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

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The canadians are coming so it must be bad?

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/hmcs-c ... 2012-01-08

They'll be doing ice berg patrols.

[Atheist-Lite]

The canadians are coming so it must be bad?

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/hmcs-c ... 2012-01-08

They'll be doing ice berg patrols.

I read they are mumbling something about taking a leadership role so be prepared to take orders?

[Seth]

The canadians are coming so it must be bad?

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/hmcs-c ... 2012-01-08

They'll be doing ice berg patrols.

I read they are mumbling something about taking a leadership role so be prepared to take orders?

Hey, that's one of the significant benefits of global warming: no more icebergs and an open Northwest Passage. Kewl!

As for polar bears, fuck 'em. They evolved from land-dwelling bears in the first place, so they can just evolve right back again. Adapt or die.

[Robert_S]

"Winning" in the middle east means propping up a rotating series of governments that can issue oil contracts, preferably with about half of them hating the other half enough to undercut each other. And then selling them weapons and bad real estate investments too so the petrodollars come back. Seems to be working...

Sometimes "winning" means walking out of the bar upright, with all your teeth still in your mouth and enough money to make all the bills and buy groceries.

[Atheist-Lite]

"Winning" in the middle east means propping up a rotating series of governments that can issue oil contracts, preferably with about half of them hating the other half enough to undercut each other. And then selling them weapons and bad real estate investments too so the petrodollars come back. Seems to be working...

Sometimes "winning" means walking out of the bar upright, with all your teeth still in your mouth and enough money to make all the bills and buy groceries.

I always leave the bar early when it looks like trouble. I've never lost a fight yet.

[Robert_S]

I was thinking of something I posted a while back: http://rationalia.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... 2#p1057682

[Svartalf]

We certainly found Bin Laden fast enough.

Is that an aftertaste of Irony I sense here...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We certainly found Bin Laden fast enough.

Is that an aftertaste of Irony I sense here...

[JimC]

Anyway, public announcements by top Iranian officials are often part of the internal political dance; to impress segments of the population with their resolute defence of sacred Iran against the great satan...

Similar hyperbole emerges from North Korea....

[Svartalf]

The Iranians have drones (and not just the American ones!). And submarines. and shore based missiles that can reach the sea, even if fired from inland. Have the missiles to launch Dirty bombs on Israel, or simply to flatten a couple of Nuke Power stations to do same job - and probably could come up with a Nuke within a year.

The US can afford to lose a few ships militarily - but not politically.........and cutting off China's oil would have much the same effect as if China cut off the USA's oil from Saudi......they may even start exploring for oil off Taiwan. or on it.

Iran might not be able to cope in a head to head conflict with the USA, but I doubt if the Americans have the balls to go ashore - so most likely outcome would be the current Iranian nutjobs being replaced by others.....who still won't like the USA.

So, the USA would (yet again) be a loser in the Middle East as would show that not only does the Emperor have no clothes - has no underpants either.

This is a staggeringly idiotic post. No offense.

With respect to "iran might not be able to cope in a head to head conflict with the USA," I mean - "might" not? "Might?" That is, you assess Iran's military capabilities as potentially having the ability to cope with the US in head to head conflict? Just want to get that straight...

You doubt if the Americans have the "balls" to go ashore. The US had the balls to go to Afghanistan, had the balls to go to Iraq, but we don't have the balls with respect to Iran?

The US would "yet again" be a loser in the Middle East? I mean - what the fuck, dude? We SUCCEEDED in Iraq. We SUCCEEDED in Afghanistan (which is technically central Asia, but whatever). What fucking definition of the words "win" and "lose" are you using? Overwhelming victory in two theaters of conflict is somehow "losing?"

Let's go through there... Iran has drones... well, a radio commanded kid's remote toy plane is technically a drone; Submarines... diesel stuff with non guided torpedoes that might have been up to date in the 60s; missiles... really better than katyushas? Dirty bombs on Israel? Much as Gawd and myself would like it, even if they have the range, they probably lack the precision, and probably also the speed and manoeuverability, so any primitive missile defense system would likely get them down before they reach target, if they would actually reach it, and they likely haven't got a decent command of the technology to ensure proper dispersal of the radiomaterial, even if they don't have better use for it than a dirty bomb.

As to the US having balls, I'd rather call it sense. Bush sent the US military in Iraq mostly to provide side benefits to Halliburton, Blackwater, and other cronies of his veep. The Afghan thing was pure idiocy, as the current state of things ten years later shows well... nobody could expect the US to do well in a place that broke the USSR's back... and doing it in Iran would be as stupid. the populace may need only a shove to rise against its rulers, but an actual invasion would just cement that very same regime as a martyr for the Faith and a bunch of heroes of Persian identity.

[Atheist-Lite]

Anyway, public announcements by top Iranian officials are often part of the internal political dance; to impress segments of the population with their resolute defence of sacred Iran against the great satan...

Similar hyperbole emerges from North Korea....

...and The Republican Party.

[Robert_S]

The US should do a little sabre rattling here... a nudge here and a needle there and let them fuck themselves over. Kinda like trolling.

[Warren Dew]

As to the US having balls, I'd rather call it sense. Bush sent the US military in Iraq mostly to provide side benefits to Halliburton, Blackwater, and other cronies of his veep. The Afghan thing was pure idiocy, as the current state of things ten years later shows well...

The initial year or two of limited intervention incapacitated Al Qaeda core, which was arguably a good idea. Sticking around after that was questionable, and the 2009 escalation and attempts at nation building since were, yes, idiotic.

[Atheist-Lite]

As to the US having balls, I'd rather call it sense. Bush sent the US military in Iraq mostly to provide side benefits to Halliburton, Blackwater, and other cronies of his veep. The Afghan thing was pure idiocy, as the current state of things ten years later shows well...

The initial year or two of limited intervention incapacitated Al Qaeda core, which was arguably a good idea. Sticking around after that was questionable, and the 2009 escalation and attempts at nation building since were, yes, idiotic.

If you want the oil and don't want to pay for it then why use messy, costly war? The British Empire was built on the opium trade and smallpox blankets.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

As to the US having balls, I'd rather call it sense. Bush sent the US military in Iraq mostly to provide side benefits to Halliburton, Blackwater, and other cronies of his veep. The Afghan thing was pure idiocy, as the current state of things ten years later shows well...

The initial year or two of limited intervention incapacitated Al Qaeda core, which was arguably a good idea. Sticking around after that was questionable, and the 2009 escalation and attempts at nation building since were, yes, idiotic.

If you want the oil and don't want to pay for it then why use messy, costly war? The British Empire was built on the opium trade and smallpox blankets.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/rea ... h-smallpox