Chalk this one up to more bluster, or part of a mounting back and forth rhetoric headed nowhere good, either way — Tehran plans to rely on its subs.
Lieutenant Commander of the Iranian Army's Self-Sufficiency Jihad, Rear Admiral Farhad Amiri told FARS that Iran has the finest electric diesel submarines in the world, and that while the U.S. has focused on Tehran's "astonishing surface capabilities," it has forgotten about the underwater threat.
Amiri said he plans to slip his fleet of subs onto the Persian Gulf floor and "fire missiles and torpedoes simultaneously."
Iran claims to have 17 Ghadir diesel electric subs in its fleet, and four have been photographed together, so the threat is not entirely without merit.
The Ghadir is incapable of holding a commando crew, and despite scant details it may be well-equipped to follow through on this most recent threat.
Earlier this month Iran demanded the U.S. remove its carriers from the Gulf after the John C. Stennis passed through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iranian Army Commander Major General Ataollah Salehi said "We advise, warn and recommend [the U.S. Navy] not to return this carrier to its previous location in the Persian Gulf."
"We are not in the habit of repeating the warning and we warn only once," Salehi said, without mentioning the Stennis.
In a related update: FARS reports that President Obama is calling for direct talks with Iran and communicated this desire through a secret letter to the Islamic Republic's supreme leader.
Well, bloody hell. Now what? Should we just bomb the crap out of them? Or should we just acquiesce and move along and give them their space.
These aren't idle threats, Iran is literally threatening to kill Americans and our government needs to move quickly before blood is shed.
Why are secret letters being exchanged by Obama and the Islamic Republic leader? This was an open threat to American citizens, and a letter is not going to cut it. I believe a direct confrontation is in order. We must remind them that the United States is not some pantywaist sissies that will back down from a fight.
This situation is volatile to say the least and Obama had better act. It's his job to see that Americans are kept safe.
This threat should not be taken lightly. Nuff said.
22 comments:
Obama has the Fifth Fleet over there, Leticia. Everything is under control. If Iran tried anything, we'd wipe them out. That one fleet alone could take out an entire nation's navy, air force, and communications infrastructure, in a few days, tops.
JMJ
Jersey, that's comforting to know. I hope it doesn't come down to that though. I don't want to see anymore Americans killed.
I don't want to see any Iranians killed, too.
And I am glad our military is large enough to deter aggression.
dmarks, absolutely. But this was no blatant and empty threat. They were dead serious. And yes, I was very concerned.
Jersey has produced a rare burst of military clarity.
We kicked Iran's ass in the tanker war. Time for another reminder beatdown, methinks...
off thread -heads up to you Leticia---
http://carolmsblog.blogspot.com/2012/01/sopa-house-protect-ip-act-senate.html
Have a few twists to the Iranian 'threat'-will research more...then make a comment if the line of research is clear-
Carol-CS
“Why are secret letters being exchanged by Obama and the Islamic Republic leader?”
It’s believed that they are warnings against closing the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation for the sanctions imposed over Iran’s nuclear program.
By the way, someone is busy murdering Iranian nuclear scientists. Probably Israel. With or without US and British connivance, we don’t know.
It’s not considered likely the murders will stop the program - more send a message that anyone co-operating with it could wake up dead and so give the impression that the Iranian government cannot take care of its own.
The Revolutionary Guards or someone else inside the regime may respond unilaterally over that.
Kill a bus full of people in London, say, as a message to Israel.
This swaggering “we can wipe ‘em out” is unhealthy.
Like you wiped out the Viet Cong? Like you wiped out the Taliban?
If we had wars every time some dipshit admiral shot his mouth off about his toys, we wouldn’t be able to sleep for all the noise.
You can destroy a countries infrastructure in a week or so, which will condemn millions of citizens to privation for decades while the rulers go on living as normal, but I don’t think everyone else in the region would be quite so happy about that.
So why don’t the citizens rise up against their horrid regime, I hear you ask…?
Well they flirted with that recently and got shot, remember?
Iran has vastly greater influence in the Middle East now, now that Iraq is a basket case. If Saddam hadn’t invaded Kuwait all those years ago perhaps he and Rumsfeld would still be having quiet chats on the sofa while mutual enemies would still be being tortured to death down the hallway, and laughing about old times.
War is not like hitting the schoolyard bully, it is like triggering an earthquake – you don’t know exactly where the cracks will open.
The Iranian president is a madman who needs to be stopped. Obama is a weak leader and he is showing that by passing letters to Ahmadinejab while Iran is making threats to our military.
How does anyone know that killing nuclear scientists will not impede Iran's nuclear ambitions to have nuclear capabilities? I worry about the citizens but it is Ahmadinejab and the rest of his regime who have treated its own citizens with brutality, not the U.S.
Siver, I agree time to take them down a notch or two.
Carol, heading over to your blog.
Magpie, we cannot speculate on who is murdering the scientists and I sincerely doubt it is Israel. You never know, it could be Iranian's killing them off.
The whole point is that we cannot allow this threat to go unchallenged. We cannot show fear or intimidation. Just my stance.
Teresa, I'm worried about all the innocents with this erroneous threat.
If our government is going to be sending secret leters to Iran, it should be to the resistance groups NOT the Islamic Republic Leader and their government.
It's almost as BO is consistently 180 degrees from any decision I think is correct.
Cube, exactly right. I don't believe that any letters of any kind should have been exchanged. It looks suspicious, very suspicious.
A conflict with Iran would be a mess. As JMJ pointed out the power and the capacity to take out the main infrastructure is there even within the capacity of the 5th Fleet - the question wouuld be what after that and what about the individual suprizes awaiting us?
The other question is why the rhetoric? That answer is actually not that difficult. Amhadinejad wants to retain power and thus he needs to look tough and internally be tough. He says all the right words to make his supporters excited back home but they translate as being stupid as soon as it is brought over here (like Saddam's "Mother of all Wars"). He is in trouble with the Grand Ayatollah and even his own Revolutionary Guard is splitting, so he needs the Military and the rural voting bloc to keep his control.
Also the embargo is now actually hurting and blocking oil would be almost a finish. The dissapointment was obvious for Iran when Saudi said they can match any loss of Iranian oil.
My problem with Iran's leadership is that like many dictatorships they cross a line that they cannot return and thus act out their threats. Like any pressure-cooker, there is a valve, which diplomats call a fail-safe and face-saving exit strategy. Right now there has been none given to Iran and that is the worry.
A second point, just to add. Remember that Iran was willing to sacrifice their children in war as they did with Iraq. They have been used to isolationsism and general embargoes before. With the power of their leadership and the indoctrination that a great portion of their population get - a war with the US/NATO would not be a cake-walk. The first few days would see the navy, airforce and communications destroyed, no doubt there. Aircraft will be lost from Iranian SA sites as they have learned their lesson from Israeli attacks. Suicide squads will ensure at least one large US capital ship sinks and we do not know the suprise factors (hidden existing mines in the straights that can be activated). Like the SCUD threat from Iraq during the first gulf war, Iran has aproximately 4000 equivelants that are much newer and more sophisticated (the Hoot, Kowsar, Zelzal, Fateh-110, Shahab-3 and Sajjil missiles) not to mention the country has ballistic missiles. Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, Incellik, Riyadh, Tel Aviv are potential targets. The head of the US Navy said last year that the old Kilo class submarines that Iran has is a potential threat to any modern navy if they are not eliminated quickly.
Iraq's population is 30 million, whilst the population of Iran is around 75 and the country has a compulsary military service program - the people now how to use a weapon.
It is not winning the war at sea or in the air that counts - it is ending the power of the regime and that usually takes feet on the ground. Iran has almost a million active military, another half a million militia and a volunteer Basij political group that has up to 11 million members whom many would simply join up. Also, their entire military program, though low on budget compared to say Arab states at 2.6 per cent, is entirely based on deterrence, which means they cannot extend power but they concentrate it on anyone trying to fight it - the worst type in such a scenerio.
This is not a comment based on admiration, actually the contrary. Just do not think it will be over in a few days, it would make Iraq and Afghanistan a nightmare if there is no other forms of solution to toppling the regime. Promoting revolution would be far cheaper and easier.
Magpie said: "By the way, someone is busy murdering Iranian nuclear scientists."
Murder might not be the best word to use to stop these men who are participating in an act of genocide. The #1 goal of Iran is the extermination of more than 5 million Jewish Israelis. Iran's nuclear bomb building program is part of this. By willingly participating in the creation of this atrocity, these "scientists" are war criminals first. If they weren't, they would defect.
dmarks,
though it is nice to say such things (perhaps to you), the quality of your answer is not very well thought out.
For a start, assassination in any format is illegal and the history of "taking out" foreign nationals in their country is considered a potential act of war.
Secondly, though we all have no doubts that these scientists are part of Iran's nuclear weapons program, does that justify it? No, under any law it does not, not to mention there is still no solid actual evidence they are building it (or that it is against any law for them not to).
Thirdly, the precident of killing off participants of a program that other countries do not like or consider dangerous is a predident that starts tit-for-tat assassinations. Then, when you complain that someone like Gingrich who is a war-mongerer and could very well be dangerous to the rest of world is taken out, basically other countries will say - so what, you sanctioned the same.
Fourthly, there is actually no evidence at all that Ahamdinejad or any other Iranian official actually declared that thier ambition or policy is to wipe off the face of the planet Israel and especially use any bomb. The country has, in fact, constantly denied any bomb plans (not that we believe it).
Thus, I suggest you reconsider the words you have made, all colourful, tough and nice, but in fact not based on much fact.
With respect, of course.
Do not get me wrong, I detest the Iranian Islamic Revolution and all that it stands for, Ahmadinejad in particular. I also believe that they are more than likely to build a bomb. However, the only way to tumble such a regime is by dealing with them and thus showing their population the alternative as that is the net result of communicating. Simply attacking and blockading them only galvanizes the hold of the government, gives them an excuse to be more controlling over their population (including brutality) and also builds on a pressure-cooker that when faced against the wall, would rather then have a war since their is no other escape for them.
Oh, then there is the issue of facts, I simply prefer people to post based on facts, not just assuming what they wish is real.
DCC: I am uneasy with the assasssination idea, actually But in regards to your third point:
"Thirdly, the precident of killing off participants of a program that other countries do not like or consider dangerous"
I disagree strongly with this sort of soft-peddling. It's deceptive and inaccurate. A program that has the end goal of the nuclear extermination of a nation of millions is dangerous. There's no 'consider' about it. And this act is so shockingly atrocious that the '"other countries don't like it" thing really downplays it. Come on, only the worst brutal savages like the idea of Iran'a plans for nuclear annihiliation of the Israelis.
As for #4, "Fourthly, there is actually no evidence at all that Ahamdinejad or any other Iranian official actually declared that thier ambition or policy is to wipe off the face of the planet Israel"
There is plenty of evidence. This is in fact Iran's frequently-stated main foreign policy goal. I'm surprised you didn't know this.
And that they would use their nuclear weapons (which you admitted they are trying to build in #2) to do this is obvious. Anything to bring about the stated extermination, the sooner the better.
Do you want any of the numerous quotations from the Iranian government about its intent to wipe out the Jews and Israelis?
dmarks,
yes I would like some clear, unambigious and unbaised reports on Iran's "plans for nuclear annihiliation of the Israelis".
The other day BBC's Panorama program that exact discussion was taking place and it pointed out a number of deliberate mistranslations, inuendos and down-right creations by Israeli government and media organisations which even under Israeli law is illegal.
We all know the anti-semitism by the Iranian and other hard-line nations in the region as well as some radical Islamists calling for destruction - however, as borderline as it can get, as far as I know, neither Khomenei or Ahamadinejad have never officially endorsed or put into State Policy the intention of "wiping off the face of the earth" Israel, or "destorying Israel" and since they have constantly denied producing or planning to produce Nukes, it is obvious that they have never said that they will "nuke Israel".
Please do prove me wrong.
Additionally, the main source of claims that Ahmadinejad used the phrase "eradication of Israel" comes from his interview on Al-Manar TV. The report was a translation from Persian and then into Arabic and then by Haaretz which was nothing like the original.
Also Haaretz has quoted ISNA (Iranian Students News Agency) which is an autonomous body and highly political. Both translation errors occured based on what ISNA said that Ahmadinejad has supposively saying. There is a quote by Haaretz that added lines and was blasted by a number of international watchdogs. The most famous was "Iran follows this issue (the eradication of Israel) with determination and decisiveness and will never ever withdraw from this standpoint and policy," the Iranian president added in the interview with the Al-Manar network. Later it was admitted taht the words in parethesis 'the eradication of....' was theirs own addition.
I added this bit just in case your sources end up being Haaratzn ISNA or some blog.
Again, having said all this, if there is qualified evidence, I will most certainly accept it and alter my views accordingly.
Remember, the Iranian government is one of those that denies the Israelis even have a right to exist. Unlike most of the countries that deny this, they have tried to enforce this, with extensive military action against Israel.
Click here to read about many of these attacks, done with weapons supplied by Iran for the very purpose of getting rid of the Israelis.
As for statements of Iran's intent, here is just one of the numerous quotations, from 2009
"The Zionist regime wants to establish its base upon the ruins of the civilizations of the region...The uniform shout of the Iranian nation is forever 'Death to Israel.'"
Death means death. And the death of a nation requires millions of corpses. How better to do accomplish this than with nuclear weapons.
Leticia said in the parent post: "These aren't idle threats, Iran is literally threatening to kill Americans"
Of course. The call for "Death to America" is nothing more than that regime calling for the death of a nation of 300 million people. There's no other way this can be read.
With all sincere respect dmarks, can you provide a source to any official Iranian threat to destroy Israel?
People shouting death to America or death to Israel is, though certainly reprehensible and a great sign of the barrier between them and us, I said and still have seen yet an offical statement from the government of Iran saying it.
It comes down to this, and I have to stand by my comment. Unless there is an offical statement from Iran threatening to "destroy" Israel, and considering that Iran has publically said it has no intentions to build a nuclear weapon (even though we doubt it), the assassination of Israeli scientists (almost certainly by Israel) is reprehensible, criminal (from an international justice perspective) and itself a defacto act of aggressive war. It also reinforces the point that Israel itself is a rogue state, does not abide by international law or internationally accepted standards (it considers itself alway a special case and thus excempt), it tacitly supports human rights abuses by allowing and protecting Settlers and more importantly, is a nuclear state established by theft and not science.
That, of course, is easy to say and I for one wish Israel to survive, prosper and be a part of society, but the point by making such a statement is that loeses its respect in this situation and that can only play into the hands of Iran whom would win sympathy from third-party non-aligned nations.
A war with Iran that included Israel would not necessarily be all against Iran not because of religion but because of the fear of an American-Israeli powerbase that does not have the region at its interest.
I watched today on France 24 today an interesting best-case war scenario with Iran. Iran attempts to attack a UAE tanker, the gunboat is destroyed by a UAE fighter, Iran fires at both UAE and US vessels and most of the navy vanishes within 24 hours, navy bases are bombed out of action and the Iranian Air Force flies north and goes on strike. Iran's religous Leader calls for a ceasefire, condemns Ahmadinejad for provoking a war and he is imprisoned. A cleric becomes the President but the country has already changed enough that within four to five years, the people simply force openess and a form of Persian Spring takes place.
"[Fox News], which isn't a cable news program but rather the propaganda arm of the RNC,"
The word "propaganda" being used here as a meaningless pejorative for information you happen to dislike.
I happen to be more open minded and support wide diversity in news channels and outlets. By your standard, CBS could be dismissed as non-news after they let Dan Rather fabricate the Bush went AWOL hoax from forged documents.
dmarks and that's what it all boils down to.
Post a Comment