Iran threatens to block straights of Hormuz - Again

https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-s-pres...ormuz-if-u-s-blocks-oil-exports/29636728.html

Should we sound the war drums or turn over and go back to sleep

 

Don't do no talkin', go straight to work with a few cruise missiles in Tehran.

 

That's not going to help unblock the straits though .. we would have to do more than that. Further - there is the problem of Iran responding with cruise missiles to Israel.

 

In regards to a hostile response aimed at Israel, I imagine it won't be much different than when Iraq did the same thing. Completely ineffective.

In regards to what to do about Iran's repeated threats to block the Straight, simply remove their capacity to do so. Again, it won't be much different than when we jumped on Iraq, their response was likened unto a hanging man's flailing legs.

Dramatic, yet ineffective.

 

Comparing Iraq to Iran is a non starter. Iraq was decimated in the Gulf war and had an arms embargo for the decade prior to the Iraq war. He was fighting back with dilapidated 1970's equipment - stuff that remained from the first war. The scuds missiles he was using - and he did not fire many - were a joke.

Iran's missile capabilities are orders of magnitude greater than what Saddam had.

 

Iran's inability to conquer Iraq during their war(s) tells a different story as to their capacity for waging war.

And Iraq was decimated prior to our dance with them? Revisionism. They had the world's 4th largest Army at the time, lead by a despot who has used gas to kill entire villages of women and children, for nothing more than vengeance, exclaiming enthusiastically his willingness and desire to use them against the Coalition of Allied Forces aligned against him even before the party kicked off.

The Iraqi troops were supposed to be tough due to the 8 years of war they honed their "skills" with. Turns out they weren't as tough as they thought they were.

By the way, Saddam fired 42 scuds at Israel during the 6 week "war" when we kicked the ever loving stuffing out of Saddam's forces. I wouldn't call that "not many" especially since they were used against a country who was not involved in the effort to stop Saddam simply as a weapon of terror. Yes their scuds were entirely ineffective and we tried to tell them that this war wasn't going to go well for them at all, but they wanted to fight so, we killed them.

We might as well kill the Iranians while we're in the area. It's the prudent thing to do.

 

I believe the threat is due to sanctions....to me it seem more and more countries are just not prepared to play ball anymore. The Iranians also seem to have a knack for coming out on top... despite all the turmoil in the Middle East they control much of Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, have influence in Yemen and South America, strong allies in Turkey, Russia, North Korea and China... sleeper cells. To me it's as if they've been waiting for this day... they've known all along America wanted an Iranian conflict and have been preparing.

 

Even if all those countries were to attack America at once, we'd still make come out on top. They'd all best remember that just because they start running for the hills doesn't mean that we will stop killing them while they run. Not to mention the multinational Russian led force we just obliterated in Syria wherein the entire force was destroyed but for one tank and one armored transport.

The Russians don't want it. The Chinese don't want it.

The Highway of Death/Desert Storm.

 

Yes Americans as usual itching for a war... the problem of course is we are moving into a global slowdown and we can therefore expect a more aggressive America, actively starting wars to sell more weapons and looking for resources in developing countries to steal and financially support the slowing US economy. The US is after all run by the corporations and lobbyists, therefore it matters not whether Democrats or Republicans are in power.

The problem is China and some other countries are now also doing the same to ensure their own survival... like leeches sucking the smaller countries dry, leaving devastation behind, competing with America... it has always been a hostile environment but with a global slowdown and added competition the whole cycle accelerate... express train to hell.

The countries that have much to fear in a conflict with Iran is Israel, Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Qatar...the other UAE countries and probably Egypt...also much of northern Africa including the Sahel where Iran will stir as much trouble as possible to encourage a large flow of refugees into Europe... they will likely do same in South America.

As usual Americans simply do not see the bigger picture, they think they're going to go in drop their bombs and go home slapping one another on the back.

Regarding the Wagner/Syria and American conflict in Syria earlier this year, the biggest contributing factor was air support vs no air support... I think most people understand it makes a big difference.

 

Itching for war? So how come there's no war when Chinese boats collide with American ships, or
Chinese jets bring down an American spy plane in International waters, or Iranians play chicken
with Americans in the gulf, or Russians buz American or NATO ships and planes ?

 

Did you even bother to read Sinnik's post?

 

At least once a year Iran threatens to send a 'fleet' across the Atlantic to American shores, announces some new 'super advanced' piece of kit or close the Straits of Hormuz. These announcements invariably flush out the feeble minded of all political stripes beating their political drums.

Right wing Americans regularly work themselves up into a lather about these 'fleets', none of which have ever entered the Atlantic but still somehow proof that Obama is bad. Idiot pro-Tehran types laud these announcements as proof ot Iran asserting itself and sticking to the US. I seem to recall a few particularly stupid examples of this type actually declaring that the straits of Hormuz HAD been closed earlier this year, despite offering no credible evidence.

One day Iran may do one or more of these things, but until that day these announcements are a bit of a Rorshach test.

 

Well, let them, who gives a ****.

 

War with the Chinese or Russia is different than war with some small weakling nation like Libya, Iraq or Afghanistan.

 

No need to overreact publicly.

 

Propaganda Alert!

 

Is it legal?

----------

"If Iran is serious about closing the strait, is the move legal under international law? The simple answer to this question is no.

Based on the international laws of the sea or the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea [PDF], Hormuz is an “international strait” because it is the only gateway between the Persian Gulf and the open sea. In all such straits, all ships have the right of transit and the countries adjacent to the strait must not deny this right of transit and must inform all relevant officials about any danger that might threaten the vessels or planes that travel through the strait. Under international laws and conventions, the right of transit cannot be suspended.

Iranian parliament has not approved the 1982 UN convention, but the Iranian government has signed it and so is thus committed to avoid any action that would violate the convention. However, at the time that Iran signed the convention it announced that it would only recognize the “right of transit passage” for countries that had also joined the convention."

----------

Once again we see one of these "International Laws" that the nation in question simply doesn't care about.

Gotta love how people have tried to paint the nation as a bad guy for simply not wanting to trade with them.

US says they will not trade with them or anyone who does and Iran, in response/anger, threatens to not let anyone trade.

If that isn't a childish action I don't know what is, but I get it, it's geopolitics in action.

Sadly for Iran, you cannot use gunboat diplomacy when you have inferior gunboats.

 

That poster is notoriously bad about it....

We say we don't want to trade with someone, they threaten military action.

And of course, these people claim America is the belligerent one ....

Intelligence at its finest.

TRADE IS NOT A GIVEN RIGHT

 

War with Big Boys is what our military does best. Most of our tools and tactics are geared toward fighting on the battlefield rather than chasing some Afghan Taliban through back yards because they too scared to stand and fight.

About F'in Time.

 

Hmmmm ~ what's this?
The 350th such "threat"???


Who from PF is going to enlist and march off to fight yet another war for imaginary threats {sic} that exist only in the imaginations of the warmongers.

 

I love when the iran defenders accuse the US of being aggressive/war mongers while they admit iran is waging 5 wars across the mideast and is undermining 6 arab governments.

If the US was as aggressive as they should be, they'd have bombed teheran to ash after the 1983 emabassy and marine barracks bombings, let alone iran's horrific attacks on US troops in iraq.

 

Armageddon nears!

 

Name of a band?

 

WTF? You actually WANT to go to war with a modern day power player like China or Russia?

Sure, we can get over there and do some damage, but you are insane if you think we can walk into China or Russia and dominate either regions.

Meanwhile, Russia and China have no chance in hell of landing troops on our soil, so hmmmm, I wonder what tactics they would use instead .....

 

Oo oo I know I know...

Diplomacy.