acidhead Posted June 8, 2010 #51 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Iran in my opinion is a modern day 21 st century false flag nation. The world and the oil corporations want nothing more than a sustainable future... BP and 'its's' mess are part of this.... -enjoy the ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiggs Posted June 8, 2010 #52 Share Posted June 8, 2010 You are actually right, sorry! Kilo is a NATO name, so for me they were the original 636 project, but I thought it was older than it really was. NATO seems to call "Kilo" all related designs, older or modern. But they are patrol subs, their range does not allow operating in the Meds in an autonomous mode, as they can be submerged for no more than 45 days. Iran has no naval base in the Meds to maintain them - unless this is done in Syria... By class they are all an anti-sub or an anti-ship boat, it cannot attack in full sense, it is designed to hide and intercept. Libya would probably be a better choice to maintain them than Syria, given that they already have Kilo's, I guess. To be honest, however - after doing some further checking into the source for the report of the Beirut delivery, I've come to the conclusion that on balance, it's more likely that the report is merely psyops rather than anything particularly based in reality. As such - I agree with Ships-Cat's assessment - the chances of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard providing an escort are realistically none. Apologies, all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARAB0D Posted June 8, 2010 #53 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Libya would probably be a better choice to maintain them than Syria, given that they already have Kilo's, I guess. To be honest, however - after doing some further checking into the source for the report of the Beirut delivery, I've come to the conclusion that on balance, it's more likely that the report is merely psyops rather than anything particularly based in reality. As such - I agree with Ships-Cat's assessment - the chances of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard providing an escort are realistically none. Apologies, all. No, they can escort - but on the fishing boats together with the activists. But this would be "armed uniformed combatants crossing national border" which means "aggression" by UN definitions. Technically any military violating national borders is an act of war. On the Navy stuff I think that Iran is not strong and secure enough to carry remote naval operations. Most likely every naval unit of it is counted and treasured in view of possible confrontation in the Persian Gulf itself. Iran is a regional power with very limited force projection capabilities, its main concern is defending of its own borders, not violating Israeli ones. Most likely this message of Rev Guards escorting someone is just a propaganda spin, targeting to remind that Iran is also against Israel... Otherwise Turkey can seize the olympic torch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ships-cat Posted June 8, 2010 #54 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Libya and Algeria have deep-water submarines ? Good grief... it used to be the case that a county had to have CLASS to operate submarines. Now every johnny-foreigner seems to have one Who's next... the Welsh ? You are correct, of course, Tiggs. The Soviets may INDEED have submarines at their Black Sea ports. meow purr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARAB0D Posted June 8, 2010 #55 Share Posted June 8, 2010 (edited) Libya and Algeria have deep-water submarines ? Good grief... it used to be the case that a county had to have CLASS to operate submarines. Now every johnny-foreigner seems to have one Who's next... the Welsh ? You are correct, of course, Tiggs. The Soviets may INDEED have submarines at their Black Sea ports. meow purr Black Sea Navy has only one sub listed in it. I do not know is it a Kilo or not though. The other one belongs to Ukraine and lives in a dry dock, unless it has been already scrapped. Black Sea is a heavily demilitarized zone, this is why Russian Navy in it is a collection of antiques. Say, aircraft-carriers are not allowed to be in it, or nuclear subs... During the last 2 world wars Russia first thing was sinking its own fleet there, to block the waterways. Mediterranean is not connected directly to black Sea issue, as it is an open sea and the other fleets are operating in it as well as the Black Sea fleet - say US 6th Fleet or Russian Northern Fleet or UK Navy or French etc. Edited June 8, 2010 by MARAB0D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosewin Posted June 14, 2010 #56 Share Posted June 14, 2010 An Iranian Red Crescent ship is already on the way. The Revolutionary Guard will not escort. "Until the end of the Gaza blockade, Iran will continue to ship aid," said an official at Iran's Society for the Defense of the Palestinian Nation. ... Public opinion in Muslim countries was outraged by the killings. An official of the Iranian Red Crescent Society's youth organization said some 100,000 Iranians had volunteered as potential crew for aid ships, Iran daily reported. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/iranian-aid-ships-set-sail-for-gaza-1.296120 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pseudo Intellectual Posted June 14, 2010 #57 Share Posted June 14, 2010 Let me guess. They're not going to try to get the aid through Egypt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosewin Posted June 14, 2010 #58 Share Posted June 14, 2010 No clue. I am not even sure if this is real...I mean really it could lead to bad things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARAB0D Posted June 14, 2010 #59 Share Posted June 14, 2010 No clue. I am not even sure if this is real...I mean really it could lead to bad things. It could lead to absolutely nothing. There is no sense for Iran to provoke Israel - first of all because Iran does not need the excuse to start a war, it can be started any second by either side without any excuse. Secondly, because Iran and Israel do not share any land border and are far from each other. Thirdly, because Gaza dwellers are Sunni, and hate Shia more than the Jews, so why would Iran go to war over them? What I mean, we need to know how to separate the propaganda spins from the real events - the countries are always using media to scare and blackmail the opponents, just look at Cheonan sinking spin, it is already forgotten! The guy who started it, lost the elections - so the reason for investing government money in a propaganda campaign varnished... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosewin Posted June 15, 2010 #60 Share Posted June 15, 2010 Iran is also ruled by Persians yet they still help keep the Arabic Hamas afloat. Why do you think not even the Palestine Authority likes Hamas? The Palestine Authority also gets money from the US now so has fallen more in line while Hamas has been sanctioned in part by the US so they turn to Iran. Really this whole situation is between America and Iran and their proxies. Syria is also very close to Iran, a predominately Sunni country, but whose government is ran by many Shia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARAB0D Posted June 15, 2010 #61 Share Posted June 15, 2010 Iran is also ruled by Persians yet they still help keep the Arabic Hamas afloat. Why do you think not even the Palestine Authority likes Hamas? The Palestine Authority also gets money from the US now so has fallen more in line while Hamas has been sanctioned in part by the US so they turn to Iran. Really this whole situation is between America and Iran and their proxies. Syria is also very close to Iran, a predominately Sunni country, but whose government is ran by many Shia. If we look at the issue retrospectively, then it is seen that from 1920s the main opponent of Israel was BP (UK I mean) - as it was reflecting the views of the Arab countries, its source of hydrocarbons. However when Israel was established, the oil companies started to use it as a point of pressure on the Arabs - it is very likely that now Palestinian movements receive support from the same source as Israel receives it from, as unstable Middle East helps manipulating the oil prices. It is basically a controlled chaos, and the contradictions between the Muslim countries are only one factor acting in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosewin Posted June 19, 2010 #62 Share Posted June 19, 2010 (edited) Oh how the tears of laughter rolled down my cheeks when I read this article. Okay children, now gather round the table. Whats this ? Yes Johhny .. it's a MAP .. well done. Now, who can tell me where the Iranian Coast is ? Yes.. well done Lucy. Now, how about the Israeli/Gaza mediterranean coast ? Correct Jane... yes... it IS a long way, isn't it ? Into the Persian Gulf... sneak past the US Naval Base at Bahrain... round the corner past Oman.. then Yemen.. into the Red Sea... all the way up past Saudi Arabia (yes... the ones who are fighting Iranian-backed insurgents in Yemen), through the Suez Canal (without anyone noticing), and finally ending up in the Mediterranean. A journey of slightly under 4000 miles. ... Did ANYBODY check a map before posting in this thread ? No gold stars, and the entire class will stay behind for 30 minutes and chant "I must not listen to Mad Mullah's" It seems the information suggested above was just a mad theory after all because that is exactly how they are getting there but without all the fanfare and theatrics unless Israel wishes to make waves, again. "This ship will pass through territorial waters of Oman, Yemen and Egypt before it reaches Gaza. It is said that the ship contains only humanitarian aid and there are no peace activists on board." http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/293432 In more recent news the Red Crescent ships are still on their way. Egypt has rejected an Israeli request to prevent Gaza aid ships from passing through the Suez Canal, al-Jazeera reports citing a high-ranking national security official in Cairo who insisted his name not be mentioned http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/06/19/10175904.html Edited June 19, 2010 by Rosewin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Monkey Posted June 28, 2010 #63 Share Posted June 28, 2010 It seems than iranian Red Crescent boat will not be running the blockade after all: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/10432384.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ships-cat Posted June 28, 2010 #64 Share Posted June 28, 2010 Indeed Moon Monkey. Apparantly the could not get permission to transit the Suez Canal. Curiously, the Suez authorities (well, Egypt basically) state that permission had not been denied, and the ship would be welcome to transit the Canal. So who is lying ? On past behavior, my money is on Iran. There was never any intention to attempt to force the blockade; it was all just polemic and Hot Air, as we have come to expect from that source. Dunno why they fuss with nuclear power; set up a few wind turbines near any of their government ministers, and they'd have all the surplus energy they could possibly need. meow purr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARAB0D Posted June 29, 2010 #65 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Indeed Moon Monkey. Apparantly the could not get permission to transit the Suez Canal. Curiously, the Suez authorities (well, Egypt basically) state that permission had not been denied, and the ship would be welcome to transit the Canal. So who is lying ? On past behavior, my money is on Iran. There was never any intention to attempt to force the blockade; it was all just polemic and Hot Air, as we have come to expect from that source. Dunno why they fuss with nuclear power; set up a few wind turbines near any of their government ministers, and they'd have all the surplus energy they could possibly need. meow purr I support your logic, but I am just wondering, if you have ever read Albert Camus? There just must be some English translations of his Algerian cycle, like of The Plague in Orange! Not all what the froggies write is stupid after all. In one of his novels he describes the vendetta, claimed on the hero of the novel by an Arab family. This hero is chased by an Arab folk, commited to kill him. When the hero (a French dude) goes outside his place first thing he sees is this Arab guy with the knife in his hand, patting, sharpening and kissing this knife and by all means demonstrating it. When he takes his girlfriends to the beach, the Arab makes circles 20-40 metres around them, still exposing this knife... There is no end to this. The hero finally becomes p***ed off, and knowing this would be a death sentence (the lawyers have been consulted with!), approaches this Arab guy and... shoots him with a pistol in public. Just to get rid of him. A very refined form of suicide, I would say. I am not saying the Persians are also like that Arab, but there is sure some resemblance of the styles, as it is quite common through Middle East and Central Asia. An European folk would hardly ever threaten to another person, but when the milk goes sour he would rather take his knife out and stab with no warning, but it is not like that in Middle Eastern cultures! This, what Iran does, fully falls into the same logical pattern as in Camus' novel. Instead of just bombing Israel to oblivion and then bravely facing the ugly consequences, they would be talking about this bombing ad nauseum, until someone's tolerance has been exceeded and they become bombed themselves. And then, after they have been bombed, it may well be discovered they never had the actual bomb! This was exactly the case of Saddam! He was threatening too much (on European/American standards ), forgetting whom he was dealing with... Why do they call it "war of Civilizations", I fail to understand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Silver Thong Posted June 29, 2010 #66 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Reminds me of another thread where I said the States should call Iran on there commitment/offer to help with the oil leak lol. Call them on the crap they say, embarrass them and maybe they will stop with this, we are kind and come in peace routine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARAB0D Posted June 29, 2010 #67 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Reminds me of another thread where I said the States should call Iran on there commitment/offer to help with the oil leak lol. Call them on the crap they say, embarrass them and maybe they will stop with this, we are kind and come in peace routine. I agree and not, the same time. Calling them on would be a good therapy against this megalomaniac brawl. But for doing this, the Caller must be free from similar illusions and delusions! I am unsure, if this is noticeable from Canada, but from half-a-planet away it is sure noticeable - USA is no less nuts than Iran or Saudi Arabia, this is just amazing! To me it looks as a rapid transformation, I just cannot recognise the country! 20 years ago this was unheard of, what they do now... It became absolutely impossible to watch American news, be it CNN or Fox - they are so emotionally loaded, that watching them scares crap out of me! For the last year I am watching BBC only, as the Brits are at least maintaining some calmness if not neutrality. My wife watches TV much more time than I do, she watches Idol, Oprah, red carpet, CNN and Fox news, fresh movies etc (I simply do not have time/energy to watch, I only use the TV to watch the selected DVDs once in two weeks), so I did not at start believe her when she told me USA was going nuts... But then I watched some stuff of hers and realised she was quite right! They are now deep into the cult of own superiority, self-rightfulness and absolutism. In fact it all borders with a lunacy, the image, this country is creating for itself has lost the touch with Reality completely! The TV presents the Americans as a race of super-warriors, but when you compare with Reality and History, these people were never warriors at all, they were always merchants! They never won a single serious war, and never even participated in one, despite they over-inflate their 10% share in WW2 to cosmic proportions. Ask an American, and he/she would not even know what Arden means - meanwhile this was the most representative American battle in WW2! They tried their bluff on the Germans in 1944 - and ended up in POW camps. All what they won from Germany was the trophy of Propaganda techniques, developed for them by Joseph Goebbels. But if we agree to admit the religious component of this current lunacy, then we rightfully can compare US with the same Iran, as they two are milk brothers in this sense. One loony against another. US would've probably called Iran on the propaganda lies, like helping with the oil spill, but because they are themselves similar loonies, they do not even notice these lies. Because the propaganda inside Iran does exactly the same - presents Iran as a world leader and a military super-power, despite this country historically never won a single serious war! Iran (like China) is always a Grand-Loser. Heaps of available ambitions cannot substitute for the real shots fired. I bet that Iranian population has no idea that their country was a historical loser. Same as the American population thinks themselves to be warriors, despite they could not even fight the Japanese in Pacific, and had to employ the Australians for this - Americans simply cannot fight without an air-conditioned tank or APC, as soon as the enemy bullet hits the air-conditioner, they surrender. Arden demonstrated, that when a serious guy with a schmeisser comes ahead and commands "hende hoch!", they immediately raise their hands up. All they have is a Hollywood Schwarzenegger, and even he is an Austrian, same bloody German... Thus, I do not expect Iran to be called on - and possibly Iran knows this too, this is why the offer to help was safely made! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Silver Thong Posted June 29, 2010 #68 Share Posted June 29, 2010 (edited) America is a nation not to be rekoned with and yes they are a bit scary. They poke an ant hill and wait for the mass confusion to ensue. It's done to deflect issues that otherwise American's would be taking issue with. Is Canada complacent? you bet we are. Hence the g-20 summit. Comparing the U.S. to some policy from the M.E. is not invalid as the doctrine is the same but from a different book. One is economics and the other, domination and one's faith with the same doctrine. I'm not going to knock American's but can anyone name a war they did win. As far as the superiority complex of an empire goes, what can one say. There rules there laws as long as they can afford the empire. Saying this I sure hope America does not fail as if it does, the last grabs will be close to home. History says so. The U.S will go into Iran. It's logical from there stand point. Politically speaking. Edited June 29, 2010 by The Silver Thong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARAB0D Posted June 29, 2010 #69 Share Posted June 29, 2010 The U.S will go into Iran. It's logical from there stand point. Politically speaking. Politically speaking its OK, but geopolitically speaking it accounts for a suicide. Whatever boils inside USA in political sense, cannot be spilt around without endangering the entire system. I really do not believe any American politician would dare touching Iran ever, as 4 million barrels per day are not a decent pay for the safety of the country. Therefore I see this all as a brawl and spin. Look at Cuba - USA is spinning about it since early 60s, but Castro is still in place, except the old age made him less active. There is nothing USA can do about it. Same refers to Iran, after all it is not in US sphere of influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now