Iranian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

The Iranians have made it clear they want to strangle the strait.
Giving into them is only rewarding bad behavior. They want prices up and sanctions down. It helps the regime of its position.
Striking at them is also not going to win any thing more than more problems.
Convoy is a pain in the arse but the only real option on the table. The oil tanker companies won’t be happy but it’s the only way to prevent more attacks like the Limpet mines or more take overs.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

The Iranians have made it clear they want to strangle the strait.
Giving into them is only rewarding bad behavior. They want prices up and sanctions down. It helps the regime of its position.
Striking at them is also not going to win any thing more than more problems.
Convoy is a pain in the arse but the only real option on the table. The oil tanker companies won’t be happy but it’s the only way to prevent more attacks like the Limpet mines or more take overs.

Click to expand...

Sounds like a lot of tax payer dollars.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Because Iran never when under political pressure attacked foreign tankers.... oh wait yes they have.

Click to expand...

Oh, I thought we were talking about current crisis only. We're gonna expand the envelope to past behavior? OK, I'm down. Then I guess the world needs to build up their anti-ship capabilities so American destroyers don't shoot down their civilian airliners.

The Iranians have made it clear that they can stick to a deal and want to do normal business. The US, or rather just Trump, has made it clear that he wants to upstage Obama so he's willing to start another crisis with Iran in the middle-east. There is nothing more clear than the fact that everything was fine until Trump's America instigated problems. Rewarding bad behavior would be to let the US get anything their way in this matter. Iran has no desire to choke off the strait that they use to run their economy out of unless pushed into a corner by a bully, a bully that constantly supplies it with reasons to develop nuclear weapons while ironically telling it not to.

Start another crisis? If President Trump had wanted he has had a dozen opportunities to start a shooting war with Iran if that was the intention. When the drone was downed being the most blatant yet instead no bullets no bombs.

Yet instead last month blasts on tankers the month before that blasts on tankers. No Iranian tankers or those with Iranian oil.

Iran loves the deal it let them do whatever they wanted so long as they didn’t go nuclear before 2025. It was a 10 year deal meant to start the process of a longer term one but since Iran got everything it wanted they weren’t going back to the table.

Monday at 6:49 PM

Jura said:

not sure what kind of 'wagging the dog' by the UK it is to detain that Iranian tanker;

LOL pulled at the time of no deal Brexit approaching,

at the time when the RN is unable to even man two of its major surface combatants (I guess the official for HMS Monmouth and Daring would be quote unquote refit),

and I'd rather not to comment on funds for the RN modernization,

and so on

anyway what Iran showed to the UK was

If You Look For Trouble, You Will Find It

Click to expand...

and
In a naval confrontation with Iran, Great Britain can find neither ships nor friends

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I was surprised but a pretty realistic description by DefenseNews for example
Where are the Frigates? part;
reminding the USN hastily retired the OHPs etc.

anyway what matters is if the UK ever stops an Iranian vessel again

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Start another crisis? If President Trump had wanted he has had a dozen opportunities to start a shooting war with Iran if that was the intention. When the drone was downed being the most blatant yet instead no bullets no bombs.

Yet instead last month blasts on tankers the month before that blasts on tankers. No Iranian tankers or those with Iranian oil.

Iran loves the deal it let them do whatever they wanted so long as they didn’t go nuclear before 2025. It was a 10 year deal meant to start the process of a longer term one but since Iran got everything it wanted they weren’t going back to the table.

Click to expand...

True, Trump is not wanting a shooting war with Iran. Because nobody have any idea what Trump wants exactly, nor does he has any idea of achieving it. Call me a pessimist but Trump is the single most gigantic problem in US foreign diplomacy.

Problem with Trump is that he likes action but has little knowledge of handling the aftermath. He sunk the Iranian deal because he doesn't like it, yet is not struggling with getting Tehran back onto the negotiating table despite all his bluster. Trump is, as unfortunately as other posters had pointed out, all hat and no cattle.

People like to take a huge dump on the Iranian deal as it apparently gives Iran the longer end of the stick, but I did like to ask them if they have any other alternatives that does not end with Iran making a mad dash for the bomb, or sparking a shooting war in the Persian Gulf, which are the 2 most likely possibilities we are seeing right now. 10 years for Iran is also 10 years for the West to formulate the next step.

And I am not even going to go into the whole issue of how the "limpet mine attack" stinks so much of "false flag" that it did make a corpse roll in its grave...................... because the last thing you want to make a iron clad case would be for the victim himself to dispute the purported chain of attacks.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Start another crisis? If President Trump had wanted he has had a dozen opportunities to start a shooting war with Iran if that was the intention. When the drone was downed being the most blatant yet instead no bullets no bombs.

Yet instead last month blasts on tankers the month before that blasts on tankers. No Iranian tankers or those with Iranian oil.

Iran loves the deal it let them do whatever they wanted so long as they didn’t go nuclear before 2025. It was a 10 year deal meant to start the process of a longer term one but since Iran got everything it wanted they weren’t going back to the table.

Click to expand...

You're now counting the number of times that Trump didn't escalate the current crisis further. Firstly, that's because even he doesn't want an actual war with Iran; he wanted Iran to just roll over and to say he got a better deal than Obama. That's what he wanted; the crisis was the side-effect of his failure. And secondly, the standards for Trump are so low now that you are saluting him for the wars/crises that he didn't start! That's like saying, yeah, I killed a guy yesterday but I'm no criminal; look at all the times I totally had the chance to kill someone and I didn't!

That's right, start another crisis, which is what happened and what Trump did. Everybody was fine with the deal; there are no indications that Iran was in violation, even US allies were unwilling to pull out with Trump. But he didn't care that it was working; he wanted to say he made the deal instead of Obama, and that's why we have these problems today. Honestly, he shouldn't even have the power to do that; a 10 year deal should be binding for 10 years. Giving every incoming president the power to pull out of commitments made by former presidents makes the US an extremely unreliable country. A deal is only good until the next election, is what that says, although with Trump, nobody expects it to even last that long. Of course Iran got what it wanted; in order to tempt someone to give up his right to nuclear self defense, you need to make a deal that's acceptable to him. Now, Iran has exceeded their Uranium cap, all thanks to Trump. What Iran will do in 2025 is not for you to guess; it is for Iran to show in 2025. You are so blinded by bias, you are accusing people of crimes that you imagine them committing 6 years down the road! Every undesirable event in recent time involving Iran was precipitated by American unreliability and aggression.

A Brazil company was afraid of sanctions, due to that it was unwilling to refuel two Iranian grain transporting vessel.

This king of stuff required, you know, to avoid mass starvation .


Brazil court orders Petrobras to refuel Iran grain vessels

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Other funny warconservative view :


The USA - Iranian relations going back to the level of Code of Hammurabi , eyes for eyes, so we can be sure Iran will kill at least one USA soldier for each killed Iranian.
With the full support of Iranian population.


From here there is a straight way for the next world war.

I think it is time to fix my spare post apocalyptic geiger counter. I live too close to a class 1 strategic target.

Looks like my joke about a law can be passed to make possible the seizure of the Iranian tanker is true, as it looks like John Bolton managed to get thought a law regarding of this matter 36 hours of prior of the piracy .

• Jeremy Hunt condemns Iran’s seizure of the Stena Impero as an act of “state piracy” and warns Iran of an increased Western military presence in the waters along their coastline
• Stop the War Coalition lays blame for the crisis on the detainment of the Iranian tanker Grace 1 by Royal Marines two weeks earlier, arguing: “This can hardly have been a legal act”
• Shadow foreign office minister Fabian Hamilton notes that legislation was introduced in Gibraltar 36 hours in advance to shore up the legality of Grace 1’s seizure
• SNP international affairs spokesperson Stephen Gethins slams Boris Johnson’s tenure as secretary, saying it illustrated “what happens when you’re not fully briefed when dealing with Iran”

Wednesday at 7:53 AM

Jura said:

...

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

Click to expand...

and she's arrived:


·

Royal Navy has officially confirmed HMS Duncan has arrived in the Gulf to support the safe passage of British-flagged ships through the Strait of Hormuz.