While Distracted by the race Between the 'Lesser of 2 Evils' America Draws Closer to MAJOR WAR

[easyt65]

Again, it happened once and we know that little trick now and we're ready for it. Do you tink we didn't learn that lesson?

'Being ready For it' and actually being able to prevent it are 2 separate things.

Did you pay attention to / read the 2 reports about the US ship being engaged by NUMEROUS small boats? A dozen or more can be used to engage a USN vessel...and all it takes is one to get through, no matter how 'ready' you are for it because your rules of Engagement have been changed. Unless you are guaranteeing that there is no way for one to get through....

If I am an enemy, and I want to close the straights I would send a dozen or more after a ship passing through the straights WHILE having my anti-ship batter in the straights fire on the same ship, forcing it to split it's focus. Of course the ship is not alone and will have support from any other ship that may be close by, but such an attack would elevate the chances of damaging the ship. (That's called 'TACTICS').

 

[easyt65]

Uummmmmmm......... A missing post...... Uuummmmmm.........

Only if you deleted one of your own, liar.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

Hung by your own ******* lies you JERK! Now just how does terrestrial radar receive a return from a ship over 600 miles away asshole? It can't is the ONLY answer. You lied and you got caught in you lie and glorification of your ignorance!

Now you guys are mixing your narratives.

The RADAR story was about what just happened. The discussion that spawned off of that was about if a small boat could close the straight, if it could damage a US ship, which it obviously can. Now you're trying to mix the two.

Bottom Line: Why did we strike a YEMEN RADAR when the missiles never came anywhere near the ship?
- A YEMEN Missile battery took hostile action against a US vessel...twice. Why do we care? Because anyone taking hostile missile shots at US ships - warships or commercial ships - in international waters anywhere in the world is our concern, and we will - as demonstrated - take retaliatory action to ensure such actions do not happen again, to protect US ships 'freedom of navigation' anywhere in the world in international waters in the future.

THE SIDEBAR: Iran most certainly does have the capability to close the straights. In fact hostile action in the gulf has resulted in international shipping completely STOPPING in the past, as LLOYD's Of London will not cover ships going through war zones. Iran has the small boats, anti-shipping batteries on the coast, and mines that will more than stop traffic through the straight.

NO, Yemen can NOT reach or effect ships passing through the straight, and I never said they could. Again, you're deliberately mixing two different conversations...or you've confused yourselves.

I'm not mixing shit you ******* liar! I responded to your simple post here directly below ONLY and have stayed on point all along, asshole. So here it is again you ******* idiot with emphasis;

The small boats often harass naval shipping, but Yemen firing missiles at ships passing through the Straight - THAT is an ESCALATION.

I responded with this, you dancing and deflecting dummy;

Damn but you are stupid! How the **** can missiles using radar targeting in Yemen target ships in the Strait of Hormuz over 600 miles from the Strait at its nearest point, IDIOT! The USS Mason was fired on in the Red Sea about 1200 miles from the Strait, dummy!

As to the rest of that bullshit you threw in there to try and deflect by baffling with horseshit, it is not ******* relevant, germane or related to what you wrote and to which I responded. You ******* lied, then lied again and have lied yet again! Run from what you posted, Forest, but it's on the record now you ******* bald face liar! What a pitiful low life **** you are!

 

[Ringel05]

I said said we're ready for them now

You SAID SAID that after I proved you wrong by posting a picture of the USS Cole, proving you had no idea what you were talking about, dumbass...'nice try'.

The only thing you're proving is your lack of knowledge in this area. As for the accidental said said...... is that all you have as a rebuke, I mean other than to call me an idiot because I know you're clueless?

No, he's correct...you're an idiot.....

Those small boats are impressive...no?

Again, it happened once and we know that little trick now and we're ready for it. Do you think we didn't learn that lesson?

No.....

View attachment 93372

Okie dokie...... Sooooo, you honestly believe Iran could shut down the straights using their fast boats with not only the US but other nations patrolling the straights? No they couldn't nor would they as they know full well the ramifications to their own economy if they tried.
Oh and yes, we learned, they try to push the envelop but know where to back off because they know they'll be blown out of the water if they cross that line. As for an incident like that causing war (what this discussion started out as), no. Causing a limited armed response, yes.

 

[Ringel05]

Uummmmmmm......... A missing post...... Uuummmmmm.........

Only if you deleted one of your own, liar.

No I didn't.........

 

[Ringel05]

Again, it happened once and we know that little trick now and we're ready for it. Do you tink we didn't learn that lesson?

'Being ready For it' and actually being able to prevent it are 2 separate things.

Did you pay attention to / read the 2 reports about the US ship being engaged by NUMEROUS small boats? A dozen or more can be used to engage a USN vessel...and all it takes is one to get through, no matter how 'ready' you are for it because your rules of Engagement have been changed. Unless you are guaranteeing that there is no way for one to get through....

If I am an enemy, and I want to close the straights I would send a dozen or more after a ship passing through the straights WHILE having my anti-ship batter in the straights fire on the same ship, forcing it to split it's focus. Of course the ship is not alone and will have support from any other ship that may be close by, but such an attack would elevate the chances of damaging the ship. (That's called 'TACTICS').

Obviously anything can happen and if you actually read international experts analysis on Iran's capability to close the straight they all agree it's basically impossible, Iran has bluster but lacks the actual capability. Oh they could cause temporary problems but it would not lead to a complete shut down.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Newsflash!

America has been at war all this time if not direct then by proxy and nothing new to me!

 

[easyt65]

Okie dokie...... Sooooo, you honestly believe Iran could shut down the straights using their fast boats with not only the US but other nations patrolling the straights? No they couldn't nor would they as they know full well the ramifications to their own economy if they tried.
Oh and yes, we learned, they try to push the envelop but know where to back off because they know they'll be blown out of the water if they cross that line. As for an incident like that causing war (what this discussion started out as), no. Causing a limited armed response, yes.

Again you demonstrate you do not have a grasp on the larger picture.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, in 2011, an average of 14 tankers per day passed out of the Persian Gulf through the Strait carrying 17 million barrels (2,700,000 m3) of crude oil. This was said to represent 35% of the world's seaborne oil shipments and 20% of oil traded worldwide.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Hormuz

Freedom of Navigation through the Strait is not only one of the US' primary goals in that region, it is the WORLD'S! 35% of all of the WORLD'S seaborne oil shipments - for nations' energy.

The reason the Iranians don't just willy-nilly declare 'The Straight is Closed' and try to enforce it because they KNOW it would be WAR...and NOT just with the United States!

And you can keep parroting your question about the small boats over and over, but I have already answered it numerous times. (If you feel like asking it again just look back at my response to the last 2 - 3 times you asked me.)

Iran would not use small boats alone. You keep ignoring the fact that they also have anti-shipping batteries along the coast in the strait that DEFINITELY can reach out and touch ships passing through the strait.


you also don't understand that IF a US ship passing through the strait was damaged (as the USS Cole was) and the Iranians declared the strait to be closed, ALL international shipping would wait at/return to the ports inside the gulf and would not pass into the mouth of the straits outside the gulf, like a hugs whipping parking lot. Lloyds of London, the primary company that insures those ships, would not let them enter a hostile area like that.

For Iran to attack a US vessel like that would be an act of war, no matter how limited or expanded, and a declaration of closing the strait is an act of war. Again, we would not be the only ones to jump on this to re-open the strait.

 

[easyt65]

Obviously anything can happen and if you actually read international experts analysis on Iran's capability to close the straight they all agree it's basically impossible, Iran has bluster but lacks the actual capability.

Please provide a link to all of these expert's opinion....


---------------------------

Can Iran close down the Strait of Hormuz?
The ayatollahs’ growing armoury is dwarfed by that of the United States. But any attempt to close the oil lanes is likely to lead to a major conflict.

 

[easyt65]

COULD THEY and WOULD They are 2 separate things all together! For HOW LONG is also an entirely separate issue.

COULD THEY SHUT DOWN THE STRAITS:
YES.

FOR HOW LONG:
Not 'long'...but long enough to impact the cost of oil and international shipping.

WOULD THEY?
Only in the direst of circumstances. Oil revenue makes up about 80% of the Iranian foreign currency earnings. Sanctions imposed on Iran did hurt them, and they do not wish to return to those sanctions. It would hurt Iran as much if not more to do so.

 

[Ringel05]

Okie dokie...... Sooooo, you honestly believe Iran could shut down the straights using their fast boats with not only the US but other nations patrolling the straights? No they couldn't nor would they as they know full well the ramifications to their own economy if they tried.
Oh and yes, we learned, they try to push the envelop but know where to back off because they know they'll be blown out of the water if they cross that line. As for an incident like that causing war (what this discussion started out as), no. Causing a limited armed response, yes.

Again you demonstrate you do not have a grasp on the larger picture.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, in 2011, an average of 14 tankers per day passed out of the Persian Gulf through the Strait carrying 17 million barrels (2,700,000 m3) of crude oil. This was said to represent 35% of the world's seaborne oil shipments and 20% of oil traded worldwide.
-- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Hormuz

Freedom of Navigation through the Strait is not only one of the US' primary goals in that region, it is the WORLD'S! 35% of all of the WORLD'S seaborne oil shipments - for nations' energy.

The reason the Iranians don't just willy-nilly declare 'The Straight is Closed' and try to enforce it because they KNOW it would be WAR...and NOT just with the United States!

And you can keep parroting your question about the small boats over and over, but I have already answered it numerous times. (If you feel like asking it again just look back at my response to the last 2 - 3 times you asked me.)

Iran would not use small boats alone. You keep ignoring the fact that they also have anti-shipping batteries along the coast in the strait that DEFINITELY can reach out and touch ships passing through the strait.


you also don't understand that IF a US ship passing through the strait was damaged (as the USS Cole was) and the Iranians declared the strait to be closed, ALL international shipping would wait at/return to the ports inside the gulf and would not pass into the mouth of the straits outside the gulf, like a hugs whipping parking lot. Lloyds of London, the primary company that insures those ships, would not let them enter a hostile area like that.

For Iran to attack a US vessel like that would be an act of war, no matter how limited or expanded, and a declaration of closing the strait is an act of war. Again, we would not be the only ones to jump on this to re-open the strait.

Well you finally clarified your initial OP and it appears the difference in our arguments is you think they could shut down the straight most likely leading to war, mine is I (and all the experts, military and otherwise, I rely on for information) know about all of Iran's capabilities and know they would not be able to close the straights because those capabilities would be almost instantly neutralized if they attempted to utilize them.
Now if we and everyone else destroyed Iran's capabilities in this instance Iran might declare war but that doesn't mean we or anyone else would declare war against Iran especially after they've been neutralized in this aspect literally removing them as a threat to shipping.
That's where our primary disagreement lies.

 

[Ringel05]

Obviously anything can happen and if you actually read international experts analysis on Iran's capability to close the straight they all agree it's basically impossible, Iran has bluster but lacks the actual capability.

Please provide a link to all of these expert's opinion....


---------------------------

Here's one that partially covers it (economic and political assessment).
Conclusion
Concerns about broadening international sanctions on Iran’s oil exports prompted some Iranian
officials to make threatening statements about closing the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has invested in
the military capability to close or disrupt traffic through the Strait. If Iran attempted to do so, the
United States—which has invested in military preparedness to keep the Strait open—would
respond, potentially joined by other countries. Such a military response may or may not be
limited to simply reopening the Strait for transit.
The threat of military response, coupled with its economic concern about disrupting commerce
with its own trading partners, makes Iran unlikely to attempt to close the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has the option of harassing tanker traffic through the Gulf as it has in the past, though that also runs the risk of military retaliation and alienating customers. However, it is possible that Iranian action becomes relatively more likely as more countries reduce or refuse Iranian exports.
Alternatively, Iran may choose to continue making threatening statements without actually acting
and/or to seek a diplomatic solution to curb oil sanctions through renewing international talks on
its nuclear program. A disruption of oil exports through the Strait would have significant impacts
on oil prices around the world. To some degree a disruption could be offset by release from the
U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve and similar reserves in other countries.

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/R42335.pdf

And here's more;

assessment of iran's ability to close the straits of hormuz - Google Search

If you read through you'll see that Iran will suffer more than anyone else if they try. So much for my not seeing the big picture........

 

[easyt65]

Well you finally clarified your initial OP and it appears the difference in our arguments is you think they could shut down the straight most likely leading to war, mine is I (and all the experts, military and otherwise, I rely on for information) know about all of Iran's capabilities and know they would not be able to close the straights because those capabilities would be almost instantly neutralized if they attempted to utilize them.

1. I agree we disagree on the opinion regarding Iran being able (not willing to) to shut down the strait or not.

2. You are so full of SHIT / false bravado claiming that YOU 'KNOW' all of Iran's military capabilities! Where did you learn all of it from? CNN? The Internet? You must hold some extremely high security clearance and work in an extremely impressive job/location to have access to all of that highly classified information!
- PS: AH IT WAS ON THE INTERNET.

3. 'Instantly neutralized'? Hardly. If you mean in a week or so then maybe. During the 1st Gulf War - 'shock and awe' - how long did it take us to beat Hussein's ass down? It wasn't 'instantly' by a damn longshot.

 

[easyt65]

So much for my not seeing the big picture........

Mixing apples and oranges again. 'the big picture comment' was about US interest and why we would care about 'Freedom of Navigation' NOT about Iran's willingness to close the Strait.

 

[Norman]

Are you absolutely sure is not just under reported?

Nope. Yemen firing missiles at US warships is NOT an 'under-reported' event. It is an escalation, but you are right - THIS incident is not enough to go to war over.

You're forgetting something, Yemen is not worth fighting over, they have nothing we need or want.

What a load-full. They have plenty of dedicated democrat voters that could be imported.

 

[Ringel05]

Well you finally clarified your initial OP and it appears the difference in our arguments is you think they could shut down the straight most likely leading to war, mine is I (and all the experts, military and otherwise, I rely on for information) know about all of Iran's capabilities and know they would not be able to close the straights because those capabilities would be almost instantly neutralized if they attempted to utilize them.

1. I agree we disagree on the opinion regarding Iran being able (not willing to) to shut down the strait or not.

2. You are so full of SHIT / false bravado claiming that YOU 'KNOW' all of Iran's military capabilities! Where did you learn all of it from? CNN? The Internet? You must hold some extremely high security clearance and work in an extremely impressive job/location to have access to all of that highly classified information!

3. 'Instantly neutralized'? Hardly. If you mean in a week or so then maybe. During the 1st Gulf War - 'shock and awe' - how long did it take us to beat Hussein's ass down? It wasn't 'instantly' by a damn longshot.

Next time you claim someone is full of shit you need to be looking in a mirror. What was it, an hour ago when you said you didn't have time for people like me?
Instantly neutralized means we know what and where and have those assets targeted. There's a major difference between what happened in Iraq and what would happen in Iran.
Do I have that kind of access? Not any longer as I'm basically retired from that line of work as is my wife who cut her teeth on SALT.........

 

[Ringel05]

So much for my not seeing the big picture........

Mixing apples and oranges again. 'the big picture comment' was about US interest and why we would care about 'Freedom of Navigation' NOT about Iran's willingness to close the Strait.

It appears you're misinterpreting what I'm saying because I don't agree with your amateur assessment 100%.

 

[Ringel05]

Are you absolutely sure is not just under reported?

Nope. Yemen firing missiles at US warships is NOT an 'under-reported' event. It is an escalation, but you are right - THIS incident is not enough to go to war over.

You're forgetting something, Yemen is not worth fighting over, they have nothing we need or want.

What a load-full. They have plenty of dedicated democrat voters that could be imported.

I would include all hacks, democrat and republican.......

 

[easyt65]

Next time you claim someone is full of shit you need to be looking in a mirror. What was it, an hour ago when you said you didn't have time for people like me?

You're right - I should have listened to myself and avoided further discussions with you so I could have avoided your bragging about how you KNOW exactly what Iran has in it's military arsenal because you read it on the INTERNET!

 

[Ringel05]

Next time you claim someone is full of shit you need to be looking in a mirror. What was it, an hour ago when you said you didn't have time for people like me?

You're right - I should have listened to myself and avoided further discussions with you so I could have avoided your bragging about how you KNOW exactly what Iran has in it's military arsenal because you read it on the INTERNET!

Tell yourself what you want, you will anyway in defense of your own ego, no skin off of my nose that you're wrong on many levels. Have a nice life.