinction.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:04 | 1969550 Irish66
Irish66's picture

cut off

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:05 | 1969552 ns_solanki
ns_solanki's picture

seems like world (US) to witness a BIG constipation problem soon..... courtsey Iran.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:30 | 1969623 Hober Mallow
Hober Mallow's picture

Someone please tell me why doesn't the oil spike with news like these and why equity does spike when a bunch of assholes agree some useless plan in Brussels.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 11:22 | 1970037 Chump
Chump's picture

For the same reason we haven't already seen a magnificent economic implosion the world over?

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:07 | 1969557 Killtruck
Killtruck's picture

Bullish for the Virginia-class submarines!

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:15 | 1969575 Sabibaby
Sabibaby's picture

Tomahawks and silver too!

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:07 | 1969734 Element
Element's picture

Those subs are blue-water operations boats, not a litoral sea boat. The straits are barely deep enough to fully submerge. And if its full of mines, well, just forget it.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:27 | 1969826 Killtruck
Killtruck's picture

I concur completely, but my point was more aimed at the idea that the future of the Virginia class subs (I believe the 4th and 5th block subs have yet to be contracted, but I may be wrong) would be very much secure if war broke out between Iran/China/Russia and the U.S. That's all.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:40 | 1969881 GCT
GCT's picture

Most likely Iran would sink some tankers to block passage through the straits. A coordinated attack on several tankers at once would stop passage for a while.  The straights are not that deep like others have pointed out. 

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:01 | 1970200 Matt
Matt's picture

So, if World War 3 starts, the Gulf of Hormuz will be the only area for naval conflict to occur? GL with that.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:29 | 1969838 hunglow
hunglow's picture

Have you ever been to Ohio?

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:09 | 1969560 Cdad
Cdad's picture

Anyone who thinks that Iran could actually close the a tool.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:17 | 1969584 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

But they have speedboats! I kid you not, speedboats!

Okay, seriously, don't these things kinda look like Star Destroyers?

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:25 | 1969596 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

they do, and they were specifically designed for this kind of theather - and they are comparably cheap - 21st century's Gunboats

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:26 | 1969614 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

They do. They look so cool, I'm tempted to join the darkside. Especially if I get to wear a big black cape and helmet that makes me sound like James Earl Jones.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:39 | 1970387 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

the Italians built something that would be even more effective and cheaper in this strait

the hydrofoil gunboat of the Sparviero Class - currently only used by the Japanese

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:53 | 1969694 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

Ask the widows from the USS Cole how they feel about "speed boats".


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:22 | 1969597 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

Cdad remarked:

Anyone who thinks that Iran could actually close the a tool.

So you're saying Lt. General Paul Van Riper is a tool?

Anyone who presumes that a US "victory" over Iran would be anything other than Pyrrhic is a television-believing dupe.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:37 | 1969638 kridkrid
kridkrid's picture

I know nothing of Van Riper, but I'll hazard a guess.. tool.  What is telling in the article to me... the comparison to Pearl Harbor.  He might be right... and war with Iran may sacrifice the Navy's Fifth Fleet, and that may just be the kind of loss that would rally US citizens to support WWIII (which is actually happening already, we just don't call it that).  When the time comes, we'll rename it.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:23 | 1969604 GeneMarchbanks
GeneMarchbanks's picture

Are you saying that this is somehow out of their capability? Elaborate, please.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:10 | 1969563 machineh
machineh's picture

"Sire -- the peasants have no heating oil.'

"Well then, let them burn euros to keep warm!"

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:18 | 1969588 Ghordius
Ghordius's picture

+1 - a good line, sirrah

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:11 | 1969565 billmill
billmill's picture

Look up Operation Praying Mantis and then add twenty years off high tech weapons development. The Navy held off last time because it was turning into a slaughter.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:12 | 1969566 topcallingtroll
topcallingtroll's picture

Iran is not very smart militarily.

They cant keep the strait closed for one thing.

Closing the strait violates international law and will push almost the entire world behind the americans to "open the strait"

The only way Iran can keep world opinion split is by never closing the strait no matter what.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:19 | 1969591 Sabibaby
Sabibaby's picture

Wow, straight out of Sun Tzu.... If someone like you were a General in Iran we would roll right over you, unfortunately for us they're probably a bit wiser...

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:31 | 1969629 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

If Iran has someone Lt. General Paul Van Riper, who sank the fifth fleet while commanding the forces of a hypothetical Persian Gulf nation during the Millennium Challenge simulation, the jingoistic war girls in Vichy, D.C., are in for a rude awakening, not to mention a bloodied nose.

As far as international law goes (not that it means anything to Vichy, D.C.), I think unprovoked attacks are not looked upon kindly.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:43 | 1969652 kridkrid
kridkrid's picture

I see two possible explanations here.  One is that Van Riper is correct, but leadership wouldn't care as the next Pearl Harbor is exactly what is needed to take the WWIII gloves off.  Second... (and I believe more likely) the US would like Iran to believe it could take down the Fifth Fleet and is even telling them how to try... same end goal, mind you, WWIII.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:01 | 1969719 TheFourthStooge-ing
TheFourthStooge-ing's picture

I hope you're mistaken; I fear that you're not.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:02 | 1969721 Element
Element's picture

Not out of the question, Washington knew that oil sanctions on Japan would force them to attack before they ran out.

The US would be starting a war with China and Russia in this case though (another one that is, after Korea, then Vietnam).

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:14 | 1969769 kridkrid
kridkrid's picture

It was more than just the oil sanctions.  We had been provoking Japan for a long time, but got downright serious about it leading up to Pearl Harbor. - McCollum Memo

No matter what one might believe regarding our advance knowledge of Pearl Harbor, our provocation leading up to Pearl Harbor is without question, IMO.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:23 | 1969819 Element
Element's picture

Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson ... this guy loved his job

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:26 | 1970328 Judge Arrow
Judge Arrow's picture

"Our provocation leading up to Pearl Harbor is without question..." is such a delectably stupid, right from the mouth breather bible comment as to have come from a human product of one of our best schools of higher education where revisionist history is produced like diarrhea in the third world. Japan was INVADING Asia, you freak. The USA embargoed oil to hamper that, you freak. It is loathesome to read the comments here fresh from the US hating revisionists schools of indoctrination - the trained mouth breathers - just get a tent and get to your local OWS where you will be appreciated - well, gee, hold that thought, they were all hosed out of their pigstys by a provocating police.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:39 | 1970385 Sabibaby
Sabibaby's picture

When did Hawaii become Asia??? 

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:50 | 1970433 kridkrid
kridkrid's picture

And from what is your propaganda free opinion derived?  And why so defensive?  Is there something about McCollum memo that you would care to dispute?  Because the facts are on my side.  Now if you want to argue whether or not America was justified in provoking Japan into war... have at it.  I may or may not take up the fight, but to this point in this thread, I have not stated nor implied an opinion on that matter.

The irony that you call me a mouth breather... perhaps that is you.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:09 | 1970546 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Those that own the past control the future.   The Power Elites own and control history.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:38 | 1970689 Chump
Chump's picture

No they don't.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 14:22 | 1970906 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

If they didn't, they would just be Chumps instead of Power Elites.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 14:41 | 1970992 Chump
Chump's picture

False choice.

If they owned history you wouldn't be here talking about it.  QED.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 18:16 | 1971797 Escapeclaws
Escapeclaws's picture

Chump I agree with anything you say because you have the greatest a avatar on ZH.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 21:02 | 1972220 Chump
Chump's picture

Heh.  Personally I'm a fan of Sudden Debt's little running...whatever that thing is.  Suits his style as well.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 20:25 | 1972141 FeralSerf
FeralSerf's picture

Have you ever heard of the Catholic Church and what they did to "heretics" for about 15 centuries?  Have you ever wondered why they went to so much trouble?

I didn't think so.


Mon, 12/12/2011 - 21:00 | 1972218 Chump
Chump's picture

C'mon dude.  I'm not saying the elites don't have a vested interest in power retention (tautology) or that they don't seek to control the narrative by revising history.  I'm asserting that they don't control, outright, history's story.  If they did, and let's stick with your example, you wouldn't be wondering at anything.  You'd only know what "they" decided you're allowed to know.

The elites are not winning here.  They are desperate.  They are putting up a bitch of a fight, and it will get worse.  But they are not omniscient nor are they omnipotent.  Not even close.  Don't give them unjustified credit.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 10:11 | 1969759 JoBob
JoBob's picture

BTW, Stooge, it's Washington, DC, NOT "Vichy, DC" You must be confused in your interpretation of the facts.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 13:13 | 1970574 Uncle Remus
Uncle Remus's picture

I see the subtlety of history remains elusive.

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:57 | 1969707 GMadScientist
GMadScientist's picture

The entire world...minus China and Russia and...

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 09:12 | 1969567 max2205
max2205's picture

9/11 only took place to bail out the Saudis. Times up for them and they can feel the deflation pain. Oil at $30 would be a nice hurt threshold then down to $15. We can all ramp up after that I think

Mon, 12/12/2011 - 12:16 | 1970280 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

fiat currencie is dead andd youwant the world's most important resource for $15

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