No. of Recommendations: 4
To those who think Iran is an irrational rouge state...

Jeff - I love it and I'm green with envy at your colorful language.

Pete
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Just thought I'd post the above as the US press seems to have misplaced this story.

Jeff

======================================

US press is afraid to stick out their neck on this item. UK is backing US government story. I wonder how the Independent had the balls to write the story.

6/23/2019

Iran is acutely aware of the fact that a ground invasion would not be popular in the US, says the Miami-based private intelligence company 5 Stones intelligence (5Si). It has become clear that Western countries simply cannot afford major military missions like those in Iraq and Afghanistan, leaving states like Iran to use asymmetrical means to further weaken their economies.

Beyond its borders, Iran can also make use of the various militias it supports throughout the region, recruiting them to act as proxies. One well-known example of that strategy is the deployment of Lebanese Hezbollah troops in Syria. 5Si claims that Al Qaeda has ties to Iran as well, and says this could "lead to a resurgence of jihadi operations that are ostensibly carried out by Al Qaeda, but actually instigated and funded by Iran."

In May, an anonymous US government official spoke with Time magazine of ties between Al Qaeda and Iran. Although US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has been adamant that such ties are a real threat, the US official told Time that Pompeo had blown them "way out of proportion."

"There have been occasional marriages of convenience, but there is nothing in the intelligence to suggest that any of them has been consummated in any grand anti-American alliance," said the official.

https://www.dw.com/en/iran-us-conflict-tehrans-asymmetrical-...

jaagu
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
The Battle of the Coral Sea in 1942 was the first naval battle where the combatant ships never saw each other. Here we have a battle where only automata died -- a US drone and then Iranian missile control systems in a cyberattack.

War changes its form.

DB2
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 17
A land invasion of Iran would be even more unpopular if people pondered the relative size, training and weaponry of Iran compared to what Iraq had when we invaded - not to mention the difference in topography and ground conditions between the two countries.

There is little chance of Al Qaeda being a client or even a long term associate of Iran. They are a vehemently Wahabi Sunni group whose leaders regard liberal Muslims, Shias, Sufis and other sects as heretical and its members and sympathizers have attacked their mosques and the mullahs of Iran are Shia.

It's true that they have allies, but most of them are juxtaposed against stronger allies of the US (Hezbollah vs. Israel, Yemen rebels against Saudis). They obviously know enough about Russia not to trust them as a reliable allie, but if the US alienates China, that combination might make sense as China expands its Silk Road initiative.

Be careful what rhetoric thread you follow - especially from unnamed US government sources who may be trying out an idea for future political expansion.

To those who think Iran is an irrational rouge state, I would submit that despite outrageous rhetoric, they have behaved very methodically and pragmatically on the world stage for a coupled of decades now. Contrary to other countries, they have been rather successful without getting (overtly) directly involved in any wars, other than their strategic support of the Syrian government (which makes a great deal of sense from their standpoint for a number of reasons).

Jeff
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Just thought I'd post the above as the US press seems to have misplaced this story.

Jeff


Very odd, all the international news has the story but I couldn't find it on any of the US news feeds? You don't think the constant insults have finally gotten to them do you?

The missile used was probably Russian though the Iranians claim it was homemade. If their claims are true then they have come a long way and air attacks there could become very expensive for the attackers.

Whatever hit the tankers was small and easily available to anyone in the region, a serious anti-ship missile would have done far more damage than the small holes shown in the photos. The fires of course make it look far worse.

Anymouse
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Be careful what rhetoric thread you follow - especially from unnamed US government sources who may be trying out an idea for future political expansion.

The same should be said, of course, about Russian intelligence operatives.

DB2
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I'm not saying that any of the following is true, but it would make a good movie plot:

What if it was discovered that the Mossad planted the limpid mines on the ships and the US drone was shot down in Irani air space. How would any US retaliation look? (Probably no more damaging to our prestige than the WMD thing was in Iraq).

Interesting that the Russian news release was made in Israel after discussions between intelligence officers.

Jeff
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
To those who think Iran is an irrational rouge state...

Jeff - I love it and I'm green with envy at your colorful language.

Pete
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Jeff:"To those who think Iran is an irrational rouge state, I would submit that despite outrageous rhetoric, they have behaved very methodically and pragmatically on the world stage for a coupled of decades now. Contrary to other countries, they have been rather successful without getting (overtly) directly involved in any wars, other than their strategic support of the Syrian government (which makes a great deal of sense from their standpoint for a number of reasons)."

BUll


Iran has spent hundreds of millions supplying weapons to Gaza to be used against Israel. Tens of thousands of rockets, RPGs, plus all sorts of tunnel building supplies including millions of pounds of cement.

Iran has fomented 'revoluntary' groups all over the Mid East from Libya to Tunesia to Yemen.....and supplied them with weapons.

despite their promises it's still working on a nuke bomb and intends to get there sooner or later.

Iran has sent both supplies and troops to southern Iraq - trying to take over 1/3rd the country.

No way are they simply a 'peaceful' country. They're a sworn enemy of the 'opposite' side of Islam...the Shia vs Sunni battle and they'll keep at it till both factions wind up in a massive war.

t.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
Iran has spent hundreds of millions supplying weapons to Gaza to be used against Israel. Tens of thousands of rockets, RPGs, plus all sorts of tunnel building supplies including millions of pounds of cement.

That's perfectly methodical and pragmatic for a regime that sponsors worldwide terrorism.


Iran has fomented 'revoluntary' groups all over the Mid East from Libya to Tunesia to Yemen.....and supplied them with weapons.

That's perfectly methodical and pragmatic for a regime that sponsors worldwide terrorism.


despite their promises it's still working on a nuke bomb and intends to get there sooner or later.

That's perfectly methodical and pragmatic for a regime that sponsors worldwide terrorism.


Iran has sent both supplies and troops to southern Iraq - trying to take over 1/3rd the country.

That's perfectly methodical and pragmatic for a regime that sponsors worldwide terrorism.


Shouting "Death to Big Satan (USA)," and shouting "Death to Little Satan (Israel)" is perfectly methodical and pragmatic for a regime that sponsors worldwide terrorism.

The Captain
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
No way are they simply a 'peaceful' country. They're a sworn enemy of the 'opposite' side of Islam...the Shia vs Sunni battle and they'll keep at it till both factions wind up in a massive war.

You mean they are a sworn enemy of the side that took down the towers and attacked the Pentagon?

Hummm. . . enemy of my enemy and all that.

Cheers
Qazulight
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
You mean they are a sworn enemy of the side that took down the towers and attacked the Pentagon?

iirc, the Iranian proxies in Syria were there to support the relatively secular Syrian government against ISIS, the same crowd the US was supposedly fighting.

Steve
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
t,

Not necessarily quibbling with what you posted, but would like to know what independent, unbiased sources you are quoting.

It takes a pretty obvious effort to ship millions of pounds of cement through an Israeli blockade. I'm not saying that Iran is not supporting Hamas in Gaza, but that requires a mound of discussion which probably isn't worthwhile here.

As far as revolutionary groups, one man's revolutionary is another's freedom fighter. Both the government of Syria and the government of Yemen have been "in-place". The Syrian government is legitimate by any measure and while the government of Yemen is referred to as "rebels" by the Saudis, the reality may be the reverse - and Iran's support of them is more political (as they are anti-Saudi) than ideological.

Iran has no particular desire to "take over" Iraq that I have seen, but is supporting the Shia majority in the face of Sunni attacks (but, again, that requires lots of explanation), but it is unlikely that they would be any more welcomed as "liberators" than the US was.

Their path towards being able to create a nuke was dramatically delayed until the US pulled the plug on the nuke treaty. If they proceed it will likely be because of the US's record on forcing regime changes unless the target had nukes, rather than any particular desire to get into a nuclear conflict.

No one has said they are a peaceful nation, but then neither is the US, the Israelis, the Saudis or others in the area.

Not quibbling, just pointing out that nothing in that part of the world is simple and simple statements tend to be misleading.

Jeff
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Thank you for recommending this post to our Best of feature.
You will not be able to recommend any more posts today. (explain this)


Their path towards being able to create a nuke was dramatically delayed until the US pulled the plug on the nuke treaty.

Pretty much agreed with everything you wrote until I got to the above line.

IIRC the president pulled out of the treaty because Iran was secretly breaking the treaty.

When video of their government meetings show the legislature chanting "Death to America" and "Death to Israel" ... again ... shows up around the world I fail to see how any thinking person can think Iran has peaceful purposes in mind when working on their nuclear facilities.

https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/386856-iran-par...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
If their claims are true then they have come a long way and air attacks there could become very expensive for the attackers.

Not so much. We've seen video of cruise missiles going through windows
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&channel=mac_...

I'm surprised at you, Tim, everybody knows even our B-52s carry cruise missiles nowadays.
https://www.stratofortress.org/current-operations.htm
So stand-off launches are possible too.

A cruise missile is a guided missile used against terrestrial targets, that remains in the atmosphere and flies the major portion of its flight path at approximately constant speed. Cruise missiles are designed to deliver a large warhead over long distances with high precision. Modern cruise missiles are capable of travelling at supersonic or high subsonic speeds, are self-navigating, and are able to fly on a non-ballistic, extremely low-altitude trajectory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_missile
Print the post Back To Top