Iran Warns US to Stay Out of Persian Gulf, or Else.

[TonyBelch]

Who actually owns the Persian Gulf?

Nobody. The exception being territorial waters which unless stated otherwise is 3 miles. The exceptions are some fishing rights which may extend further. Iceland extended their territorial waters out to 200 miles which led to the 'Cod War' with the UK. Some of the states with shoreline on the gulf may have made extended claims. One would have to look at a map of the area to determine exactly who claims what and which claims have been acknowledged by the UN. There is also a sort of 'free use' clause so if two states border a narrow strait and their territorial claims overlap they can't deny free access through the strait to the shoreline of another state. So any Iranian threat to traffic of any sort would be illegal.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Freedom of Navigation" is a policy for the US going back to the Barbary Pirates.

[TonyBelch]

"Freedom of Navigation" is a policy for the US going back to the Barbary Pirates.

That's the term I was looking for.

[Robert_S]

I think the US navy should wait until he steps up the sabre rattling, then withdraw. Then, when Ama-wossname is doing his victory laps, come right back in force.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Freedom of Navigation" is a policy for the US going back to the Barbary Pirates.

That's the term I was looking for.

As noted above, the USN loves Freedom of Navigation Exercises. "Line of Death"? We're there. "No Go Zone". We go.

[TonyBelch]

I think the US navy should wait until he steps up the sabre rattling, then withdraw. Then, when Ama-wossname is doing his victory laps, come right back in force.

I think one should ignore the little beardy troll. Middle East Macho Politics is the problem. The Arab/Persian/Islamic character combination demands a testosterone fulled attitude. They simply don't realise what ponced up little pricks they look like to westerners. The only issue with ignoring them is they take it a victory which boulsters their retoric which ratchets up expectations that may lead to a demonstration on their part.

[Ian]

Who actually owns the Persian Gulf?

Nobody. The exception being territorial waters which unless stated otherwise is 3 miles. The exceptions are some fishing rights which may extend further. Iceland extended their territorial waters out to 200 miles which led to the 'Cod War' with the UK. Some of the states with shoreline on the gulf may have made extended claims. One would have to look at a map of the area to determine exactly who claims what and which claims have been acknowledged by the UN. There is also a sort of 'free use' clause so if two states border a narrow strait and their territorial claims overlap they can't deny free access through the strait to the shoreline of another state. So any Iranian threat to traffic of any sort would be illegal.

Territorial waters are internationally recognized as 12 nautical miles; a very few nations such as Syria (which has claimed 35nm) have sometimes challenged this, but to little avail. Exclusive Economic Zones can extend as far as 200nm. In cases of chokepoints where international commerce routes require travel through some waters which would otherwise be considered territorial (such as Hormuz, for both Iran and Oman), there are designated navigational lanes for inbound and outbound traffic. These lanes are considered international waters - which Iran has no right at all to close. Threatening to close Hormuz isn't an exercise of Iranian rights, it literally is a threat against the rest of the world. As for the rest of the Gulf, the states of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman might have a thing or two to say about Iran declaring that they have the right to decide who may enter and who may not...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[Atheist-Lite]

They'll use a toxic radiological chemical leak to make the straits impassable for months no matter what anyone does. I've read this is the plan somewhere. Could explain why they feel they have a strong hand against the world at large. What do they care about the world anyway when the governing religious authorities believe in it coming to a end?

[TonyBelch]

Territorial waters are internationally recognized as 12 nautical miles; a very few nations such as Syria (which has claimed 35nm) have sometimes challenged this, but to little avail. Exclusive Economic Zones can extend as far as 200nm. In cases of chokepoints where international commerce routes require travel through some waters which would otherwise be considered territorial (such as Hormuz, for both Iran and Oman), there are designated navigational lanes for inbound and outbound traffic. These lanes are considered international waters - which Iran has no right in the world to close. Threatening to close Hormuz isn't an exercise of Iranian rights, it literally is a threat against the rest of the world. As for the rest of the Gulf, the states of Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Oman might have a thing or two to say about Iran declaring that they have the right to decide who may enter and who may not...

Thanks for the correction (3 to 12 miles). I should have Googled it in the first place. And as you say the Sabre rattling due to Iranian rights over the strait is just that; political posturing and Bulls Shit.

However. IF, and it's a big IF, Iran can develop a fission bomb small enough to deliver effectivly then a US carrier would be an absolutly perfect target as it is military and colateral damage would be zero. It would be suicidaly stupid to try it but intelligence doesn't appear to be the long suit in Iranian politicians.

[TonyBelch]

They'll use a toxic radiological chemical leak to make the straits impassable for months no matter what anyone does. I've read this is the plan somewhere. Could explain why they feel they have a strong hand against the world at large. What do they care about the world anyway when the governing religious authorities believe in it coming to a end?

Personally can't see this happening as chemical weapons are notoriously difficult to control. Good psychological impact but generally bad practical effect. They could try it but I'd put this on the lower end of the list personally. But loonies do lunatic things.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

They'll use a toxic radiological chemical leak to make the straits impassable for months no matter what anyone does. I've read this is the plan somewhere. Could explain why they feel they have a strong hand against the world at large. What do they care about the world anyway when the governing religious authorities believe in it coming to a end?

Personally can't see this happening as chemical weapons are notoriously difficult to control. Good psychological impact but generally bad practical effect. They could try it but I'd put this on the lower end of the list personally. But loonies do lunatic things.

The first gas attack in WWI failed when the wind shifted.

[Atheist-Lite]

They'll use a toxic radiological chemical leak to make the straits impassable for months no matter what anyone does. I've read this is the plan somewhere. Could explain why they feel they have a strong hand against the world at large. What do they care about the world anyway when the governing religious authorities believe in it coming to a end?

Personally can't see this happening as chemical weapons are notoriously difficult to control. Good psychological impact but generally bad practical effect. They could try it but I'd put this on the lower end of the list personally. But loonies do lunatic things.

The first gas attack in WWI failed when the wind shifted.

Water is more predictable...

[TonyBelch]

They'll use a toxic radiological chemical leak to make the straits impassable for months no matter what anyone does. I've read this is the plan somewhere. Could explain why they feel they have a strong hand against the world at large. What do they care about the world anyway when the governing religious authorities believe in it coming to a end?

Personally can't see this happening as chemical weapons are notoriously difficult to control. Good psychological impact but generally bad practical effect. They could try it but I'd put this on the lower end of the list personally. But loonies do lunatic things.

The first gas attack in WWI failed when the wind shifted.

Water is more predictable...

But ships can just sail through, so all you do is kill fishes and 'piss' on your neighbours. And don't forget there are plenty of people that would get really upset at the environmental damage while urinating on a dead american sailor.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

They'll use a toxic radiological chemical leak to make the straits impassable for months no matter what anyone does. I've read this is the plan somewhere. Could explain why they feel they have a strong hand against the world at large. What do they care about the world anyway when the governing religious authorities believe in it coming to a end?

Personally can't see this happening as chemical weapons are notoriously difficult to control. Good psychological impact but generally bad practical effect. They could try it but I'd put this on the lower end of the list personally. But loonies do lunatic things.

The first gas attack in WWI failed when the wind shifted.

Water is more predictable...

You've never been to sea, I can tell.