The key word in Adm. Jacoby's testimony is briefly. Yes, Iran could briefly close the Strait. However the majority of Iran's naval forces would then be hemmed in and it would be shooting fish in a barrel. Now to address your "stealth" torpedoes and submarines. The US Navy had and has zero problems in tracking Soviet/Russian and Chinese submarines whereas they have never successfully tracked a US sub long enough to obtain a firing solution. These submarines are far more advanced than anything Iran has produced. Furthermore the US will have no problem detecting your piece of sh!t "stealth torpedoes". In order to strike their target they will need to run at a high speed otherwise they could be outrun and outmanouvered. This, in turn, causes water displacement which produces a signature that can easily be picked up by the radar on our subs and surface ships. I guarantee you that the US Navy is not worried about Iranian produced "stealth" subs and boats, the mine laying would be a hassle but could be delt with, your entire navy would be destroyed by plane, helicopter, and submarine launched weapons, and any missile battery, sunburn or otherwise, would be destroyed the minute they turned on their radar. Like Adm. Jacoby said, Iran could BRIEFLY close the Strait. But is briefly closing the Strait worth the costs to Iran?
Congratualtions to IM!! Most posters celebrate 1000 posts, but IM has reached the amazing plateau of 1000 threads threadjacked! He will be enshrined in the Guiness Book of World Records!!
You have a source to support your comments? I can give you sources in opposite. For instance, sources that point out that the US has no defense against the sun burn missile. Those guarantees are worth as much as your guarantee that Rafsanjani was going to be Iran's next president. Indeed even less. The US navy has itself said that Iran's forces and missles present it with a 360 degree danger and there have been studies showing that Iran could possibly sink a good chuck of the US naval fleet in the region. You live in a fantasy world. The US could not destroy the liquid fueled (meaning much longer launch time with no storage ability), much more primitive, Scud missile batteries of Saddam Hussein. And that was in a country like Iraq, where a large chunk of the Iraqi population could be enlisted to supply the US with information. Iran has no reason to close the Straits of Hormuz, unless the country is being threatened. Once it is being threatened, the cost to Iran is unavoidable and beyond Iran's control. The issue becomes the costs to the US. Besides, I mentioned that to be able to successfully withstand the US, Iran would need to have an alliance with countries like China. On its own, the more dangerous Iran's threats to the US, the more likely the US will brandish the "nuclear card" as it has indirectly a few times. Iran needs some protection against "nuclear blackmail". Otherwise, if nukes were erased out of the equation, the balance would change dramatically. Iran would still lose at the end, and lose badly, but the US would suffer too much for it all to be worth the costs of an imperialistic whim.
Yes, it's called physics you moron. An attack using multiple sunburns is the only way Iran would achieve any success. As Iran has a very limited number of these weapons, this option would disappear rapidly. While the Phalanx system is not capable of defeating the sunburn, the AEGIS missile defense system is capable of defeating a small number. My source is a former XO of a SEAL Team. Your source should be more credible than newsmax, rense.com, or globalsecurity.org(since you say its analysis of Iran lacks credibility) or the like. So I was wrong about who was elected. I don't recall you correctly predicting who would be elected months before hand. And I was correct as to why the EU was dealing with Rafsanjani. As for dealing with the US fleet in the region, sure, Iran might be able to take a few ships out, thus briefly (and there's that key word again) closing the Strait. However they would expend the majority of their anti-ship missiles as well as lose most of their fleet and aircraft. Then, three more carrier battle groups arrive and the Strait is reopened. There's still 8 more carrier battle groups left that haven't been deployed at that point. I live in a fantasy world? You're the one that thinks Iran has stealth torpedoes and submarines and is a mighty power that will one day rise again to dominate a region. As for a large chunk, remind me again how long ago the first Gulf War was as well as where the Scuds were being launched from. Last I checked a "large chunk of the Iraqi population" did not live in the western deserts of Iraq, therefore they would have no knowledge of the location of Scuds. You truly are a piece of work. How many days until you move?
It is physics that the US can detect and take out any missile launched at it ships? In that case, the laws of physics have been defied by missiles such as the sunburn! So you agree there is one category of missiles that defy what you apparently regard as the laws of physics! I guess there might be a little hope for you still... The aegis is not able to defeat the sunburn missile. That is pretty well established. So you want me to also refer to annonymous, unnamed, and unpublished sources? I can do that too! You didn't predict. You claimed that the election results were already known! And that Rafasnajani was going to the next president of Iran. I am not "sure" about anything, but that seems to be about the only reasonable claim you have made in this post. Iran does not need stealth weapons to dominate the region. As Arab commentators from US friendly countries have noted, the minute the US leaves, Iran can rearrange the map of the entire region without even firing a shot. Otherwise, none of my comments have meant to imply that Iran could defeat the US miilitarily; only that it could make a military engagement costly. Iraq was able to even fire its shorter range missiles into Saudi Arabia during "Operation Iraqi Freedom". That from areas already virtually under US occupation in the south. Next month, September. And can't wait.
Holy sh!t you're stupid. I was talking about your "stealth torpedoes". Go ahead and try again with your post. And here I was thinking that we were stuck with you until October. What a shame.
Dealing with many of the posters here is to me like dealing with a spoiled, and some cases delinquent, children who can't behave. You want to learn about new generation torpedoes which the US itself is working on? And which defy your laws of physics? Here is a place to start.
So would that be a joint research operation between the US and Iranian Navy, or is Iran more advanced in its torpedo development than the US? And where in that article did it say that a 100% stealth torpedoe is possible? You're pretty dense. Funny, but dense.
Dreamer, You're absolutely right. But you have to understand a controlled stir-up temp in Taiwan can sever at least two purposes: 1) Make sure Taiwan to pump money for arsenals so those money can go to Bush's friends--just like you paying protection fees to Mafia; 2) Make China to give consessions when it asks US to tell Taiwan cool off. The first issue for Taiwan to pay protection fee, right now due to internal policitical fighting, the budget to give moeny to Bush's friends is in trouble. So you need more pressure coming up Pentagon (such as Chinese military report to exagerate the threats of China), and Congress, and Medias. Just need to give Taiwan enough pressure to give in. The second issue for China to ask US to do something to make sure Taiwan cool off, and there is no free lunch. So China has to give up something. But in same card, China can make one single phone call to North Korea to make US to give up something. For me this is like a Texas-Hold'em poker game: Taiwan calls, China follows the call; Then US does a raise, and China goes with ALL-IN! That will slow down everybody. Then it becomes normal. No one does anything. What I feel is that when US Pentogan strategist was publishing a strategy about how to unity NATO and Japan to fight a total war against China, there is no much reactions, but when a Chinese general talks back, the Congress and Media are in full fury!
It is pointless to argue with him, he has no concept that what Iran can do is still decades behind US research in the same arena. While Iran attempts to deploy their "Sunburn" and stealth weapons, we will just use our space based lasers and lay waste to their R&D shacks. There is no finer Navy in the World then the US Navy. We ahve 2 Fleets that patrol the Worlds Oceans, hell one is dedicated to the Pacific, thus the moniker Pac Fleet, and the other handles the Atlantic, the Indian falls under the Pacific Fleet for obvious reasons. Iran couldn't hope to inflict any serious damage on even 1 Air Battle Group let alone sink a Carrier or the group itself. The "stealth" torps that IM keeps blathering on about have been disproved time and time again. Besides the US will just use some stealth Bombers, fire some stealth cruise missles, and not so stealthly destroy any and all major cities and military bases in Iran with either convential or non-convential arms. But again it won't come to that as Iran cannot afford a war with the US. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/20/tech/main578998.shtml http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/021020-laser1.htm http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/usa/submar.htm http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/ http://www.military.com/ http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/VA-news/VA-Pilot/issues/1995/vp950401/04010226.htm http://foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=2774 http://www.sinodefence.com/missile/antiship/3m80.asp http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001053.html http://newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/6/4/165209.shtml Some links to read.
See for IM this whole Iran v USA thing is like, my daddy can beat up your daddy type conversation. Even though his daddy is a 105 pound 5'4" desk jockey and my daddy is a 6'6" 232 pound Navy SEAL/UFC Heavyweight Champion.
Its more like this: The US a bully, trying to bully Iran around. The US is bigger and stronger, though not wiser, and can indeed beat up Iran. I am saying to you, however, that if the US decides to get violent, Iran can throw some punches too. Sure. The US will beat the crap out of Iran in case of war, but why get into a war in the first place? Since Iran is not asking anything from the US, and only wants not to be bullied around, I am hoping that there will be enough sane Americans who will say: why even take a couple of punches, to beat up Iran, when Iran doesn't want anything from us? Lets leave Iran alone, or make friends with it instead. And, no, you can't decide what kind of government Iran should have either. That is for the people in Iran to decide and no one else.
yes, you iranians can throw some punches by funding terrorists in iraq and sending your suicide bombers to help them out. But in real fight, you iran will be nothing. You iranians try to draw the Chinese into the fight with the U.S.? Go tell your mummy that this strategey is not gonna work. China need oil but Russia have a lot of it. It is you Iran that can't defend your country that's why you iranians are so desperate to form those alliances with countries like China, India or Russia.
Guys, You need to read the book (I forget the name ) about how CIA staged a coup out of US embassy to overthrow a democratic Iranian government and restored the Shah. That event was the starting point for all those religion fundamentalists and loonies to start their movement. By reading history, you can feel our government didn't sever our long term national interest very well. For example, the full support of Saudi Arabia who is actually the main financial resources for most of terrorisms. Also for all the bio, chemical weapon technologies we gave to Sadam Hussein (by Rumsfield himself), or help Bin Ladin training his troops durig Afghanistan war, etc. Many of the polices are short-sighted and today we are paying prices for them. If we are not throwing out a democratic Iran (request by UK for their BP company), we may not deal a mullah ruled country there; If we are not train Bin Ladin and Co., we don't have to face the threat from Al Quada today; If we don't support the Saudi Royal garbabge, there are probably someone else running the country without pumping money out to Bin Ladin, Taliban, etc. So wish people in Pentagon understand, it is better to have China as a friend rather than an enemy. Those money you got from defense budget by creating a monster enemy to justify it is nice, but normal Americans will pay the price later on.
I understand that the US screwed up with the reinstatement of the Shah. However I find IM's statement that the current govt. is the choice of the people to be laughable. In the past 2 elections there, over 3000 people have been refused the right to run for office. Among them a high percent were reformers who truly represented the people. It is unlikely that any war will happen with Iran, but if it should happen there is little doubt that the US will win and win easily. I don't want to see that happen, I do not want to the US in another war, but if push comes to shove, I fully expect the US to do whatever it takes to win. Iran could become a strong regional power and perhaps a stabilizing force in the region, they just need to choose to do that, and to do that they will have to renounce their support for terror groups like Hezbollah, and they will have to get rid of the puppet masters that control the country. Mani has stated, Mani I hope I am getting you right here, that over 70% of teh Iranians are under 30 and that this group is not in favor of the current govt. If that is true, then that is a very clear majority that does not agree with the "elected" govt.
What is laughable is your attempt to speak to a subject you have no clue about. In the presidential election, there were more than a 1,000 people who registered. The overwhelming majority unknown "no hopers"; many even failing to meet basic age or education requirements. At the time of the registrations, there were many reports about the aspiring actors and similar figures registering their names. Not one of the rejected candidates had a snow balls' chance in hell to win the election in Iran. The best known among them was Ebrahim Yazdi. He ended up endorcing Moin, who finished 5th in the first round. Moin was the candidate of Iran's top reformist party, the IIPF. Yazdi himself had previously run for president and lost badly. A complete analysis of Iran's election can be found in the online encyclopedia. There you can find the list of real candidates that were rejected. Other than Yazdi, and maybe the former Iran goalie Hejazi, none of the rest would have even earned 1% of the vote. Hejazi, a non political figure, might have done as well as Blazevic in Croatia while Yazzdi would have merely split Moin's votes.
I see that while you were trying to attack my accurate post concerning the most recent election, you chose not to acknowledge or address the validity of my other part of the post where over 2000 reformers were banned from running for govt.position. How could any of the over 3000 people who were denied the right to run for office expect to get any of the vote? Yeah that's what I thought!
You do realize that threadjacking was invented by the Iranians, as was China, India, Russia and Democracy.
********, I just got neg rep by Iranian Monitor for troll. Why is this a troll IM? "........It is you Iran that can't defend your country that's why you iranians are so desperate to form those alliances with countries like China, India or Russia..........."