This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Iran Outlines Key Steps And Actors In A Potential Straits Of Hormuz Closure
While the Iranian war game naval exercises have been ongoing for almost five days, or half of the projected 10, tensions in the Straits of Hormuz region have been rising culminating with today's interchange between the head of the Iranian Navy and the US 5th Fleet (which for various reasons we can not present you with a status update today). One question that remains is just what would a closure of the Straits looks like. Luckily, the Middle East Media Research Institute's blog has caught a release by an Iranian website Mashreq News, which spells out the step by step details of just how such a closure would be enacted.
In response to threats by Western countries to impose oil sanctions on Iran, the Iranian website Mashreq News, which is close to Iranian military circles, posted an article on December 15, 2011 outlining military measures that could be taken by Tehran to close the Strait of Hormuz should the regime choose to do so.
The article enumerated the forces and weapons that Iran could employ in such a military operation, including fast attack craft carrying anti-ship missiles; submarines; battleships; cruise and ballistic missiles; bombers carrying laser-, radar- and optically-guided missiles; helicopters; armed drones; hovercraft; and artillery.
It stated that despite Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's statements that Tehran would not initiate a military confrontation but would retaliate harshly if attacked, "there is no guarantee that [Tehran] will not launch a preemptory strike on the civilian level, for instance through cyber-warfare or by means of economic pressure, including by closing the Strait of Hormuz and cutting off [this] energy lifeline for an indefinite period of time." It added, "Should additional sanctions be imposed on Iran, especially in the domain of oil export, Iran might keep [its] oil from leaving its territorial waters."
In a further threat, the article stated that Iran would in the future be able to attack the 480-km pipeline with a capacity of 2.5 million barrels/day[1] that the UAE is planning to build in order to bypass the Strait of Hormuz in order to neutralize Iran's ability to disrupt the world's oil supply: "As for the plan... to construct a [pipeline] from the UAE that will be an alternative in times of emergency in case the Hormuz Strait is closed, we should note... that the entire territory of the UAE is within range of Iran's missiles, [so Iran] will easily be able to undermine security at the opening of this [pipeline] using weapons to be discussed this report."
In accordance with Iranian doctrine, the article pointed out that these weapons would actually not be necessary because there would be suicide operations, and added that "the faith of the Iranian youth, and their eagerness to sacrifice their lives, will sap the enemies' courage."
Despite statements by Iranian government spokesmen, including Oil Minister Rostam Qasemi and Foreign Ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast, that the closing of the strait is not currently on Iran's agenda,[2] Majlis National Security Committee member Pervez Sarouri said that the Iran would be conducting 10 days of naval maneuvers, called "Velayat 90," beginning December 24, 2011, to drill closing it.[3]
Satellite view of the Strait of Hormuz connecting the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman
Kayhan editor Hossein Shariatmadari, who is close to Khamenei, called on the regime to announce immediately that Tehran would close the strait to vessels from the U.S., Europe, Japan, or any other country participating in imposing oil sanctions on Iran.[4]
At a press conference on the subject of the Velayat 90 naval maneuvers, which commenced on December 24, Iranian Navy Commander Habibollah Sayyari said that his forces would be capable of closing the strait if asked to do so.[5]
It should be noted that Iranian officials have previously threatened to close the strait as a means of deterring Iran's neighbors and the West (see previous MEMRI reports from 2010, 2008 and 2007).[6]
The following are the main points of the Mashreq News article on closing the Strait of Hormuz.[7]
Fast Attack Craft
The article stated that since it first introduced fast attack craft for use in the Iran-Iraq war (1980-1988), the Iranian navy has immeasurably improved the craft's "ability to face advanced enemy combat vessels, much less cargo ships. These boats are equipped with sea radar systems; advanced electronic communication systems; sea-to-sea cruise missiles, both short-range – 25 km – and medium range; medium- and large-caliber [sic] torpedoes; and naval mines, along with traditional means of warfare – including semi-heavy machine guns, missile launchers, and shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles. These sea craft are capable of blocking the Strait [of Hormuz] for a brief or an extended period, and of facing enemy warships trying to open the route.
"In addition to their high speed and abovementioned equipment, these sea craft are highly maneuverable. Their ability to operate at night, aided by the requisite accessories, as well as in stormy weather, has been demonstrated repeatedly in recent years, in maneuvers both minor and major. Their successful record includes stopping submarines from countries beyond the [Gulf] region that aimed to cross the Strait of Hormuz, and supporting [Iranian] submarines threatened by enemy warships in the Indian Ocean... Iran has various types of naval mines, both stationary and remote controlled. This weapon [i.e. the mines] may, if necessary, be operated by Iranian boats and submarines [located at] various points in the Strait of Hormuz and the surrounding waters."
Submarines
The article continued: "The Iranian navy's acquisition of submarines... some 20 in number... has rendered it more powerful than the navies of the [other] countries in the region. Iran's submarine craft can use torpedoes, mines, and missiles, and can remain submerged for weeks in order to accomplish a mission. Apart from the Russian Kilo class submarines, the Nahang, Ghadir, and Fateh class submarines have been pre-fitted for the waters around Iran, especially the Persian Gulf... These submarines can remain stationary in the water and can evade various enemy radar and sonar systems...
"The Kilo class submarines can carry 24 mines or 18 large torpedoes, while the Fateh class submarines can carry 12 torpedoes and/or eight mines. In addition, there have been reports in the international media stating that Iran has equipped the Kilo class [submarines in its fleet] with Hoot torpedoes...
"The Ghadir class submarines can also successfully participate in the operation [to close the strait]... [These] are small submarines manned by one or several people. Known as 'wet submarines,' they are used for commando operations, laying mines, and firing torpedoes... and can operate in narrow and shallow areas."
Warships
The article stated that "Iran has various classes of missile ships, warships, and destroyers. These marine craft are capable of launching four 'Nour' anti-ship missiles, which have a range of 120-170 km, [even] over 200 km. Additionally, these warships' 114mm and 76mm guns... can threaten various [types of] ships. [Iran's] warships can [also] threaten submarines while simultaneously operating together with the rest of the [Iranian naval] force in closing the Strait of Hormuz."
Anti-Ship Cruise Missiles
It continued: "We divide Iran's missile force into two groups: cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. They possess a wide variety of ranges and destructive capabilities. Coastal launchers for Kowsar short-range missiles and for Nour and Ghadir missiles [with a range of some 200 km] have so far been displayed, and the Naser-1 medium-range missiles are launched from Qare'a triple-barrel missile launchers. These launchers are independent, meaning that if they are deployed near the coast, they could detect and identify naval targets and attack them without the need for supporting systems from [Iranian] air and naval units.
"These systems can cover most of the Strait of Hormuz if deployed and camouflaged 70 to 150 km deep into Iranian territory, or even in the Kerman province [in southeastern Iran]. The Iranian armed forces possess these systems in abundance, and they are ready for deployment."
Ballistic Missiles
The article noted: "...Thus far, three types of anti-ship ballistic missiles have been displayed in Iran: Khaleej-e Fars, Tondar, and Sejil. Khaleej-e Fars missiles, with a 300-km range and a 650-kg warhead, are designed to destroy enemy warships. The missile can be prepared for launch in a few minutes due to its use of solid fuel and advanced guidance systems. It strikes the enemy ships from above, traveling at Mach 3, reaching [the target] in a short time and at an acute angle.
"The triple-barrel launcher for these missiles provides sufficient firepower from the first launch; it increases the operational effect of the missile, while decreasing the enemy's ability to retaliate. Based on photos of the missile, it uses an electronic guidance system, which ensures its effectiveness even against the enemy's electronic warfare. The missile's speed, angle of approach, and impact from above are effective points in its modus operandi. We can estimate that the enemy's chances of intercepting it are miniscule.
"The Tondar missile, whose range is estimated by experts to be 150-250 kilometers, operates alongside the Khaleej-e Fars missiles as a short range ballistic missile... and their combined operation can significantly raise the chances of hitting the target... The [Tondar] missile can cover the Straits of Hormuz from deep inside Iranian territory. The Khaleej-e Fars missile can cover the Western Sistan-Baluchestan area, the Kerman province area, eastern and southern Fars province, and all of the Straits of Hormuz."
"The most terrifying of all Iranian missiles is the Sejil long range missile. It has commonly been considered merely a surface-to-surface missile, but the armed forces recently announced that it can also be used to destroy naval targets. Although not much is known about the missile's guidance and targeting systems, the missile has shown great accuracy in hitting a predetermined target. This missile, with a range of 2,000 km, can reach speeds of Mach 8 to Mach 12 (2,700-4,100 meters per second)... Its warhead weighs at least 500 kilograms, helping it to destroy the target. This missile can be used to cover regions beyond the Strait of Hormuz even if deployed on the northern Iranian coast, or at the most distant point in northwest Iran. It is a two-stage rocket powered by solid fuel, and reaches great speed at the end of the first stage [of launch]. It is difficult for the enemy to detect and track it during the first stage, because it uses several methods to reduce its radar signature... Thanks to its high velocity, the chance of it being hit by enemy defense [systems] is even smaller than the chance that they will hit a Khaleej-e Fars missile.
"Such missiles would be launched from deep inside Iranian territory because scattering launchers over a larger area will make it difficult for the enemy to detect them, will limit the means the enemy will be able to use to destroy them, and will also allow the launchers to be relocated and re-camouflaged.
"Although the enemy is much more likely to detect lower-velocity missiles... the combination of the use of these weapons in areas both closer and farther away from the shore and the increased number of targets... can maintain their effectiveness."
Bomber Jets
The article stated: "Iranian fighter jets can carry various types of air-to-surface missiles that can operate against naval targets, including air-to-surface missiles with optical, laser, and radar guidance; Nour and Ghadir missiles adapted for aerial use; C-801K and C-802 missiles; as well as Kowsar and Naser missiles. [Iranian] Air Force jets can carry up to five such missiles.
"Additional missiles for naval targets include: limited range TV-guided Maverick missiles; Qassad-1 and Qassad-2 optically guided bombs with a range of 30-50 kilometers (Qassad-3 bombs, with a range over 100 kilometers, will become operational soon); and Russian-made KH-25 and KH-29 missiles with laser and optical guidance, which can be mounted on Su-24, Su-25, and MiG-29 jets. Their range is 10km-30km, and they have medium destructive capabilities.
"In addition, KH-58 long-range anti-radar missiles, which can be mounted on Su-24 jets for attacks on enemy warships, will play an important role in closing the Strait of Hormuz.
"The array of missiles and bombs with varying ranges will assist Iran in operating remotely against enemy frigates and warships."
Helicopters
"The Shahed 285 helicopter can carry Kowsar anti-ship cruise missiles, and Mi-171 helicopters can launch Nour long range missiles, and apparently Ghadir missiles as well. These helicopters, along with Cobra attack helicopters, can threaten merchant vessels and enemy warships."
Flying Boats
"Only one model of flying boat has thus far become operational in Iran. In fact, it is a new type of plane that can land on the water, and can be equipped with anti-ship missiles. This boat can take off from the water, from various points on Iran's coast, and can operate against enemy warships together with aerial defense."
Drones
"The Iranian army drones are used for anti-ship missions. The Karar drone can carry four Kowsar missiles. Due to its speed, the drone can increase the potential energy of the missiles and extend their range. The drone has a range of some 1,000 km; it is launched by a rocket, and when it reaches the correct range, it launches the missiles. Karar drones can carry dozens of missiles to the enemy warships.
"The Karar drone is made from materials that allow it to evade radar detection and get close to enemy vessels. Nevertheless, the drone can also use missiles like Naser-1, for large areas."
Artillery and Surface-to-Sea Rocket Systems
The article also claimed that Iranian security officials several times pointed out that guided bombs are actually being used against moving naval targets. It said that the range of Iranian artillery shells is over 40 km, and that they can be used to harm or destroy enemy ships. It added that during maneuvers, Iran had successfully utilized the Fajr-3 and Fajr-5 rocket launchers against naval targets.
Endnotes:
[1] Reuters.com, November 21, 2011
[2] Sharq (Iran), December 15, 2011; ISNA (Iran), December 14, 2011. An article on the Mardomak website, which is operated from outside Iran, stated that the closing of the strait was an empty threat: "As long as Iran's economy is dependent upon oil, and the export of crude oil passes through the Persian Gulf, the closing of the Strait of Hormuz will remain [nothing but] a verbal threat... Even if the tension between Iran and the U.S. increases considerably, the closing of the strait will not be an option. Iran will respond to the pressure by other means." Mardomak.org, December 22, 2011.
[3] Fars (Iran), December 13, 2011. The oil minister denied reports that Iran plans to close the strait as part of the exercise. Mashreq News (Iran), December 16, 2011.
[4] Kayhan (Iran), December 13, 2011. In addition, a group of Majlis members circulated a petition defending Iran's right to close the strait in response to oil sanctions. Kayhan (Iran), December 19, 2011.
[5] Yjc.ir, December 22, 2011.
[6] See MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis No. 615, "Iran Demonstrates Its Deterrent Strength in Military Maneuvers," June 14, 2010, http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/4372.htm; MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 2029, "Iran Threatens to Close Strait of Hormuz If Attacked," August 19, 2008, http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/2842.htm; MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis No. 407, "Iran's Response to Western Warnings: 'First Strike,' 'Preemptive Attack,' Long-Range Ballistic Missiles, 'Asymmetric [Guerilla] Warfare,'" November 28, 2007, http://www.memri.org/report/en/0/0/0/0/0/0/2465.htm .
[7] Mashreq News (Iran), December 15, 2011.
»
- 41351 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
I have a different point of view than most ZH's on US war post-WWII. The sin in Korea and Vietnam especially was the willingness to sacrifice US infantrymen, our boys. When, however, you evaluate the accomplishment of shifting strategic goals, our 'establishment' has done rather well. The goal of a localized war is never the goal described to the public. This isn't a tin-hat theory. It is the reality which always is elucidated by events when the war is over, elucidated by fairly mainstream historians.
You jokers make me laugh.
All Iran has to do is put ONE mine in the straight, fire ONE 'missile', or shoot ONE projectile at a Tanker or US Warship. LMAO.
Then, this happnes.
A seawolf submarine or 2, or 3 or a los angeles class or 2 or 4 start putting Iranian naval ships on the bottom of the ocean, this will take ONE 24hr period until they do not exist.
ONE or TWO or THREE Aircraft Carrier battle groups start destroying land based targets, at minimum - 1000/day.
The US Airforce starts launching strikes against Iran at 1000/day.
In just ONE 24 hr period, Irans ability to attack ships in the straight is reduced by 98%. The rest is taken care of over the next week or month.
China and Russia will do exactly NOTHING.
Where do you even begin to get these nonsense numbers about the operational capacities of US air squandrons on a US carrier? 1000 targets/day?
He said two or three carriers; the main limitation is inventory of steerable weapons and look down targeting; the numbers may be slightly high; I'm not sure; but how many targets do they have? Basically, he's right. if you have the location you can make the missile launch facility go away. and you can cerntainly make the surface ships go away.
Even if you had 2 or 3 carriers (and the US won't risk putting a carrier in the Persian Gulf unless things get really sticky), they simply don't have the weapon inventory or number of strike aircraft in a US carrier wing to engage in anywhere near this level of operational capacity on a daily basis. Let's also disregard the operational losses the US would surely suffer if it hits some of the more heavily defended targets. It would need a massive supplement from the US Air Force to begin approaching that kind of operational strike capacity on a daily basis.
Roughly 35 strike fighters per carrier is about all you got out there. Before attrition.
A Carrier Battle Group can lay down some whoop ass sure... but 1000 per day max sortie?
errrm.....
I have sat in BWI years ago when they would stack the incoming tin 30 seconds apart. The take offs are given so that they will be shooting the gap between two arriving jets.
Hell looking out the window while landing to see a 737 charging at you moments after you crossed it's runway while still in reverse power...
I say we will never know the true numbers. Only those who have a operational need to know in battle will. And maybe someday we will read about it in books.
Are YOU serious? One aircraft can take on 5-8 targets PER sortie and fly AT LEAST 2 Sorties, more like 4 PER day, UP TO 8!! Add in at LEAST 100 Tomahawk missile strikes\day, add in what the Air Force can do and lets not forget submarine launched Tomahawks. We can EASILY strike and hit and destroy 2000+++ targets per 24hr period. Id bet drones ALONE could strike 100 targets per day. LOL!!
Wishful thinking.
U.S. has been supplying this "enemy" with military hardware through China and probably needs to build it up for 1-2 more years for optimally profitable war.
OK, I'm joker and I do agree with you about the mighty US military power.
Are you going to stop all human life around Hormuz and PG after you have finished this awesome display?
If not, then we got trouble, tankers are slow moving fat highly flammable bath tubs, no need for a billion dollar war ship to get the bonfire going.
And I think there will be a few highly pissed off Persian who will risk a potshot on a tanker just to make a point.
But the good thing is, don't need so many of them in the post war economy and the US has a trillion dollar "defence/security" budget to protect those tankers against the evil ragheads that are left.
Iranians have everything to lose in a war with US, but also the damage to the world economy will be "significant".
So leave the mullahs in peace building their flying boats and bragging about how macho they are, who cares!
Concur, Russia and China have no interest in getting involved in this shit show militarily, nor will they. I think we can draw this that oil goes up-- I think it's a strong investment; We know gold is going up over the next year.
Realistically, Iran poses no real military threat, however, the US cannot afford lengthy occupations-- and we know it. That being said, No world powers can compete with the US militarily in anything like a conventional war (or "unconventional operations" for that matter in the gulf, due to the US military's ability of power projection)...
history seems to show us that war is a great opiate and distraction and the US loves its wars...
I'm not so sure Russia/China will do nothing this time....they are very irked at the US...and they know that this is not REALLY about Iran....it's ultimately about the continuing Cold War to retain dominance over R/C.
If you really want to read a good book on this topic and actually want to learn something instead of most of the kneejerk comments here, pick up TANKER WAR: America's First Conflict with Iran, 1987-88
http://www.amazon.com/TANKER-WAR-Americas-Conflict-1987-88/dp/193203384X
So do we need to get into what Hezbollah just (JUST) did to Israel in Lebanon? With itsy-bitsy anti-tank missiles?
War is like going to divorce court: forget what you thought you knew, you are rolling the motherfucking DICE, people.
that's actually an important part of the discussion. Where do you think the itsy-bitsy missiles came from? They don't grow on olive trees. We know where they come from; there's lots and lots of evidence as to where they come from; for free; Hezbollah is just another way to spell Iranian Secret Service.
How do you think has been supplying with Iranians with Silkworms and upgrades for Exocets they had in stock? Russian and Chinese.
I wonder if we are seeing the beginning of the New Normal for Eurasia: A bloc of Russia, China, Iran and (gasp) India that is tied together by pipelines and cash, and in whose sphere of influence the US military is not welcome except as an honored guest in rare invitational joint exercises. Afghanistan and Pakistan being the only wild cards left. Europe is 'colonized' by Gazprom, as Germany has basically already been, and is thus neutralized.
Maybe a shot doesn't need to be fired in the Gulf to establish this new frontier. Maybe no one informed the US Fifth Fleet PR flacks.
What does Israel do then? Nothing much, I guess.
Perhaps the US has simply outlived its usefulness in Eurasia. Except by setting a good, moral and democratic example of course. Oh and pluralistic, that's important too eh?
Just ruminations under a fell moon. Not hating. Actually it's a huge opportunity for us to rebuild at home. I hope we take it.
"Hezbollah is just another way to spell Iranian Secret Service."
I should know better than reacting to this re-spouting of MSN demonization, but just for your education let me point out that if it was not for Israel's invasion of the Lebanon in 1982, there would not exist any Hizbullah.
Hizbullah started as a local south Lebanese villagers' (who happened to be Shi'a) resistance movement against the Israeli occupation.
It has gained strenght as a political party as the rest of Lebanon was weakened by its never ending (because constantly re-ignited by targeted assassinations) civil war.
Yes, they have gained Iran's admiration and support because of their unwavering resistance to the zionists, but to equate them with Savama is laughable. When Iranian support is broken, for whatever reason, they will still be a major force in Lebanon.
And more on the new US sanctions themselves, which aim to 'suspend the laws of supply and demand' while dancing a pirouette on the head of a pin balanced on an elephant's tail while riding the whirlwind, or something to that effect.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/28/world/middleeast/iran-threatens-to-block-oil-route-if-embargo-is-imposed.html
Maybe that's why Iran thinks it can sabre-rattle; the chances of the US scaring up 'replacement' oil from the likes of Angola (?!?) just by jawboning are basically nil. Thus the sanctions are stillborn and Iran can crow all it likes. Unless both sides make fatal mistakes...think I've seen this movie before...
Meanwhile a quick savage spike to the USD to dampen the oil markets....easy enough for the Fed/JPM/GS....and by the way whack PMs as 'collatoral damage' AKA buying opportunity....
Lotta stink in this fish.
one would assume the USA would use high altitude spy planes, satellites and stealth Aircraft to decimate any vessel the Iranians attempt to launch.
our subs would take their subs out in under half N hour Since we are currently tracking their positions , quite possibly from satellites or airborne assets
I cannot fAthom using vessel based 20th century technology
the iranians would get their asses kicked
these assholes can't even build the bomb without outside help, something the USA accomplished in the 1940's
So then why are they such a big scary monster that frightens the living shit out of the United States?
b/c the Tavistock Institute media and politicians SAY SO!!!
All hail the Mighty PNAC!
Shutting down Hormuz would be a bad move from Iran. They would only isolate themselves even more, it would however benefit Saudi Arabia they would be able to provide higher production and cover Iran's production.
imperatore.blogspot.com
Iranians are producing roughly 2.5M per day and the Saudis & the Gulf states combine have nowhere near the reserve capacity to make up for the shortfall if Iranian oil stop reaching the market. They would struggle mightly to fill even half of it and doing so greatly diminish some of the longer-term oil production.
I really am pretty disgusted some of the posters on here who so seemingly advocate so strongly for war and aggressive conflict vs. Iran. Disregarding the carnage and lost lives this would mean including US serviceman, you would hope they would have enough common sense to realize this would have a pretty awful impact on their daily lives economically too.
Unfortunately, loads of people are easily convinced that going to war is somehow in their best interests until their sons/husbands (now daughters and wives) come home in boxes/horribly mangled mentally & physically and they have to deal with negative economic repercussions that come from war (inflation, potential shortages, etc).
They just want Mooselims gone, methinks, peaceful though they may be. /sarc
We have been doing that for years now.
Our VA is processing about 500 vets per day instead of about 140 before 9-11 happened.
I must say that they have a done a damn good job of it too.
And on a related note, the insignia of the USA's newest nuclear aircraft carrier, USS George H. W. Bush (no, really):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CVN-77_insignia.png
so. bad.
Have you ever heard the story of Prescott Bushs' heroics in WW1? If you have not, I suggest you research it, some folks really have no qualms with making shit up to further their career.
Thinking a successful closure of the Straits does not need to be a full scale military action.
Probably what could count as a win would be Iran causing a diversion or significant slowing down of shipments.
All they need is for tankers to be too scared to make a run through the Strait.
I am guessing a nice burst of AP rounds from even a fast attack boat would cause sufficient damage for tankers to want to steer clear.
Straits are not that deep, especially in the shortest part between Oman and Iran. Looks something like 75-100 metres. Apparently, there have been incidents of submarines (US Navy - Same team) bumping into each other and with other boats.
Situation could unfold in too many ways.
Here's one: Imagine we get a little accidental mash up and an incapacitated sub washes up close to the Iranian shoreline and the US Navy sheepishly asks for a tugboat out to Oman. etc etc.
All I can say is did China give Iran any of these ?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-492804/The-uninvited-guest-Chine...
Reminds me of Saddam's promise to unleash the "Mother of all Wars" just before he took his flea infested ass into his spider hole/Andy Gump.
Better send Cheney over there to negotiate a peace deal or the bankers and defense elites will not get their war.
Why the fuck is the US so hell bent on starting wars all the time??? This is ridiculous to say that Iran can't have nuclear reactors. Did anyone bomb America when we were developing ours???
Read:
http://www.amazon.com/Simple-Wealth-Mr-Andrew-Costello/dp/1463523017/ref
read "Iron Mountain report" if the question's not rhetorical.
You folks have NO IDEA the US military capability, a single B1 Bomber carries 24 JDAMS, so 10 bombers = 240 DEAD targets, 20 B1's = 480 and 30 = 720! We have MORE than that and that is PER sortie.
B-52's carry 12 JDAMS and we have PLENTY of those.
B-2 Bombers - we have plenty of these.
F-117 stealths - plenty bitchezz!
Drones - we now have literally hundreds of armed drones, a full on drone strike can destroy between 250-500 targets and possibly 2X that!
Sea Launched Tomahawks, if we wanted to, we can put 300-500 Tomahawks in the air in 24 hours off of our naval surface ships and submarines.
And I havent even talked about the power of Naval Air off of Carriers AT ALL, nor I have talked about land based attack aircraft from oh, idk, THE USA, UK, Turkey, Saudi, Israel, Afghanistan, DC, etc etc.
We have 2 Carrier Battle groups right outside the entrance to the gulf, another one nearby, another one by the med -- ALL WITHIN STRIKE DISTANCE OF IRAN.
Just 2 Carriers with 70 Attack aircraft at 5 targets each = 350 Dead Targets. These targets are less than an hour or two away. How many sorties can be flown in a 24 hour period??? HMMMM??? NOW DOUBLE THAT because our pilots are super fucking human and can bend time!
Our military is designed to fight CHINA if we have to, or RUSSIA, we have the ability, and resources to strike 10,000 Targets in a weeks time, EASY!!! GET A FUCKING CLUE ALREADY. THe USA is NOT TO BE FUCKED WITH, WE WILL HUNT YOU DOWN AND KILL YOU WHILE YOU SLEEP ON CHRISTMAS IF WE HAVE TO.
We will land Stealth Motherfucking Drones in your country just to see what the fuck you are up to!!! WHO DOES THAT SHIT MAN?? THE FUCKING USA DOES.
Iranian navy wont last 2 hours. Airforce? 2 days max. Land based defensive weapons? 24 hours. Offensive weapons 1 week MAXIMUM - these estimates are conservative.
"THe USA is NOT TO BE FUCKED WITH, WE WILL HUNT YOU DOWN AND KILL YOU WHILE YOU SLEEP ON CHRISTMAS IF WE HAVE TO."
ladies & gentlemen, your tax $$$ at work.
bill1102inf led off some incoherent frothing with:
Somebody's been jacking off to the military channel again.
I have to agree. One thing you dont want to do with the US is wage a true military war. Guerilla style terrorist wars are a different story.
You will enjoy life in Dyess Texas.
Those Bones are awesome around dinner time. Just pour a little fluid under your cup so it does not rattle off the table.
I recall Carter killing the B1 program. I cried because at the time they were meant to carry cruise missiles. No penetration of USSR needed, just lob them and go away. USSR had a fit for a while.
But even then, I did not know and still dont know the true genius and cunning at work in the Skunk plant. And those who make the thermobaric to burn the caves after 9-11.
It's the People with the moxie and a strong burning patrioism to see our Nation through it's time of war that makes such things happen.
Just keep in mind we don't have too many of these assets. What is used must be used wisely.
Some of you have mentioned that we are anxious to have a war. We are not particularly eager to see war but have made and continue to make ready as if war happens and our homeland gets dragged into it via conventional bombing or nuclear.
Say, do you hang your model airplanes along the same wall of your Justin Beiber posters at the foot of your bed or do you just hang em' in front of the window or under your roof sky light? I bet you stick those glow-in-the-dark star sticker thingies on ur ceilings too....
Hilarious. Our F-117s have been mothballed.
Persians "Die with your boots on, if you're gonna die" bitches! There will be no closure of the straits.
memri.org is site run by the mossad....be careful with what you read.
hero
Tyler,
pay attention.
If you are a Friend of Israel, Mossad is not your problem.
...as long as you don't mind them spying on you and manipulating your internal politics.
Insanity.
Can't wait for all the biologicals,cobalt 60 and manufactured lethal plague.
Humans do not deserve to live on this wonderful planet.
There is a place called Fort Detriek in Maryland. I believe it is a deep lab that contains some really nasty shit that can destroy a human being in ways that will make death a welcome embrace.
Lots of military talk on the blog today. Most of it done by asses that probably know finance but obviously know NOTHING about the US military (I am a recently retired officer, and War College grad). FYI, in a war the Iranian Navy and air force will be gone in a nanosecond. Period. Our allies cannot keep up with us, let alone enemies. Navies are BY FAR the most expensive military machines, and it takes decades to develop ships and doctrine to fight and win sea battles. Do you even know how many navies can do underway refueling? Or in-flight refueling? You can count on two hands. You idiots think that a Criscraft doing 60 mph would be hard to take out? Are you fucking serious? Do you know what a single F-18 can do? In a single sortie?Or a helo? The guy that made the comment about subs is correct. Our entire national defense is predicated on subs because they are the only things we have that cannot be taken out in a first strike. Aircraft carriers are like Jutin Bieber.....cute and get all the press. But subs are why you sleep well at nite. ANd they do more than launch nukes. The Iranians will use UNCONVENTIONAL warfare. Just like Saddam did. Their Navy will be NOWHERE to be found. Like their Air Force. It it flies...it dies. If it sails....it fails. Simple as that. They know it. They will block the strait, and cause oil prices to skyrocket. But they will be destroyed in the process. They know that too. Fuck with people's money, and even friends will become enemies. We drastically overspend on our military, but guess what: you get what you pay for. My guess is that if war comes, we will initiate combat, if necessary. And the carriers will be FAR, FAR away. But not the aircraft....which are light years ahead of anyone. The Serbs and Iraqis thought they had a modern air defense against us. Have you ever studied what happened to them? The israelis also know how to take out air defenses, quite easily. Ask the Syrians, they'll tell you about it. Iran is NOT homogeneous. They have a serious internal problem with keeping their young folks happy (which they aren't), and their oil fields (and entire economy) would be set back to the stone age. Their leadership has their hands full, and war would be suicidal for them, painful for us. That is why they are trying to make a nuke. I pray we do not get into another mideast war, the next one is on Israel and the rest of the world. We have done enough bleeding. Let the rest of the world do some now.
DB, 100 percent accurate.
Come on DB. You know the obedient crum sucking Goy will do all the heavy lifting for the Zio thugs.
Lieberman/Levin/McCain lead the charge!
I agree... for Iran this situation is likely all about asymmetrical actions. Why fight a game you know you would lose. The only way for Iran to score a win is to keep up psychological pressure. If Iran does try to do some damage and they can't back it up they lose the psychological edge and the game is up.
It's like how North Korea has been doing it. Keep making loud noises here with a bold but not major move here and there to extract concessions from the world.
Of interest though is how does Iran ship the bulk of its oil. Pipelines to Asia or via tankers.
Another point of interest is how many allies does Iran really have in the Middle East. They have been in a state of siege, in particular with their ideological/religious enemy: Saudi Arabia (Sunnis who happen to be allied to the US). Syria is an ally, but currently have their hands tied. Lebanon is an ally at the moment with the Hezzies dominating.
--
Yes, it's a similar mentality as in North Vietnam, even when you had 700,000 persons on the ground, and tanks and MBTs, along a narrow land border, and Arc Light, and early LGBs and TV guided bombs and missiles, but it all still failed miserably .. and the North knew it would be smashed to rubble, but it believed it was right, and must win, no matter what.
Whereas the approximate opposite was true of the US side.
Which is the same sort of backdrop we see right now in this pending stupid pointless unwinnable war.
And that's why Iran will fight th west, and we will lose, no matter how much we devastate the military hardware and civil/Islamic state.
And I'm one of the few civilians you'll encounter who does know about refuelling capabilities of various countries, and ranges of platforms, sensors, defence networks, advanced comms architectures, delivery systems, payloads, weapon delivery modes -- you name it. And a load of assorted research that I probably shouldn't know of at all.
I read between the lines of what you said, and I can see you're worried about where this will go, when the US expends all this effort, ordinance, debt and blood ... and the rag-heads just keep coming.
Despite all I know of western and eastern systems, this is how it's going to pan out. They are going to defeat the west, because Russia and China and Pakistan and Syria and lebanon and much of Iraq, will actively assist them.
The initial battles will mostly go the US way, and like you said, the Iranians will close the straight down, and do a lot of other damage as well. That antiship ballistic missile tech they have (that I posted yesterday) imagine that hitting export terminals, all over the region, with similar precision and energy.
Not just Iran goes into post bombardment chaos, the entire region, then the entire world, flips into post bombardment chaos.
--
--
I could say the same thing about any country on Earth, it's the same in the USA, the NATO alliance in general. Has it prevented them from fighting?
Not a bit.
Kuwait was thus slammed back into the stone age ... the primary damage was gone after about 2 years.
Iran will wait us out - it has no choice but to do that, so they will.
--
--
And again I could say much the same things about any country on Earth, and it's the same in the USA the NATO alliance in general.
Has it prevented them from fermenting and participating in war, at every turning?
Not one bit.
Enjoy reading your post this evening.
I'm wondering if you have been taught the principle of "Full Spectrum Dominance" at the War College.
That's what this is all about...one cannot view these developments only within a military action/reaction bubble...the military leaders are too intertwined with the money-powers and do their bidding to maintain energy/dollar dominance.
I hate how our military is used for these purposes. I hope that the troops are beginning to understand that they are being USED by the banksters/MIC for profit and energy dominance.
And please don't call me a passifist-hippy. I am anything but that! I simply believe in the Founding Fathers' ideas about foreign policy....which in NO way resembles the current foreign agendas of TPTB.
Thanks for your service.
FSD not emphasized or even taught with emphasis anymore in Norfolk since Colin Powell left in neo-conservative disgrace. Circling back to the old "Theater Control" or "Containment Management" dogmas rising from our Afghanistan fiasco "dork think". Almost like Vietnam's lessons have been lost in time.
FSD is not emphasized at the war colleges. Taught, but not emphasized
Everyone's focused on the wrong teams and the wrong targets. Let me give you folks an alternative scenario.
It starts with an Israeli mine, most likely a nuclear dirty one that will permanently close the straights and be blamed on the Iranians as a military accident or better yet, a rogue Bosnian group supported by the Iranians. A few more nuclear detonations by the Israelis, blamed on Iranian military incompetence, will get the Iranian populace in the proper mood for revolution. Arms will be supplied to the revolutionaries from Saudis and Europe via the Turks and Jordanians. Iran, Syria, and Iraq will be a bloody sectarian battleground and an economic mess. They will essentially go back to the 12th century. Infrastructure ripe for reconstruction controlled by the Saudis and paid for by oil money they will dispense. Kuwait and maybe Qatar will act as investment bankers and sectarian-neutral political leaders in concert with the Saudis.
The US will stay offshore in the Indian Ocean and only attack in defense if the Iranians can clearly be seen shooting at Americans way out in the Indian Ocean. No US troops to be landed on Iranian soil.
Saudis will clean up the straights. The Russians and Chinese and US will be eager to come in and clean up the mess, for a price and maybe some oil as Saudi contractors once their safety is assured by the new regimes created in all three countries. Borders may be re-written to fix the sectarian issues.
At the start of the conflict India will invade and take out Pakistan with US and Chinese blessing. We immediately pull out of Afghanistan and it returns to normalcy and political irrelevance.
Korea is immediately united and the PRNK is taken out by the Chinese in exchange for annexing Taiwan.
The US will immediately invade and take over Venezuela. Oil problem solved and we're out of Eurasia.
Everyone wins except the extremists. The Israelis become established friends of the Saudis.
Nice Machiavellian plotting. Like it.
But you lost me with the bit that implied Saudi and small Emirates stay aloof, untouched and functional.
India takes-out Pakistan ! ... with China's blessing!
I took that part as an abortive attempt at black humour, as I'm sure you realise that won't happen.
<sarc>And I would have used TEPCO contractors and Japanese in general to clean up the straights, as they're known to be invulnerable to any level of irradiation. </sarc>
Venezuela?
Have you seen the Topographical map where it borders Columbia lately?
Nah no need to invade just ship that annual gift of heating oil back to chavez.,
They might try to put Iranian missiles into Vene...that will place our Gulf Coast in direct threat. Something that will not and cannot be tolerated. We have too much important shit down here.
Colombia will help the US. They know that the longer Chavez stays in power the higher the chance of their political instability. They also know that if we put things back right in Venezuela they will win economically. Things are going well in Colombia now (I was there on a survey trip in August) and they don't want a communist anarchist Che Guevara wannabe like Chavez ruin the stability they have achieved now that they've gotten the drug lords out of the insurrection business.
Peru, on the other hand, may be the problem state to watch.
Iranian missiles are already in Venezuela. They've been there for about 3 months. East of Maracaibo. The early reports of Iranian technicians shipped directly from North Korea to the Venezuelan jungle bitching about the humidity were picked up almost 8 months ago. Their Farsi stood out over the Spanish in the intercept bundles. Easy pickings for the puzzle palace boys.
The Chinese have always believed that allying itself to Pakistan was playing second fiddle to the Russians who have a strong alliance with the Indians. They also know now how unreliable and mercurial Arabs are as partners who at the drop of a hat will turn on them. The US, of course, has never been able to fathom that characteristic of the Pakistanis, just like the Russians failed to appreciate in the 80's.
If the Chinese can get in a peer ally position with Russia in the eyes of India, then they can win through better trading of products, etc. They'll drop and abandon the Pakistanis in a second if New Dehli agrees to give them peer status as an ally with Russia. India would love Russia and China currying their favor since the sucking of the proverbial financial milk through the Western tit via outsourcing is beginning to taste sour and unreliable.
The Saudis will try to stay above of the fray unless directly attacked. If they do attack, they will be brutal, to say the least. They want to be viewed as the saviors of the region, bringing common sense and modernization to the region and the devastation of Iran and Iraq back into the civilized world through their graces. For that contingency of violence from the zealots in Tehran they are stocking up on F-15's and ordnance. The ground component will come from Iraq forces, whose memories are still aflame of the past war. The Saudis are too smart to get involved on the ground.
Liked the Tepco comment. We'll need all our radiation workers here once Barry has to announce to the sheeple in the US that the contamination from Fukushima has reached our shores in Alaska and Washington in the next few months.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45800485/ns/technology_and_science-science/#.TvyOOtSvhsA
The Chinese don't need to go via India to obtain an aligned peerage relationship with Moscow.
It's not as if India is in a superior position with Moscow in that regard. India has been drifting away from Russian aerospace and naval purchases, and back toward western and Israeli sources of new tech for years now. Plus India as always seems more interested in a neutral/independent 'non-aligned' status, than an aligned one.
The US has been trying to get much closer to India for the purpose of strategic alignment, and the Gillard Govt over the past two months has now completed what George Bush began, and effectively demolished/abandoned core principles of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, simply to enable uranium sales to India - a non signatory. Something that absolutely should not be happening under that treaty, when America and Australia are signatories.
This Western NPT policy collapse is about courting and neutralising India strategically plus also to meet India's pre-requisite terms for greasing the wheels of increased trade interactions and investment - but not a true alignment. Moscow could not get that, and Washington (and Beijing) won't get it either. The Indians simply cherry pick what they want and walk away if you attempt to get them to sign anything binding.
At the same time, Moscow has already sold most of its best existing aerospace and naval technology to Beijing, so it's obvious these two countries already have a close cooperative strategic relationship of sorts.
What more can Beijing really expect or gain from existing relations with Moscow?
Rather, as I see it, what's really happening is the Russia of 15 years ago that needed to sell its tech and systems, to any big buyers who wanted it, due to the need to preserve its own defence industry, so it could develop and replace its own rapidly approaching obsolescence, has now done that. Thus the Russia of 2011 has preserved those industries, and developed its new tech and platforms and is now bringing them into service.
But what did China do with the Russian tech? The Chinese either built under licence, or reverse engineered the Russian systems (and then exported it). And the Indians, Malaysians and Indonesians, who also bought the Russian hardware, are not entirely satisfied with its maintenance needs, operational availability, and reliability. Hence immediately after Malaysia bought Su-27s to replace its aging Mig29 fleet, they enquired if the US would now sell them the (supposedly inferior) USN Superhornet? And Washington's answer was a clear, no, we will not sell you the Superhornet. The Malaysians already had a single squadron of F/A-18Ds for about a decade, and know these aircraft are far more capable, integrated and reliable that the former Soviet Mig29, and their 'new' Su27s.
But Washington offered the Superhornet to India! ... and India had the cheek to decline it! ... opting to pursue Eurofighter and French Rafale ... they simply refuse to become strategically beholden to any one power-bloc ... and they want to use this aloofness to open doors to the latest technology and its transfer. And that is working for them ... so far.
But Russia is in a better economic and political place now, and it can afford to be more selective about the terms of arms sales, and its client base for the release and transfer of new-gen weapon tech that its preserved weapons industry can now go ahead and manufacture. The Russians are also well aware of how the Chinese tried to develop and acquire stealth tech to leap-frog them, with the J-20 and other new developmental Chinese platforms, sensors and systems.
So no matter what the Chinese or Indians do, the Russians are going to be more circumspect in protecting their IP, and in transferring advance new hardware. And especially to try to keep it out of western hands. So they're not going to be as willing to share it with basically non-aligned states, like India, nor a mercenary IP predator and duplicator and re-exporter like China.
Thus your scenario of India taking out Pakistan with Chinese support to obtain peerage with Moscow, makes little sense to me, as their strategic aims and needs already overlap in many ways.
It's clear that Pakistan is becoming a major export customer for Chinese aerospace tech between 2015 and 2025 and Beijing will not want to cut the throat of a geo-political client state they can arm and use against the West's intrusions into the region.
You also need to realise that for China to become any sort of actual globalised great power (rather than just the large regional power it is) it needs a far-flung great alliance with other significant states (like the US has, and the Brits once had, via exploitative colonialism), and a sympathetic political architecture and world-view.
i.e. such as the alliance the US is rapidly pissing away via its repeated irrational acts of war-criminality from a puppet Washington 'leadership', taking orders from a financial elite that actually has no interest in the USA remaining a superpower via maintaining a like-minded global political alliance. Hence the US alliance is getting weaker, due to its abysmal leaders, and it's not clear there will be another global actual superpower once the US finishes blowing its own foot off. This is because the necessary pre-requisite political and economic defence alliances and sympathetic world-view and trust simply won't be there, for either Russia, or China, or India to build such an underlaying alliance for one of those to emerge as a replacement global superpower.
China however is much too arrogant and offensive plus completely cut-throat and untrustworthy and clearly is not interested in a genuine democratic processes, so it not going to become a global superpower, as no global alliance will form around that. You won't get a great global alliance via betrayal of your potentially best and closest neighbouring client state, like Pakistan.
India is too aloof, disinterested, introspective and opportunistic to become a global superpower replacement.
Russia is too geographically and politically isolated and off to one side - and it always has been. The US fought WWII across all oceans (as the Brits couldn't) but Russia fought WWII across rivers and lakes. The US is globally mobile and Russia can't achieve and maintain that level of dynamic.
The US (and NATO) only 'succeed' to remain a global superpower for as long as everyone wants it to be, for when that ends the US becomes a large regional power again, like before. And Europe falls apart. What will happen is the US alliance's fringe will fray and disassociate (as we already see all over the world), and the US will continue to loose policy influence and cooperation for its serial dumb acts, and will concurrently face ever-growing obstruction, undermining and proxy-combat, as opposition from other regional powers increases.
Plus if India smashed Pakistan with an all out attack--what then? Occupy and annex it to become India again? No chance. Not to mention that dozens of Indian bases ports and connective urban area would be nuked in the process.
No way are Beijing and Moscow going to go along with that for transient or peripheral reasons.
Scenario: Obummer waits until Iran blocks Hormuz meanwhile skyrocketing oil prices at the pump. Americans call for bombing of Iran to ease our pocketbooks. Obummer gets huge political support and Ron Pauls dreams are crushed. Welcome to the 2nd term of Obummer.
In this crazy world, I wouldn't rule this out...unfortunately!
I don't think it's that simple, though. This would be a huge world war....it would possibly escalate to nuclear very quickly, and we can't rule out retaliation (or false flags) on our very own shores.
It makes me shudder....
Most folks don't realize this, but the Iranians have a very adequate military capability. If NATO Inc. attacks, there will be a tremendous loss of life on NATO's part. If it happens, it may well go tactical-nuclear. Since NATO inc. is going to shut off Iranian international banking access, they will retaliate. Why hasn't a pipeline been built to bypass Hormuz? Because NATO INc. wants to own these camel jockeys. Barry wants a war, but the Iranians have the capability to whack his ass. Be careful what you wish for, Barry, your puppetmaster is setting you up...
Keep in mind whenever reading material from MEMRI, that this organization is zionist sponsored, and most famous for the intentionally distorted misquote that Istael should be "wiped off the map."
This company is going to be in for a hard landing if the 5th fleet needs to lay down some pipe, there'll be a glut in the Persian glass market: http://www.persianglass.co.uk/
It´s always a cakewalk but then it drags on for years costing trillions of dollars. I don´t see how the U.S. can afford another adventure at this point.
The Western MSM just don't get it, or rather, they don't want to get it, or they're not being permitted to get it;
ABC Australia Online reported, this morning;
It's not a case of when, or if, but the fact that the West HAS fully expanded its oil and financial sanctions against Iran's "oil and financial sectors".
The point is, we're already fully escalated - the next escalation involves combat operations, and as we saw with the drone incident, the preparations for this are well-advanced, and in motion.
BBC Online - 22 November 2011
In other words, Iran isn't just saying IF you do that, we will then do THIS.
Iran is saying that you HAVE already done that, to the maximum extent and damage you can muster and inflict, and because of this clear act of outright geopolitial and geo-strategic aggression, we're about to perform a major an lasting demolition of your own energy supplies and markets, as a form of sanctioning of the West, if you don't immediately cease and reverse your passive-aggressive geo-political behaviour and escalation.
And the MSM simply isn't putting that very clear and obvious message out there, for the miffed distracted public to see.
The Iranians could hardly be any more blunt with their message, at this point.
And there can be no question at all that Washington, London, Moscow and Beijing, all understand with 100% clarity exactly what Iran is saying it will do if it does not see actual de-escalation of sanctions or embargo.
And if this is not fully de-escalated there will be a major regional war, that will literally draw in every major power on earth, and become a world war, within just some few weeks - maybe 3 weeks, maybe 10 weeks, maybe 15 weeks, but soon.
I want to re-emphasise, Washington is acutely aware of what they've done to Iran. And of exactly what Iran's preparing for, and that it's delivering its final series of warnings of what's about to happen, if Washington and Israel do not immediately quit and roll-back their attack plans.
And I want to emphasise that Moscow understands all of this equally clearly, and it definitely will act to stop a major strategic war from taking place on its southern flank, and if it can;t prevent it, it will seek to win it on terms that Russia can accept.
And that implies USA and NATO out.
And a very large chunk of the region's population want that, and will do almost anything to get it.
Get yourself ready -- this is what the real-thing looks like.
Don't ever forget or let anyone else forget that the USA, NATO, and especially Israel, under a banner of human rights, anti-authoritarianism, and an extreme, and also extremely hypocritical and irrational anti-nuclear weapon proliferation dogma, deliberately fermented WWIII;
In order to:
1) Eliminate or disregard actual natural 'human rights' and common dignity and decency, in practice.
2) Exert genuine authoritarian fascist control
3) And as an excuse to actually use WMDs, in pre-emptive 'defensive' attacks, to prevent a cataclysm - when in fact, it is itself the very essence of the pending cataclysm.
--
Western civilisation is OURS - we created it, we built it, and it is ours.
It is not the bankers and political sychophants to wreck and butcher, for speculative paper profit and public asset stripping, whenever they combine together to hatch a foul plan, to do just that, while pretending to be both the attacked 'victim', and the ultimate 'good-guy'.
If you ever had a reason to call your elected or unelected overseers, and to engage in unlimited civil protest using any methods you feel appropriate and effective, to express it - now is the time to do it.
And if you ever had a reason to prepare for the collapse, now is it -- because as a culture, and a society and as a civilisation, we're running-on-empty in more ways than it's possible to literate.
I couldn't agree more! You really hit the nail on the head. This analysis fits in perfectly with the Engdahl book I am currently reading, "Full Spectrum Dominance".
Now that I know the REAL truth behind the geo-political-military machinations, I can honestly say that I don't blame Iran and Russia for their stances.
I never thought I would utter these words, but, I am truly ashamed of the Western world. Wow....that hurts!
Bravo.
Iran is not a push over, like Iraq and Afghanistan were..with their Russian made s300 and possibility the newest s400 missile system... air superiority by Amerika and Israel is not likely.
After all Obama army is in their backyard...how would anyone react to that type of intrusion..it would be view as possible end of their existence...they will fight like dogs to the very end...i know i would too.
Iran does not have S-300 not even s-400.
war pigs won't stop until they start something
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZCyOWLrRTE
Big Oil Provokes IranDecember 27, 2011 — Dean Henderson
Iran’s PressTV reported that on Saturday Iran’s Navy launched a ten-day exercise dubbed “Velayat 90” covering an area from east of the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Aden. The drill comes on the heels of the downing of several US & Israeli spy drones – the latest provocation by the West against Iran.
The Russian newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta says Iran has the capability to close the Strait of Hormuz. Such a maneuver would send oil prices skyrocketing.
Oil-rich Iran has been in the crosshairs of the Illuminati banksters and their Four Horsemen oil cartel (Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell) for well over a century.
(Excerpted from Chapter 1: David Rockefeller & the Shah of Iran: Big Oil & Their Bankers in the Persian Gulf…)
In 1872 British Baron Julius du Reuter was granted an exclusive 50-year mining and communications concession in Persia by that country’s Peacock Throne monarchy. By 1921 the British government had installed Shah Mohammed Reza Khan in a palace coup. [1]
With their puppet in place, du Reuter’s firm, one of the British Empire’s most important tentacles, busied itself exploiting the rich oil reserves in what is now known as Iran. The Anglo-Persian Oil Company grew swiftly, first changing its name to Anglo-Iranian Oil, and later becoming British Petroleum (BP).
Prior to WWII du Reuter’s BP dominated the Persian oil patch. Following the war Britain dumped its puppet Shah in favor of his yet more pliable son Shah Reza Pahlevi, whose Nazi sympathies were less overt. By 1943 the US had established a military command in Iran and signed the Tehran Agreement, cutting the US half of the Four Horsemen a generous slice of the Iranian oil pie. [2]
Iran was coveted for its expansive reserves of crude and remains the most geopolitically strategic Middle Eastern nation, bordering both the unprecedented Persian Gulf oilfields to the south and the vast, largely untapped Caspian Sea crude reserves to the north.
After World War II the Iranian people became increasingly hostile towards Big Oil and their puppet Shah. Anger was especially prevalent among oilfield workers of the Khuzistan region who formed the main constituency of the Tudeh (Masses) Party.
In 1951 Tudeh formed a coalition with the National Front Party and elected Mohammed Mossadegh Prime Minister of Iran. Mossadegh, who first campaigned against Soviet occupation of northern Iran, became a vocal critic of Four Horsemen control over Iranian oil. He soon announced plans to nationalize BP interests in Iran. [3]
BP responded by organizing an international boycott of Iranian crude and called on two long-time associates for more drastic measures.
US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and his brother, CIA Director Allen Dulles, both worked for the Washington law firm Sullivan & Cromwell before joining the State Department. The firm represented BP in the US. [4]
After failed negotiation attempts in Tehran with the populist Mossadegh led by Averell Harriman and Vernon Walters, the Dulles Brothers took charge of a joint CIA/MI6 smear campaign painting the Iranian leader in the most brilliant colors of Red. When this anticommunist rhetoric failed to convince the Iranian people to turn on their popular leader, a military expedition was organized.
Financing for the CIA coup, code named Operation Ajax, came from Deak & Company, founded by OSS operative Nicholas Deak. The company was the largest currency and gold bullion trader in the US after WWII and financed CIA adventures in Vietnam and the Belgian Congo through their Hong Kong gold monopoly.
Operation Ajax was led by H. Norman Schwartzkopf, father of the Gulf War General of same name, and Kermit Roosevelt, grandson of President Teddy Roosevelt. A palace coup led by Shah loyalist General Fazlollah Zahedi was organized in 1954. Mossadegh was deposed and the Shah flew into Tehran from exile in Rome seated next to Allen Dulles. [5]
The Four Horsemen had their puppet back in the National Palace. Kermit Roosevelt stayed in Tehran, his CIA Deputy Director of Plans income soon augmented by a new job as salesman of military aircraft for Northrop Corporation.
In 1952 the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) published a report detailing collusion and price-fixing on the part of the Four Horsemen. Titled The International Petroleum Cartel, the report detailed secret production quotas, joint ventures, marketing agreements and other evidence of collusion.
The Justice Department responded to the 1952 FTC report by bringing an anti-trust case against the US faction of Big Oil. Exxon, Mobil, Chevron, Texaco and Gulf hired Sullivan & Cromwell, but the hotshot lawyers were never needed.
Ten days before the coup against Mossadegh’s democratically-elected government, President Eisenhower dismissed the FTC case on national security grounds. Ike granted the Horsemen immunity from prosecution, while his envoy former President Herbert Hoover traveled to Tehran to help Big Oil and their puppet Shah establish the Iranian Consortium, which consisted of the Four Horsemen and French oil giant Compaignie Francaise de Petroles (now Total Fina). BP held a 40% share. [6]
continued here:
http://deanhenderson.wordpress.com/2011/12/27/big-oil-provokes-iran/#more-1576
Great info! If this does not convince people that the bankster/energy sector TRULY rules the world through Western military dominance, then I don't know what would.
A great book to compliment this info and to further illustrate how this Iranian situation plays into the broader goal of maintaining dominance over Russia and China:
"Full Spectrum Dominance," by F. William Engdahl
Reading the threads it appears everyone thinks it'll be a toe to toe naval fight, with a knockout in round one for America due to superior technology and capacity.
That would be totally dumb, you're missing the point. All Iran has to do is mine a 10km wide section of the straights traffic lanes. Then harass efforts to clear the mines.
e.g.
http://warfare.ru/?linkid=2403&catid=331
Actually I've been warning people about the reality of these mines and other shock weapons. I suspect people just can't get their head around the fact that none of it's fiction. These mines also have anechoic appliques, that absorb sonar and also EMS wavelengths so you get almost no warning, or else, actually no warning ... then this happens.
A warhead from this sort of torpedo based weapon can literally blow a 7000 tonne DDG in half.
RAN Frigate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBydeP-5jKw
USN Destroyer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=beU3sExN1BA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBSixrh4G_4
[Both ships were sunk by an Australian SSG using a Mk48 torpedo, but it demonstrates what torpedo warheads do, they detonate under the keel to blow a large cavity open in the water under the keel, so that the ship falls back into it, thus structurally sheering it in half and the collapse of the cavity blasts the bottom and the decks upwards. The ship sinks almost always. There are very few munitions that can sink a DDG with just one hit. These are probably the most dangerous and effective conventional naval weapons there are. Australia also uses the latest version of the British Stonefish III torpedo (stonefish is a fish that literally looks like a rock, but kills you if you stand on it http://www.barrierreefaustralia.com/the-great-barrier-reef/stonefish.htm ), and the Mu90 EuroTorp, which both can act a self-deploying, or air, ship and sub and missile deployed sea mine. We've a large stock of the most advanced ship-killing stealth munitions, including latest blocks of the JASSM cruise missile. Hostile fleet sails within 3000km of Oz ... won't survive even out at that radius.
Iran can probably reach similar radius with a comparable weapon.
But a USN F/A-18F MTOW can not reach out to Iran from that radius.
Nor can a Tomahawk from a DDG.
Which leaves the Sub, which is also put at risk.
These torpedo mines are better than subs because they can be layed (swim to) scores of locations that are hundreds of kilometers apart, and sewn by just one sub if neceassary, but they can potentially take out most of a fleet. They also have loitering oceanic modes ... with 12 months of deployed life ... before self destruct (sinks quietly to bottom) or self-recovery occurs. You think you won the naval battle, but six months later you lose 2 DDGs and a CNV.
The USN has never had to deal with this class of weapons being used, especially in a bluewater open-ocean setting at a 'safe' radial distance from all the ruckus.
There is no safe radial distance when your opponant has a ballistic missile capable of launching a satellite.
The torpedo mines can be launched from ships, fishing boats, subs, or aircraft.
They can even be deployed by the score via BALLISTIC MISSILE or cruise missiles.
The idiots beating the US war-drum don't realise what an arse-whooping they're potentially in for, and how shocking the losses may be.
I suspect everyone who wants a promotion, and their day in the sun, is just blowing happy-crappy smoke-rings up Barry and Hil's arse.
The Commander Peace-Maker in Chief eloquently explains how he's lost half a fleet with the Secretary of Bitch standing beside 'The One'.
Mission accomplished.
Straight closed.
Not only that, but you can't go anywhere near it again any time soon ... Iran then explodes a nuke for some punctuation.
Now what Barry? ... Hil?
Oh yeah ... Washington really thought this through - NOT
But Iran did
As noted US minesweeper fleet is weak
FUCK! FUCK! FUCK!
These cunts are more equipped than the Taliban!
The USA would see its battleships sunk like the Bismark. One thing I learned, is that bigger targets are not as effective as many smaller attack vehicles. Like ants on a Tiger. The Tiger is overwhelmed.
It would take weeks for the USA to shift their equipment.
Or they could lob a nuclear warhead or two. They did it to the Japanese to save thousands of soldiers lives. The public bought it. So they will do it again.
The obvious, cheaper solution would be to reroute the oil, using roads, pipelines, etc. But don't tell the Nobel Peace Prize winner.
"It strikes the enemy ships from above, traveling at Mach 3, reaching [the target] in a short time and at an acute angle" - Sounds like the fiat Ponzi scheme... who is next in line? :-)
Price of CL says Iran has cried wolf one too many times..yawn....non event
A couple of U.S. subs is more than sufficient to take out most of Irans Navy. Stealth bombers, cruise missiles, and drones will take out any land assets, and navy / marine fighters will project air superiority. Iran knows this and is just talking BS. The last thing they want is to lose a battle with the U.S. as it would lead to a government coup. Allot of Iranian citizens are not to happy with the government.
Yea, but but how do you stop a handfull of guys and a couple of Zodiacs?
They only have to get lucky once.
First of all - almost all the vehicles of the Iranian military discussed here are worthless against a ready US Naval Force.
As an x-naval office who has served in the gulf I can tell you:
No aircraft will surivive in the air longer than it take time for their landing gear to retract.
None of these Soviet era subs will ever put to sea - our subs can hear the cooks heating up breakfast pierside - each sub is an artificial reef in waiting the moment it leaves the pier - and all the sailors on it now it -
Fast attack, hovercraft and naval forces will never leave port - as they will be destroyed pierside - and if they do venture out - they'll have minutes to launch their cargo - and if they manage to launce they'll never get back to the pier...
There is simply zero way the Iranians can conventionally take on the US Navy - their only hope is to:
**Convert civilian ships into mine layers and drop russian made pressure mines in the straights - mines built to detect certain classes of ships and then denoate. Mines are a real problem even for the US Navy...
**have countless mobile and fake - Surface to surface missile batteries along the coast - and only fire them in salvo's hoping to overwhelm American anti-missile defense.
** Long range homing torpedoes that can be launched from shallow hidden fixed underwater positions - the straights are 36 miles wide at points - I am sure the Russians by now have developed a long range (10 mile) wake following torpedo. Setting up a battery of those a few miles off the coast at 100 feet could cause a nasty surprise.
** Pre-position military outside of the conflict zone to attack US ships and interest caught off guard or in port - i.e USS Cole -
** Be tactically defensive but strategically offensive - a defense in depth - where the agressor is drawn into a trap of attrition -
They only need to damage a Carrier (would never sink one - I served aboard one and they are almost impossible to sink unless you can hit one with at least four 1,000lb torpedoes) - or maybe sink a Cruiser or Destroyer - America of the 2010's is a bully hits hard but doesn't like being hit - you take out just one Cruiser and 200 sailors Americans might actually start asking WTF - is happening - what the Arab world needs is a "Tet" offensive - a tactical defeat but a strategic victory.
i served on a carrier as well, but never drank the same koolaid they had in the ward room. (they call it bug juice on the 2nd deck) we almost sank when someone turned the wrong valve. carriers are protected by the integrated tactical shield that all ships in the group provide, but the Persian gulf is very small and creating a radar picket line around these ships is more difficult. incidentally a chinese submarine was shadowing one of our carriers in the pacific a few years ago. these ships have little or no defense other than their air wing, but of course several together can effectively keep a radar picket line going 7/24. i don't doubt that we have superior firepower, we certainly have a lot of it, and there is no doubt we would take out their air defenses first strike and set up the no fly zone, which is the purpose of all this.
and Iran would be reluctant to release the full fury of their weapons until they were sure the US had committed, first strike means everything, and the US has the advantage in that respect. Iran will never strike first, and that is where all the advantage lies. a gradually escalating conflict suits the US capabilities best. i'm sure its all mapped out all the way to Tehran, cakewalk I, but no boots on the ground this time, just perpetual bombing until we achieve regime change.
the unknown isn't some tactical weapon, its what the other than good US allies would do. would NATO join in? would China take the other side? would Israel provoke an escalation? thinking about all those carriers bottled up in the Persian gulf gives me cause to pause. and none of these units are really battle tested. and after years of putting airwing offices in charge of these ships it makes me question their readiness (see USS Enterprise Captain removed from duty, sex tapes).
All those U. S. ships sitting in a bathtub. Sounds like Pearl Harbor!
One of the issues that hurts the USN ability to win a major engagement is the VLS air defence system's 128 cells (on US DDGs) are used for several other compelling purposes. And this increases a ship's multi-role capabilities, but likewise reduces its survivability to organised attack and counterattack. US VLS is a fantastically flexible and fast-launch system but the fact that it is so multi-purpose, and fast, quickly leads to growing vulnerability, as missiles are used up, especially within such closed-shallow confines, close to Iran's coast, and its steep hinterland. A VLS pack consists of 32 vertical launcher 'cells'. There are 4 of these VLS packs on US DDGs, for a total of 128 launch cells.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_launching_system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke_class_destroyer
This is how the cells may be utilised;
1 CELL per SM3 plus new SM6 extended-range missiles - less than 500km range, some DDGs can shoot down LEO satellites, or intercept exo-atmospheric ballistic missiles in space, a necessary missile within the Iran context.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-174_Standard_ERAM
1 CELL per SM2 a long-range air defence missile with less than 160 km effective range, to kill bombers, maritime patrol aircraft, fighters, drones, cruise missiles, glide bombs, ballistic missiles, and can attack ships and land targets on shore - an essential missile necessary missile in this context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-66_Standard
1 CELL can also contain a total of 4 ESSM medium-range missiles with less than 50 km effective range, to kill anything in the air, or to hit specific parts of other ships, fast boats, or maybe a periscope - an essential missile in this context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESSM
1 CELL per RUM-139 VL-ASROC - short range torpedos launched via missiles, that drops into the water up to 22 km away, where they can kill a sub, or deposit as sea mines - a very necessary offensive and defensive weapon in this context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RUM-139_VL-ASROC
1 CELL per Tomahawk TLAM cruise missile for stand-off precision land-attacks - again a critically important attack weapon in this Iran context http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_%28missile%29
--
Thus the limited 128 VLS cells which were initially envisioned during the cold war to provide a rapid-fire SAM launch mechanism against dozens of incoming anti-ship targets, simultaneously has evolved into a multi-role offensive system for many other purposes, but thus reduce the fleet's air defence capability.
And because VLS is so rapid-fire, the limited available cells allocated for actual air defence, can be emptied very fast. It is a system that can fire a missile every second.
On top of this the USN uses a fully-automated networked robotic 'cooperative' missile engagement system that makes all the decisions, because humans simply can't detect and classify and fire fast enough to cope with waves of attacking missiles. So the automatic engagement system will usually allocate and launch at least two missiles to fly-out to engage every 'hostile' incoming contact.
So if the Iranians throw 10 waves of 10 cheapish and more plentiful decoys at the US DDGs (100 decoys, with 10 incoming each minute) and these are electronically indistinguishable from real anti-ship missiles to a robotic missile engagement system, that system will respond accordingly and try to smother them with at least 200 missiles. Of course the Iranians will mix the decoys in with some actual anti-ship missiles, so the radar system will see some hits and debris that are real to trick it into acting as though all the incoming contacts are real missiles.
Thus the rapid-fire VLS also rapidly empties its cells. So now most of you VLS cells allocated to air defence are empty. And the USN still don't know for sure if these were decoys or the real thing. They may think it's over. Then the Iranians do it again but the US cooperative engagement system finally runs out of SM2 and ESSM missiles.
Only 20 minutes have passed since the first VLS missiles were fired but all you have left is the close in weapon systems (CIWS) to defend the fleet from a real air attack.
Now the Iranians do it again, only now they mix in the decoys with more real anti-ship missiles at a 50:50 mixture. Now they finally start getting one or two hits, because the US defences can no longer cope with so many fast targets at very close range.
30 minutes have passed
Finally, you send in the fast attack boats and make the next wave 100% anti-ship missiles - hundreds of them - from shore-based truck launchers, from jets, and from small boats - from multiple directions.
45 minutes have passed
All DDGs have been hit multiple times and are all burning or else burning and sinking, an LHD has capsized, and the CNV is burning furiously.
The Iranians then send in several waves of unmanned boats, that can also fire missiles, and are packed full of explosives to try and finish off whatever remains afloat.
At the same time Iranian targeting drones are now able to enter the area within 10 km of the ships, and provide real-time target cue data, so that within minutes the CNV is hit by four ballistic missiles and torn open from stem to stern by secondary explosions. It begins to list and settle in the water as three small boat explode at the waterline with shattering force.
--
The problem with VLS is there's no 'magazine' from which to reload VLS cells. Once the SM2 and ESSM missiles have been used up (in as little as 10 minutes) you become easy pickings. A US fleet has a lot of VLS cells but it is at least theoretically possible to set up an elaborate attack by decoys where the DDGs and cruisers are bled of missiles, to the extent that within as little as 30 minutes, the entire fleet must beat a retreat to the nearest port to reload the VLS.
VLS can not be reloaded at sea. It's been tried using elaborate mechanical systems, but it's too dangerous. The only way VLS can be reloaded is to go back to a properly equipped naval base, tied up to a pier, else surrounded by a large floating platform, with a closed sea dock.
Hence the USN desire to build large floating mobile sea-bases
The Persian Gulf and Straight's geography is the perfect location from which to launch this sort of ambush and Iran is the sort of country to do it.
But consider if the Iranians concurrently demolish the home base of the USN 5th Fleet in Bahrain, with precision attacks by ballistic and cruise missiles, plus missile deployed sea mines?
Even if the fleet all survived it would them have to vacate the region and steam to Diego Garcia or elsewhere to re-arm. By then the Iranians have full control of the Gulf the Straight and the Arabian Sea, and have thoroughly mined all three areas and are ready to beat off any attempt at clearance.
This will cause hundreds of naval vessels to flood into in the region, but its too late, no more oil is coming out of the gulf. Tanker traffic has ceased. Escorted convoys are still out of the question.
Naturally all Western Govts will order their forces open the straight, and that will leading to partial invasion and a very bloody destructive and uncertain naval air and land battle to wrest back control. It will take weeks to many months to achieve that, and months to years to clear the water of the mines.
Which means western financial systems and economies will collapse almost immediately.
From the Iranian point of view its a win, the war may not be over, and Russia and China and regional proxies will capitalise, and any fight will be much more nasty and complex than anyone expected.
A game-changing tactic.
Unsinkable huh? So was the Titanic and the Bismark. Thanks for the info though.
'Indirect tactics, efficiently applied, are as inehausible as heaven and earth, unending as the flow of rivers and strem; like the sun and moon, they end but to begin anew, like the four seasons, they pass away to return once more.' ART OF WAR.
These small wars cannot be won! Haven't we been through this time and time again?
"There is no instance of a country having benefited from prolonged warfare.' ART OF WAR.
OK, so here's the scenario if I were writing it.
1. Iran is finally goaded into striking first.
2. US and Israeli forces begin striking targets in Syria and Iran. Command and control targets are attacked first.
3. A nuclear weapon detonates on a cargo aircraft at 37,000 feet over the US eastern seaboard. There are few direct casualties on the ground, but the EMP attack destroys most electrical infrastructure from Boston to the Carolinas, and inland in an arc that covers large parts of Pennsylvania and upstate New York.
4. All indications are that the crude weapon originated in the Islamic republic of Iran.
5. Aircraft are grounded worldwide. The US Fifth Fleet begins a no-holds-barred war against the Islamic Republic, including the use of low-yield nuclear weapons.
6. In the United States, seventy-five million people are at immediate risk from lack of water and food.
7. Millions of vehicles have failed in the affected region. Most roads in the region will be blocked for years.
8. Many nuclear power plants must be supplied with diesel fuel by helicopter to maintain safe shutdown of their cores and spent-fuel ponds. More than one plant has a catastrophic failure with major release of radiation.
9. Millions will die, millions more will be permanently displaced. The United States' ability to project military power has been greatly weakened for decades to come. Although Iran will be destroyed as a regional power, the American military will soon be forced out of the Middle East by economic realities.
10. Unknown to Americans, the weapon, and the plot, originated in Russia.
:-) Where's Clancy when I need him?
End game
Very interesting Mick! An EMP detonated over Kansas would knock out electricity in all contiguous 48 states. There was a very good TV series a few years back called "Jericho" which by the way is available by direct download on Netflix. Anyway, in the series nukes are detonated in multiple American cities and Iran is blamed with supposed proof of North Korea complicity. Iran is subsequently turned into glass but it turns out that the U. S. Department of Homeland Security was responsible for the nuke detonations in something like 25 U. S. cities. Also, an EMP was detonated over Kansas. Often, the demonati tell us what they have planned in such media presentations.
Well, that's if you do it at very great altitude. Like a hundred miles. Which means you need a really serious delivery mechanism, like an ICBM. Unless you want to launch a lower-tech missile straight up from the middle of this country, which doesn't seem very likely.
That's why I like my scenario with a simple cargo plane, at a standard altitude. You still get the entire rich part of the east coast.
And the pilots don't have to know what they're carrying.
Won't work though as EMP won't propagate far in the lower atmosphere, as it propagates less distance than the thermal pulse and shock wave do at that altitude. You need to get above about 140k feet to get significant EMP to propagate (and still fairly localised even in that case). At lower altitudes the thick air simply absorbs the free elections locally or they rush vertically to earth. The further you get from the Earth's surface the more likely they are to spread laterally first and also upwards, before arcing down, to get 'earthed'.
The larger the blast and the higher you go towards a max height of about 600km the greater the EMP flux, and the greater the area affected obliquely below it oyt to up to 2500km radial distance (which is larger than a small continent in area). The thin atmospheric gases thin-out too much above about 750 km, to generate strong EMP, so the effect dilutes fast as you go even higher. Probably 400 to 500km up is an ideal altitude for max effect and propagation.
You're trying to create a massive pulse of free electrons (ions) by using ionising radiation to strip the outer electrons (negative ions) off the atoms (net positive ions), in the rarefied gas of the upper atmosphere. So the higher the energy of the weapon's ionising radiance from the blast, the larger the number of ions stripped off the atmospheric atoms, over a larger area, so the larger the resulting pulse, and its area of strong effects.
As you can see that requires a very powerful warhead to do it right, and a serious sort of at least intermediate range balistic missile (~4000 km range), to get it up there, and also above the point on the Earth where you want it to detonate.
You effectively need a missile capable of launching a satelite into orbit. And that's something only a state can do, to another state, or to an alliance of states. And there are only a few states which can do it.
Namely, any state that can do it has to have these features;
1) to have actaully tested a multistage high yeild thermonuclear weapon with an actual high yeild
2) continually creates tritium supplies within reactors for a weapon program
3) can launch a heavy satellite into a low-drag stable orbit
Any country that can do that can launch a strategic EMP attack. As far as I know only the original five nuclear powers USA Russia, Britain France and China definitely can muster EMP strikes. Many other countries however can potentially create localised EMP events of hundred km across with a single stage 'A-bomb' weapon detonating at lower altitude of 100 to 200 km. Unless you do a series of tests you don't know how effective it will be, but these are completely banned since 1963 when the US, Russia and UK which had already completed such tests, decided no one else should know about such things with experimental detail.
But more recent nuclear armed states all seem to be working toward acheiving a strategic scale of EMP attack capability. India in fact claimed to have tested several 'multistage' weapons in 1996, but if they did, these either failed, or were very low yeild via design. The former, I think, given multistage designes are supposed to make bigger bangs possible, not smaller ones.
It's been my view for about 20 years that if we ever do see a nuclear strike it will most likely be in the form of an EMP attack. It's the ultimate in 'neutron-bomb' type effects, of tayloring radiation yields to indirectly kill-off the people over a few months of starvation, exposure and illness, but leaving everything else almost untouched. It's amazing it's not happened as yet. Once the USA, USSR and UK had each independently discovered the severity of EMP effects they mutually agreed to ban all further high altitude nuclear testing and eventually agreed to also ban nuclear weapons in space, four years later. These were the first ever nuclear test-ban agreements, that then led to 33 years of underground tests.
Partial Nuclear Test Ban Treaty
Date: 4 August 1963
Prohibits nuclear tests above ground, under water, or in space
Outer Space Treaty
Date: 27 January 1967
Prohibits the introduction of nuclear weapons to space
1963 also coincided with the final stage of the US's global roll-out of a very expensive global 'seismic' network (and I do mean network) since about 1954 who's primary purpose was to detect and geographically locate and measure the energy of underground nuclear tests. It also just happened to be great for detecting locating and measuring earthquakes, but that was not why it was built, that was a fortuitous secondary function.
At present any signatory to the NPT can give three months notice in writing of their intent to withdraw and they are legally free to do whatever they wish with regard to pursue the proliferation and building of their own nuclear weapons, without outside assistence.
That is in fact what North Korea did.
So despite all of the US and EU song and dance routine the North Korean's did everything legally, and have not done anything 'rogue'.
The difference with Iran however is they have not withdrawn from the NPT, but then again, it was the Shah who signed on to the NPTin 1968 and ratified it in 1970 -- not the existing Iranian Islamic Republic and its constitution and law, plus there is a lot the Shah did that the new regime does not accept responsibility for.
As I see it, the NPT has been in progressive failure since the very first Indian nuclear test on 18th May 1974, and the Israeli bomb proliferation, plus Israel's known technical assistance to South Africa's HEU weapon program, in the mid 1970s to early 1980s.
So now in 2011, with Australia also agreeing to sell uranium to a non-signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, as Bush also agreed to transfer advanced nuclear tech to India, a couple of years earlier, the NPT is now all but worthless and effectively doomed to outright failure.
But why bring this up?
It's because that very same treaty is now being hypocritically used to brow-beat Iran with a threat of possible nuclear pre-emptive attack, or a massive conventional air assault, and also as the pretext for pre-war sanctions, against a country that it's arguable that the NPT even applies to legally, at this point.
It's also being used to build the impression and pretence that North Korea did something wrong, or went 'rogue', and flouted international law and due process - but it certainly didn't. It has 100% LEGALLY developed and tested its own nuclear weapon technology - and every country on earth has the legal right to do that, if they feel that they must.
NO COUNTRY HAS TO ASK HILLARY CLINTON'S APPROVAL - UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES
Proliferation has occurred, and it is occurring, and it can't be effectively halted, via the NPT, and the NPT should not be used as a foul political double-standard and a mere shallow pretext to actually start wars from within a UN 'world body' that is supposed to be doing the exact reverse.
Thanks for the excellent information!
I did not know about the minimum height to get significant propagation. You just spoiled one of my best end-of-the-world scenarios!
Happy New Year!
Also, if you see this -- what do you think of the idea of using a smallish EMP attack to target not the earth's surface, but something in orbit? You would carry out the attack over an uninhabited area -- i.e. someplace over the Pacific -- but directly underneath the place where your orbital target was passing at that time.
Once you create the pulse, it seems to me that it ought to travel both up and down. Maybe in this way you could generate a pulse powerful enough to overwhelm whatever hardening your target has -- and without the need to send something physical all the way up to the target.