Iranian Naval Commander Threatens To Sink US Ships, Create "Catastrophic Situation" If Trump Kills Deal

President Donald Trump offered some of his most bellicose rhetoric yet about Iran on Tuesday when he said Iran would have "bigger problems than they have ever had before" if the country's leadership dared to restart its nuclear program following a US pull-out of the JCPOA (otherwise known as the Iran deal), per the Times of Israel.

And today, a top Iranian general hit back at Trump with an aggressive threat to sink US Navy ships, while warning that the US would find itself in a "catastrophic situation" if it withdraws from the deal and reimposes economic sanctions.

"The actual information that the Americans have about us is much less than what they think they have. When will they figure this out? When it is too late," the Revolutionary Guard Corps’s navy commander, Admiral Ali Fadavim, told Iranian television on Saturday.

"They will definitely figure it out when their ships are sunk, or when they find themselves in a catastrophic situation," Fadavi threatened in an interview with IRINN TV, according to a translation by the Middle East Media Research Institute.

On Wednesday, a non-proliferation envoy confirmed that the US isn't seeking to renegotiate the JCPOA. Instead, the White House would like to pursue a separate agreement like the one French President Emmanuel Macron proposed during a press conference with Trump. And apparently, Macron's proposal took his European partners by surprise.

Admiral Fadavim's remarks followed a similarly stern warning from Iranian President Hassan Rouhani.

"I am telling those in the White House that if they do not live up to their commitments, the Iranian government will react firmly," Rouhani said.

"If anyone betrays the deal, they should know that they would face severe consequences," he added.

Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif also reiterated over the weekend his warning that Tehran was ready to swiftly resume uranium enrichment if the US ditches the accord.

Meanwhile, Ali Shamkhani, the Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, warned that Iran would consider withdrawing from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty if the US reimposes sanctions.

Of course, by leaving both the Iran deal and the NPT, Iran would only lend credence to its adversaries' claims that the Islamic Republic is seeking to build a nuclear weapon - an accusation Iran has long denied. The White House has set a self-imposed deadline of May 12 for deciding whether to pull out of the deal.

Tags

Comments

philipat TBT or not TBT Thu, 04/26/2018 - 00:42 Permalink

I don't think that sinking US ships in Hormuz would be a very bright idea BUT if the US pulls out of the Agreement with Iran (Which Europe has indicated it will not), it would be yet another example to ROW of the futility of entering into Agreements with the US. The most chilling example in recent times, of course, being the unilateral decision by the US to pull out of the ABM treaty. Which resulted in Russian Hypersonic missiles. Great decision...more hubris and arrogance.

In reply to by TBT or not TBT

TBT or not TBT philipat Thu, 04/26/2018 - 00:59 Permalink

The agreement was made with one person .  Obama.   To make a treaty with the USA the Senate of the USA must ratify .   Same problem with the climate virtue signalling treaty signed by the Obama admin on behalf of...the Obama admin .     One notices a lot of his legacy was never signed by representatives  of the several states(Senate) or of the people(House), and so was easily reversed .    One imagines the horror Obama feels that Hillary was maybe going to lose, and then did!   MAGA 

In reply to by philipat

Caloot beepbop Thu, 04/26/2018 - 01:45 Permalink

The American Empire is as trustworthy as heroin addicts.   The only good thing obumr did was that Iranian deal.   For fucks sake, can we please get the fuck out of the middle East.   How many wars are we going to be tricked into.   The Iraq war.  Kind of like Seth rich.  Iraq.  How many of our fucking friends and brothers need to have their legs blown off only to end with a barrel in their mouth, because of some bullshit towel head.  Oh.. he threatened us...  Let's kill our kids.   Wtf

In reply to by beepbop

Siamo pazzi Caloot Thu, 04/26/2018 - 02:10 Permalink

US Empire? No.. I totally agree with you but it is the British Empire and their terror state Israel running DC . We are occupied and they have our military ! This will be our destruction ... unless we have a leader that can say NO to the Rothschild Empire in Western Europe . British are the ones that bullied Trump into the bombing of Syria after their false flag British white helmet lies . sine they occupied DC after civil war .. they got that FED and CFR going . They used US and Russia to take our their competition .. Germany who according to EU plan way back to before Kaiser was supposed to be the stronghold of European Union .... British Empire has been the root of all these wars wars and regime change using DC as a front  . Once we were finally occupied as they incited our civil war and we are down , we have been their shield . Their military prostitute. If we had a leader that could say no ..  then we could avoid another world war . Sick stuff !    They are mere pirates and need to STOP flying US flag into battle. Let them use the DC flag , that foreign country now charading as our government since 1871 ! 

FRAUD !!  

In reply to by Caloot

FBaggins Super Sleuth Thu, 04/26/2018 - 11:46 Permalink

Exactly. Even reading the translation provided in this posting, "They will definitely figure it out when their ships are sunk, or when they find themselves in a catastrophic situation," and looking at the context, it is clear that the Iranian admiral is responding to the bellicose provocation of Trump who wants to cancel the deal restraining Iran from a nuclear program and at the same time he (Trump) is threatening war if the restraint is cancelled and Iran develops what it wants. The fact is that if Iran does develop nukes to protect itself from the US and Israel, then the Western goblaists will not get to control Iran's oil ever again. Yet, if the deal goes by the wayside then in the interlude while Iran was is the development stage, it would be a sitting duck even if it was not developing anything. Once the deal is rescinded then iran will be regarded as a threat to justify another Iraq. Also, if the present deal remains in place and Iran is honoring it there is no justification for a major war.  So if the deal remains in place the Western warmongers will likely create a major false-flag attack to justify the war they want, and now are probably picking as a target some large US warship at anchor somewhere off the shores of Iran.   

In reply to by Super Sleuth

Shemp 4 Victory macholatte Thu, 04/26/2018 - 14:22 Permalink

The headline is bullshit clickbait. Even when translated by DC-based Israeli-founded MEMRI, it reads:

The actual information that the Americans have about us is much less than what they think they have. When will they figure this out? When it is too late. They will definitely figure it out when their ships are sunk, or when they find themselves in a catastrophic situation.

This is clearly not a threat. It is a prediction of when and what it would likely take for the arrogant US to stop believing its own bullshit and face reality.

What a crappy, misleading article.

In reply to by macholatte

I Am Jack's Ma… Super Sleuth Thu, 04/26/2018 - 13:57 Permalink

^ this.

The headline is a deliberate lie, but hey...  

Regardless of the mullahs, its notable that the Zionists are **lying** to try to make Israel’s enemies our own.

MEMRI is every bit the Zionist-Jewish disinfo mill Gatestone is.

And really, peddling the same Zio shit we can all see and assess all over the MSM.  Not sure why it adds value here.  

 

But you either see the propaganda from the (((usual suspects))) now, or you never will.

In reply to by Super Sleuth

silver140 Super Sleuth Thu, 04/26/2018 - 18:11 Permalink

Thanks. It makes sense that he wouldn't have said such a senseless threat. I have a feeling that there's going to be many misquoted Iranians and Syrians, and Russians. I may have missed it, but so far I haven't seen here on ZH any news concerning the press conference at The Hague involving some of the people who were filmed by the US/Saudi jihadists during the fake chemical attack in Douma. Hopefully we'll see it here soon?

https://www.rt.com/news/425240-opcw-russia-syria-douma-witnesses/

 

In reply to by Super Sleuth

msamour Four Star Thu, 04/26/2018 - 08:12 Permalink

The strength of the Iranian Navy does not come from their large vessels, it comes form the multitude of small fast attack craft they are able to cobble together rapidly. A war ship, or even a group of war ships can rapidly get overwhelmed when they are surrounded by a large amount of small attack vessels.

Modern warships are equipped with modern electronically controlled, or assisted weapons. They have the ability to track and destroy multiple targets at the same time, but they have a limit. If there was to be several hundreds small attack boats incoming from every direction to conduct attack on a fleet, the first wave could be repelled easily, but the successive waves would then become difficult. As the weapons on modern ships have limited ammunition per load, they would then need to get reloaded. No fleet would survive a swarming from hundreds of small attack crafts at the same time. Iran is counting on this. I have seen the Persian Gulf in the late 90's when it was peaceful, and this has got to be one of the most crowded body of water on the planet, perhaps after the Straits of Malacca. I would not underestimate the Iranian's ability to sink several important ships of the US Navy.

In reply to by Four Star

msamour Four Star Thu, 04/26/2018 - 08:12 Permalink

The strength of the Iranian Navy does not come from their large vessels, it comes form the multitude of small fast attack craft they are able to cobble together rapidly. A war ship, or even a group of war ships can rapidly get overwhelmed when they are surrounded by a large amount of small attack vessels.

Modern warships are equipped with modern electronically controlled, or assisted weapons. They have the ability to track and destroy multiple targets at the same time, but they have a limit. If there was to be several hundreds small attack boats incoming from every direction to conduct attack on a fleet, the first wave could be repelled easily, but the successive waves would then become difficult. As the weapons on modern ships have limited ammunition per load, they would then need to get reloaded. No fleet would survive a swarming from hundreds of small attack crafts at the same time. Iran is counting on this. I have seen the Persian Gulf in the late 90's when it was peaceful, and this has got to be one of the most crowded body of water on the planet, perhaps after the Straits of Malacca. I would not underestimate the Iranian's ability to sink several important ships of the US Navy.

In reply to by Four Star

commoncourtesy gatorengineer Thu, 04/26/2018 - 12:31 Permalink

Makes you wonder.

Just viewed the Millennium Report that states; Major False Flag Ship Attack on U.S. Navy in Mediterranean
Planned as Pretext for World War III. 
Everything now points to a major false flag ship attack being staged by the Zio-Franco-Anglo-American Axis and NATO on the U.S. Navy in the eastern Mediterranean. Nothing galvanizes the American public to war like a surprise attack on a ship.

In reply to by gatorengineer

rejected Four Star Thu, 04/26/2018 - 14:31 Permalink

The US Navy ships would be easy targets in the Person Gulf or Gulf of Oman from land based ship killers.

Guess the US could nuke them and make the entire region uninhabitable for a few centuries or chance a disastrous invasion with its LBQT obese military. Hell, it cannot handle the Taliban armed only with old school rifles and C-4.

In reply to by Four Star

11b40 CashMcCall Thu, 04/26/2018 - 19:37 Permalink

Yes, and I have not even seen mention of mines in the gulf.  We acknowledge they have 8-10,000, and 5-600 that are "sophisticated".  Remember IED's in Iraq?  Selling the Persians short is a very big mistake.  It is named The Persian Gulf for a reason.  Just look at a map and the amount of shoreline they control.  Defending it from a determined invader like America would be hard, but closing down the Gulf as we know it would be easy for them.  Their history of war makes ours seem puny, and they are united (like it or not), but the West is not.  Israel is. 

How long will the tail wag the dog?  When will we be told to attack?  How far down the road to crashing the world economy will we go?  Why?

In reply to by CashMcCall

FoggyWorld Siamo pazzi Thu, 04/26/2018 - 02:59 Permalink

Just suspect Mrs. May with her cock 'n bull story about the Skripals and then the in-her-mind toxic chemical attack by Assad in Syria, have or will force Trump to rethink things.  She isn't trustworthy as her own people already know.

To that, the Macron debacle had to wake Trump up a bit.   He really did go all out to put the best face of the US forward only to be socked in the gut with Macron's farewell, Congressional lecture.

Hopefully if Mueller calls it a day soon, Putin and Trump who really are more natural allies just may be able to recalculate things because both men want similar things.  A modern sort of nationalism that does respect boundaries but also is more than willing to negotiate.  And neither the US nor Russia wants or needs to continue to squander huge amounts of money for what really given the geography involved, is a way overbuilt military for both countries that have overkill piles of nuclear weapons.

And they both want material progress for their own citizens which is dragged down by war.

Trump has to bite the bullet soon and fire both Sessions and Rosenstein and consider removing Wray as well.  Those men just are working on their own agenda that almost never resembles Trump's.

 

In reply to by Siamo pazzi