Iranian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Jura said:

page me once it's a reality, LOL

Click to expand...

Well if the French say they want to join it and then don't that would damage their credibility on the international stage. Much better to quietly reject the idea or take their time to consider it. But it's up to them, obviously.

Anyway, what are your thoughts if they do join? Is it enough if they provide 1 or 2 ships, or do you have a larger "minimum" in mind?

Mr T said:

Well if the French say they want to join it and then don't that would damage their credibility on the international stage. Much better to quietly reject the idea or take their time to consider it. But it's up to them, obviously.

Anyway, what are your thoughts if they do join? Is it enough if they provide 1 or 2 ships, or do you have a larger "minimum" in mind?

Click to expand...

My thoughts are regardless of how many of what they send if they send anything, they now know to steer clear from any illegal seizures of Iranian ships!

Jura said:

Yesterday at 6:49 PMnow
Iran’s illegal seizure of a British tanker – a failure by the Royal Navy or a failure of strategy?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

kind of 'bright future' type of blog post, some UK fanbois are hilarious in the discussion below it

Click to expand...

@Jura,
According to the article, the Iranian tanker seizure went through a judicial review process whereby an additional 30 days of impoundment was handed down by the Gibraltar court. Since you are pretty good at digging up stuff, any chance you can get hold of the court decision document which should explain the legal basis behind the seizure?


Updated.
P.S. “At a private meeting of the Supreme Court on an application by the Attorney General, the Court has extended the period of detention of the vessel, Grace 1, for a further 30 days and has set a new hearing for 15 August 2019,” the Gibraltar government said on Friday.

Mr T said:

Well if the French say they want to join it and then don't that would damage their credibility on the international stage. Much better to quietly reject the idea or take their time to consider it. But it's up to them, obviously.

Anyway, what are your thoughts if they do join? Is it enough if they provide 1 or 2 ships, or do you have a larger "minimum" in mind?

Click to expand...

in my armchair, "minimum" would be the assets needed to go to War the same day they're hit

Jun 19, 2019

Jura said:

...

by the way I've recently read in Twitter the RN in 1980s was strong enough to keep four major surface combatants in the Persian Gulf for escorting there (the RN had fifty plus of them at that time, now is down to 19 (or 17 depending on how you count) as far as I know)

Click to expand...

so I think if a RN frigate had been attacked and badly damaged by Iran while escorting a tanker in 1980s,

the UK (together with the US 5th Fleet etc. I guess) would've fought Iran immediately

(but hey, at that time my primary source on was a Czechoslovak communistic military journal (it sounds very funny to me now, but it's true), so I'm not exactly an expert on Cold War NATO)

now I wonder what the RN would do if Iran sent a Type 45 to the bottom of the Persian Gulf

Friday at 9:54 PM

Jura said:

the Pentagon's video of quote unquote downing:

Click to expand...

and nothing happened except the Pentagon sort of doubled down:
Marines Might Have Brought Down Multiple Iranian Drones from Navy Ship, 4-Star Says

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

sure

Jura said:

in my armchair, "minimum" would be the assets needed to go to War the same day they're hit

Click to expand...

That sounds rather excessive. Iran is unlikely to declare war by attacking ships escorting civilian shipping, not least because previously it backed off when a Royal Navy ship challenged it harassing a different civilain ship. Currently it's only going after ships that aren't protected.

now I wonder what the RN would do if Iran sent a Type 45 to the bottom of the Persian Gulf

Click to expand...

Not sure. For a start it would depend if Iran admitted it sunk it or denied it like when North Korea sunk the Cheonan. But it would obviously be a big escalation, not least because it would take more than a handful of planes or missiles to sink one. Even semi-pacifist members of NATO like Germany would have to agree to take action against Iran, if only economic. Does Iran want to salvage the nuclear deal with Europe? It can't do that if it attacks the Royal Navy out of anger.

"Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, head of U.S. Central Command, a second Iranian drone is believed to have been taken out by Marines within an hour of the first on Friday and that there might've been even more aircraft in the air."
"As always, it was a complex tactical picture. We believe two drones," he said. "We believe two drones were successfully -- there may have been more that we are not aware of -- those are the two that we engaged successfully."
Even this dude, a 4 star general, is admitting that he doesn't know. Everything is "we believe" and "there may/might"! A 4-star general doesn't know, which means nobody under him reported anything with confidence. They likely just blasted signals whenever they detected a drone and made assumptions that sometimes it went down; other times, it didn't, so probably 2, maybe more, maybe less; they don't know. If they had videos, they'd know; it wouldn't be "believed to me" or "might have", it would be "at least one" or "at least two."

Mr T said:

Not sure. For a start it would depend if Iran admitted it sunk it or denied it like when North Korea sunk the Cheonan. But it would obviously be a big escalation, not least because it would take more than a handful of planes or missiles to sink one. .

Click to expand...

The South Korean frigate Cheonan was broken in half by a torpedo, in the Persian Gulf there are dozens of small submarines similar to those of North Korea that use torpedoes, so it may not be necessary to use planes or missiles to cause serious damage even to a destroyer that decides to enter the Persian Gulf in that funnel that is the Strait of Hormuz, all this meant in case of conflict, but a pair of 533mm torpedoes would be badly digested even by a Type 45

At the moment Iran is the one that try to de-escalate the events, the USA pushing for escalation.


The seizure of tankers / ships will be the top of iceberg, there will be many more answer from the Iranian side.

And anyway, the most likely reason of the theft of Iranian tanker is internal UK politics, a person in the government tried to score points, or to get better position to be the next prime.

Internal play of the UK oligarchy .

Iran now hinting at a ship swap and stating (which it didn't do earlier) that the tanker was not bound for Syria. The UK had already said it was willing to release it if assurances were received that it wasn't going to Syria.

Not sure if this is enough or if the UK will require something more than a verbal assurance. We'll see.