“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Saturday, January 07, 2012

Joint US-Israeli Military Exercise to Begin




Iran, US and Israel announce new war games as tensions rise in the Gulf

Surge in military activity in the region comes amid threat of EU embargo on Iranian oil and possible closure of strait of Hormuz
















Tensions on the oil shipping lanes in the Gulf have escalated with the announcement of new naval exercises by Iran's Revolutionary Guards and news that Israel and the US are planning to carry out extensive joint manoeuvres in the region.

The naval commander for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, said the drill in February would be "different compared to previous exercises held by the IRGC". The Iranian navy finished 10 days of exercises in the Gulf on Monday, during which it tested a range of new missiles. It warned that Iran could close the strait of Hormuz, the narrowest point in the Gulf, through which a fifth of the world's traded oil passes.

On the same day, the Israeli military said it was preparing for joint exercises with the US to rehearse missile defence and co-operation between the forces. The manoeuvres involve thousands of troops, have been planned for some time and were hailed by Israeli and US officials as their biggest joint drill.

Associated Press quoted an unnamed Israel official as saying the drill would test multiple Israeli and US air defence systems against incoming missiles and rockets in the next few weeks. Israel has developed the Arrow anti-ballistic system, which is designed to intercept Iranian missiles in the stratosphere, with the US.

The military activity in the region comes at a time of high tension. At the end of this month, EU foreign ministers are expected to agree to impose an embargo on Iranian oil imports, after a report in November by the UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), confirmed western allegations that Iran had worked on nuclear weapon design.

Iranian officials have made clear they would view an oil embargo as an act of aggression, and could respond by closing the strait. The US and UK have said they would act to keep the shipping lanes open. Philip Hammond, the British defence secretary, said during a visit to Washington: "Disruption to the flow of oil through the strait of Hormuz would threaten regional and global economic growth. Any attempt by Iran to close the strait would be illegal and unsuccessful."

The sabre-rattling over the strait drove the price of crude to more than $100 a barrel. Meanwhile, there is continual speculation that Israel might attack Iran's nuclear programme, which Tehran says is for peaceful purposes, and which the west and Israel allege is a front for acquiring nuclear weapons, or at least a capacity to make them. Observers say all sides are flexing their muscles to deter their adversaries from taking aggressive action, but warn that heightened activity will increase the chances of an unplanned clash.

Mark Fitzpatrick, a former US state department official now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London, said: "I'm not predicting there is going to be a skirmish, but in the absence of established communications, the tensions and the activity raises the possibility of an unintended exchange of fire."

The USS John Stennis, a US aircraft carrier deployed to the region, is outside the Gulf and an Iranian navy commander has warned Washington not to bring it back. The US navy said it would continue to patrol the Gulf as normal.

Fitzpatrick said he did not think Iran would attack shipping through the strait of Hormuz "as it would be an invitation to the US to take wider action and attack its nuclear sites".

Another flashpoint could come in June, when US sanctions on the trade in Iranian oil come into effect. Gary Sick, an Iran expert and former White House policy adviser now at Columbia University, said such measures were "the equivalent of a military blockade of Iran's oil ports, arguably an act of war".

"The main reason why Iran's putative threat to close the strait of Hormuz was dismissed is because Iran also relies on the strait to export its own oil," Sick wrote in his blog. "But if Iran's oil revenue – 50% of its budget – is cut off, they would have little to lose by striking out at those they hold responsible, including passage through the strait of Hormuz.

"Iran cannot defeat the US navy, but the swarms of cruise missiles they could fire, both from shore and from their fleet of speedboats, could create havoc, as could the flood of mines they could put into the fast-moving waters of the strait."

Fitzpatrick said even under sanctions, Iran would still have "multiple markets for its oil", and would therefore still have a lot to lose by closing the strait.

71 comments:

  1. The most positive affect would be a reality check for the Iranians. Their currency is in shambles and spring is not far away, enough time for the economic sanctions to have serious impact on the Iranian people and major street demonstrations to resume.

    The British and French seem to be firmly behind this, at least to the point of a show of force. All in all, this is preferable to a unilateral attack by Israel or the US.

    The Iranian regime has no upside to provoking a war. The potential consequences of an arbitrary attack by Israel or the US against Iran could have equally disastrous outcomes.

    Let’s hope that this display hastens a diplomatic solution and we do not repeat the calamity of our Iraq adventure.

    ReplyDelete
  2. bring the war to the westSat Jan 07, 04:02:00 AM EST

    So it shall begin. Iran will stand tall inshallah. It will become example and pride for Muslims inshallah. The objectives of the triangle of evil, US Israel and Saudi Arabia, or neocons zionism and wahhabism, are known to all Muslims. However, the targetted countries like Iraq, Syria, and Iran have been passive and reactive to such plots, rather than proactive and decisive in handling such critical matters. If the zionist nazis of the west and the son of satan Isra-Hell decide upon war on Iran,then it is a MUST that Iran should bring the war to the cities of the west by hook or crook. This time let the mushrooms of the west taste the horror of war upon there own loved ones,and let them too see there infrastrutre destroyed, there hospitals,water plants,sewage systems, comminications, airports, government, military buildings,commerce and much much more destroyed too. I am sure there many friends of Iran who would willingly help Iran by all means possible. Let the west suffer murder and mayhem too.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I sure hope to hell Obama knows what he's doing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Smile though your heart is aching
    Smile, even though it's breaking
    When there are clouds, in the sky, you'll get by
    If you smile, through your fear and sorrow
    Smile, and there'll be tomorrow
    You'll see the sun come shining through
    If you'll....
    Light up your face with gladness
    Hide every trace of sadness
    Although a tear, may be ever so near,
    That's the time, you must keep on trying
    Smile, what's the use of crying?
    You'll find that life is still worthwhile,
    If you'll just....
    Light up your face with gladness
    Hide every trace of sadness
    Although a tear, may be ever so near,
    That's the time, you must keep on trying
    Smile, what's the use of crying?
    You'll find that life is still worthwhile,
    If you'll just....
    Smile

    ReplyDelete
  5. I swear by allah, I won't smile at all till the mahdi comes, inshallah.

    What does the sun, and life, mean to me?

    ReplyDelete
  6. The only thing you're bringing is your lips to my dick, douchebag.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I forgot to put my b in there.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  8. You shiites are a sad bunch for sure.

    Hoping for chaos as you do, unable to feel the sun, and take life on its own terms.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous said...
    I swear by allah, I won't smile at all till the mahdi comes, inshallah.

    What does the sun, and life, mean to me.

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

    Today we have politicians in the pocket of AIPAC. Palin had her twin US, Israel flags on her governors desk.

    My personal opinion is no US politician should have loyalty to anything but the American people. It is against the US national interest to do Israeli bidding, or it puts US lives and treasure on the line for something that benefits Israel more than America.

    ReplyDelete
  10. AIPAC would get about as far as IranPAC, if there is such a thing, if the American people didn't have its affection for Israel.



    The potential consequences of an arbitrary attack by Israel or the US against Iran could have equally disastrous outcomes.

    What in goodness name would be arbitrary about it? They have said they want a world without the little and great satan, and strive for the means to try and bring it about. Arbitrary would be if we say attacked Canada.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  11. Arbitrary:

    (of power or a ruling body) unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority.

    ReplyDelete
  12. “...if the American people didn't have its affection for Israel.”

    LOL

    not b

    ReplyDelete
  13. b ain't the brightest bulb on the tree.

    ReplyDelete
  14. But, we've learned to put up with him anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Rufus is a dumb shit that has drunk deeply of the Obama kool aid.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  16. Better than Netanyahou koolaid.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Rufus is a nincompoop, though, as Trish the psychologist used to say, he is a dear one, he just is never right about anything.

    He does come up with some pretty good one liners.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  18. If, as Trish affirmed, rufus is a wonderful guy just always wrong about everything, he serves a useful purpose nonetheless. If the question at hand only has two possible answers, he is like a guiding star. If the problem may have multiple possible answers, he at least serves an eliminative function.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  19. How can it be, boobie, that you recall what trish thought, but cannot recall what you wrote, in November of 2008?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Obama's Panetta said:


    Just two weeks ago U.S. Defence Secretary Leon Panetta predicted Iran could have nuclear weapons in “probably about a year . . . perhaps a little less”. About the same time, Washington’s Nonproliferation Policy Education Centre published a report that predicted: “If Iran were to now make an all-out effort to acquire nuclear weapons, it could probably do so in two to six months.”

    That timeline could be sped up considerably, if Iran has an as-yet undetected clandestine nuclear enrichment facility, the study said.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Canada OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper delivered a scathing rebuke of Iran on Thursday as tensions build in the Middle East, saying the regime in Tehran is the greatest threat to global security and may be looking to use a nuclear weapon.

    Harper said Iran’s musings in the last week to close the Strait of Hormuz — one of the busiest oil shipping routes in the world — reinforces how serious a threat the country is to peace and security on the planet.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Who should we believe, the retired Mossad Chief or the folks that brought the people of US the false reports from the Gulf of Tonkin, or supposedly validated reports of WMD in Saddam's Iraq?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Personally, it would seem that anyone that does not give Mr Dagan more credibility must, obviously, be an anti-Semitic hater of Judaism and Israeli intelligence operatives.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Another Former head of the Mossad says...

    "As steep as the price for hitting Iran may be, a military strike on Iran will be less painful than the cost of living with an Iranian nuclear weapons threat," argues former Mossad head Maj. Gen. (res.) Danny Yatom. "The backlash from a strike on Iran's nuclear sites will not be as bad for Israel as will an Iran armed with nuclear weapons," he says. "I don't think that those predicting apocalyptic repercussions of a strike on Tehran are correct, and even if they are, Israel can't afford to wonder if Tehran will go crazy and bomb us."

    Yatom's position is diametrically opposed to that of former Mossad head Meir Dagan, who sparked significant controversy earlier this year by stating that an attack on Iran would be a foolish move that would lead to a war with an unknown outcome.

    It is impossible to stake the nation's security on predictions by those who claim a nuclear Iran can be deterred and that the Iranian regime would not launch a nuclear attack, Yatom added. He acknowledged that rocket attacks would likely ensue from Lebanon and Gaza following a Western or Israeli strike against Iran, but added that Israel's response would be "so painful and crushing that rockets will come to an end. Civilian facilities and infrastructure in Lebanon and Gaza will have to be hit. Innocent civilians could be hurt. But we will have to deliver a crushing blow so that the barrage of rockets against us will not continue."

    The world does not have much time left to act on Iran, the former Mossad head warned, adding that "there is an evaluation that they have crossed the red line. They have the knowledge to make the bomb. All that is needed now is the decision to do it.... The world has a year in which to halt the Iranian nuclear weapons program, probably less."

    Yatom also doubted that sanctions or covert operations could stop the Iranians. "We have only two options: to let Iran get the bomb, or to use military force against their military nuclear program. I think that force will have to be used. But I don't think Israel should lead. This is, after all, a global problem.... Nevertheless, should the world stand on the sidelines, Israel will be fully entitled to use its natural right to self-defense. To us, the Iranian nuclear weapons program is an existential threat."

    ReplyDelete
  25. Mr Penetta, has no credibility, not when compared to Mr Dagan and the Israeli intelligence services.

    As proved in Iraq, the US has poor intelligence capabilities with regard the nuclear capacity of others.

    The Israeli, far superior, in Iran than the US.

    Only an antisemitic observor would be purposefully blind to that reality.

    ReplyDelete
  26. The complicated relationship between the Mossad and Israeli media
    The Mossad's attitude toward journalists: Respect them, suspect them and use them.

    Former Mossad chief Meir Dagan's crusade this week against an Israeli strike on Iran took on a new dimension with his several media interviews. His campaign also reflects the Mossad's attitude toward journalists, something along the lines of respect them, suspect them and use them. The degree shifts from one Mossad head to the next.

    Some Mossad chiefs considered appointing a spokesman for the organization and then had second thoughts; one ordered that former employees be barred from Mossad headquarters because they gave media interviews without asking his permission.


    So maybe Dagan is saying in public one thing and in private saying something else...

    Do you really think Dagan is speaking to the PUBLIC the same things he speaks in private...

    Dagan is personally responsible for setting the Iranians back for YEARS on their nuke plans...

    Everytime DR quips that the prediction for Iran to get the bomb is 2-3 years away since 1997 the reason it keeps getting pushed back is because people like Dagan are actually PUSHING it back...

    It aint from lack of trying...

    So if PUBLICALLY Dagan says x....

    I bet he's privately saying y...

    But we all know that...

    Rat's just a horse's ass....

    ReplyDelete
  27. desert rat said...
    Mr Penetta, has no credibility, not when compared to Mr Dagan and the Israeli intelligence services.


    Rat has no loyalty to his President or his nation...

    ReplyDelete
  28. The General, not being the Mossad Chief, for at least the past 8 years, is behind the curve.

    Mr Dagan having the more current intelligence. As confirmed by the current Chief, Tamir Pardo, saying that Iran did not pose an existential threat, to Israel.
    Even if it obtained a nuclear warhead.

    Again, no cause for war.

    But if the Israel want to invade Iran, they should get on it.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Oh, I am loyal to the United States, but have no faith in the credibility of the government officials.

    The two cannot be conflated.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Mr Dagan having the more current intelligence. As confirmed by the current Chief, Tamir Pardo, saying that Iran did not pose an existential threat, to Israel.
    Even if it obtained a nuclear warhead.


    actually that is not what he said..

    but you know you are misrepresenting his thoughts.

    you cant snip 5 words out of a 1000 word essay to make a point, that is lying....

    but that is all you do...

    lie and misdirect...

    distort and cause chaos...

    now YOUR president and HIS Sec of Defense say there is an issue and YOU decry them as stupid..

    go back to your horses....

    ReplyDelete
  31. desert rat said...
    Oh, I am loyal to the United States, but have no faith in the credibility of the government officials.

    The two cannot be conflated.



    People like you, that go to war not in uniform and do wet opps are not loyal to the USA.

    That does not serve the Constitution

    ReplyDelete
  32. Only a fool would allow loyalty to a country or religion blind him to situational realities.

    That you are foolish, "o", beyond any doubt.

    ReplyDelete
  33. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Still, there is no cause for war with Iran.

    They pose no current threat to the United States or its people.

    ReplyDelete
  35. As far as "wet" work goes ...

    It does not rain in the Army ...
    It rains on the Army.

    We trained soldiers.
    Whether that was extra-Constitutional, well, the lawyers can argue that.

    There were no convictions, for lawbreaking, on any level of government as far as I am aware.

    The President, not impeached.

    No harm, no foul, no call.

    ReplyDelete
  36. DR: There were no convictions, for lawbreaking, on any level of government as far as I am aware.



    Yep a rose by any other name is still a rose...


    A murderer by any other name?

    A murderer...

    If conviction is your line in the sand?

    All the rapists and murderers that "got away" with it are innocents...

    Your logic shows a flawed moral compass...

    ReplyDelete
  37. The Director of the CIA telling the President of the United States that finding Saddam's nuclear program a ...

    "Slam Dunk"

    Obviously, the CIA was misinformed.

    Whether by accident or design, not that important to the 4.000 plus US dead that were a result of the misinformation.

    Not to mention the tens of thousands of Iraqi who died, needlessly.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Rapists get away, when the victims refuse to come forward to report the crimes.

    The actions that the US took in Central America, they were well reported.

    There were no crimes committed.
    Not by anyone I knew or saw.

    No rapes, no torture, no abuse.
    No drug smuggling or "wet" work performed by any agents of the United States, that I ever witnessed or even heard of.

    f you have proof to the contrary, bring it forward.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Israel's official motto: "By Way of Deception, thou shalt do War”. Obama must believe the Americans are morons. America only fights wars for Israel. No other country begs the US for war and genocide. 'Who is going to deny the fact that Israel wants world war 3 starting with Iran.

    Zionist Senator Joseph Lieberman, foremost champion of the Iraq War, told Fox News that the “US must pre-emptively act in Yemen. He also wants war with Iran, and called for the Iraq war. Israel called for the Iraq war.

    How convenient for the Zionists who love to send American Gentile kids to die for their causes but they ain’t the problem. AIPAC is one thing, but it seems to have nothing to do with garnering the Jewish vote in elections.
    A belief has been propagated and nurtured in the US that America's and Israel's future are somehow entwined in destiny. That comes mostly from right-wing Christians for reasons I have no idea but the Jews are smart enough to take advantage of them and do.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Otherwise, go serve some chocolate.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Something is definitely going around the bar but Logos seems to an exceptionally bad case of it.

    ReplyDelete
  42. There were reports of Nicoland airfields being used as transit points for northbound cocaine, but those airfields were not operating under the auspices of the US.

    Indeed, they were operated by the Sandinista.

    May have been part of the reason the US took such an anti-Sandinista position. Though the US has a long history of military intervention in Nicoland.

    Against the Sandinista, almost invariably. Ever since the Marines first tracked Augusto Sandino, but never killed him. Leaving that to the locals, in 1934.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Funny thing though, how the political argument remains the same.


    US Senator Burton Wheeler even argued that if United States soldiers intended to
    "stamp out banditry, let's send them to Chicago to stamp it out there. ... I wouldn't sacrifice...one American boy for all the damn Nicaraguans.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Logos said:
    ...Israel's official motto: "By Way of Deception, thou shalt do War”

    Whether intentional or not, he is confusing what Victor Ostrovsky claims is Mossad's motto.

    There is a large and growing movement. This is a diverse group representing the view points of anti-Zionists, anti-Israel and anti-Jew.

    It's disturbing that many of these viewpoints are based half truths, misrepresentations and lies motivated by hatred and bigotry.

    ReplyDelete
  45. prop·a·gan·da
       [prop-uh-gan-duh] Show IPA
    noun
    1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
    2. the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.
    3. the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.

    ReplyDelete
  46. It was much better, for the US, to train the locals to act as proxies than to once again deploy the Marine Corps in another foreign military intervention.

    Lessons learned and now applied.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Propaganda ....

    That the Iranians cannot be influenced by MAD doctrine.

    That the Iranians pose a military threat to the US.

    That the Iranians possess a nuclear warhead.

    That the Iranians are a threat to whirled peace and security.

    I agree, the propagandists are hard at work, spreading disinformation.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Well, at least the military/geopolitical experts at the bar are now cognizant that Iran can project force outside it's border.

    Deuce & cedarford slowing figuring out their AIPAC, neocon posts have nowhere to go except the Obama administration.

    Past...cedarford, you are aware that Obama is POTUS, right?

    And poor desert rat; is there any blogger more wrong on more topics. Just happy that deuce's blog gives you a refuge from reality.

    Those propagandists in the Obama administration?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Another anoni, or more of the same?

    Even allen agreed, the Iranians cannot project a military threat beyond their frontiers.

    The brothers wiggly.

    ReplyDelete
  50. As for being wrong, no one has ever made that case.

    Those that disagree, just call me names or make false accusations of some type of criminality.

    Propaganda, time and again.

    But the arguments I've presented, never debunked or proven false.

    ReplyDelete
  51. R u lonely desert rat, so much blogging, wanting someone to pay u attention?

    So bellicose

    ReplyDelete
  52. desert rat said...
    As for being wrong, no one has ever made that case.



    Now that's Propaganda!

    ReplyDelete
  53. (Sat Jan 07, 02:56:00 AM EST)

    ReplyDelete
  54. "The Iranian regime has no upside to provoking a war."

    ---

    The coming of the Twelfth Immam?

    How can one so easily dismiss the beliefs of one of the World's Great Religions???

    ReplyDelete
  55. How can one easily dismiss anyone's coming?

    ReplyDelete
  56. Doug said...

    "The Iranian regime has no upside to provoking a war."

    ---

    The coming of the Twelfth Immam?


    Excellent, Doug. Might add the command in the koran to kill the Jew behind the tree, etc. Many here stumble over all this, being sane, but not grasping that the Iranian leadership is not sane.


    b

    ReplyDelete
  57. Anonobob: Heh, the aircraft carrier Stennis reentered the gulf after being told not to, by the Iranians, and immediately rescued 17 Iranians held captive on a freighter by Somali pirates.


    You should look at a globe, Bob.

    Doug: How can one easily dismiss anyone's coming?

    That's what all this is about, the Twelfth Imam getting his rocks off?

    Logos: A belief has been propagated and nurtured in the US that America's and Israel's future are somehow entwined in destiny. That comes mostly from right-wing Christians for reasons I have no idea but the Jews are smart enough to take advantage of them and do.

    Anglo-Israelism. The belief that Britain, America, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are descended from the ten "lost tribes". It was the same impulse that led Virgil to write the Aeneid and posit that Rome was colonized by a hero from the Trojan War.

    ReplyDelete
  58. What do you suppose Ahmadinajad will be talking about with Hugo and Danny on this trip?

    With Danny maybe he is negotiating a lease for a closer base to Target Phoenix.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  59. Your last one there don't make much sense, Miss T, this early in the morning.

    Some of our illustrious forebears thought the Native American Indian tribes, like the Cherokee, was lost tribes.

    That makes rufus an Israelite.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  60. 1/2 Israelite, is rufus.

    b

    ReplyDelete
  61. Pat Robertson, may allah bless him, was for offing Hugo before the idea was popular.


    b

    ReplyDelete
  62. Anglo-Israelism. The belief that Britain, America, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand are descended from the ten "lost tribes".

    Did you just make that up?

    ReplyDelete
  63. When the first mullah straps on the one-way-vest to heaven I’ll believe the 12th what-the-fuck-ever bullshit.

    (Blogger does not like me this morning)

    ReplyDelete
  64. T,

    I didn't think so, but the response was so preposterous that I had to question it.

    Actually the idea of British/Israelism is no more/less preposterous than the idea that all life miraculously evolved from nothing into the rich diversity of highly complicated extant and extinct lifeforms.

    ReplyDelete
  65. You don't strap on a vest and check out if you think you will have a front row seat at the Mahdi's return.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Anonymous said...

    You don't strap on a vest and check out if you think you will have a front row seat at the Mahdi's return.

    Sat Jan 07, 11:02:00 AM EST


    !!!!

    EX--ACTLY!!!

    Who in his right mind would want to miss the coming of the mahdi?

    b

    ReplyDelete