If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reuters) Followup Iran plans more war games in strait, obviously unaware that the only way to win is not to play   (reuters.com) divider line 42
More: Followup, Iran, Strait of Hormuz, Catherine Ashton, EU Foreign Policy, Iran plans, oil exports, American Law, uranium enrichment  
•       •       •

2038 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Jan 2012 at 9:17 AM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!



42 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2012-01-06 09:17:55 AM
Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?
 
2012-01-06 09:21:34 AM
This is like taking advantage of a retarded kid (Imanutjob) to get your war on. I guess O-f-head has to do what his military-industrial complex overlords tell him to do.
 
2012-01-06 09:21:38 AM
we're (USA) going to screw around and end up at war with iran. we do not need that. that would be disasterous.
 
2012-01-06 09:22:07 AM
This is going to drag in China, the US, The EU and most of the Middle East.

A full house beats a strait.
 
2012-01-06 09:22:33 AM
mulletor: Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?

Which originated in PERSIA.

DO I HAVE TO CONNECT THE DOTS FOR YOU>??!!>!
 
2012-01-06 09:22:52 AM
It's all good unless and until they interfere with shipping. I can't really fault them for this. It's waters off their coast. Their timing is politically motivated but so is everything when it comes to militaries and government.

/did I not spell militaries right? How the fark else am I supposed to pluralize it?
 
2012-01-06 09:22:54 AM
Having more war games makes no logical sense, strategically or tactically. What it does do however is give the US Navy and any/all other interested party's an unfettered view of their doctrine, skill, and technical capabilities. Sure, in exercises I know NATO and the Soviets/Russians used to hold back a bit to keep their choicest cuts of tech under their respective hats but you can't hide ALL of it.

Looks like sabre rattling for domestic consumption.
 
2012-01-06 09:24:45 AM
Mr. Ahmadinnerjacket, after careful consideration I have come to the conclusion that your defense system sucks.
 
2012-01-06 09:26:26 AM
bungle_jr: we're (USA) going to screw around and end up at war with iran. we do not need that. that would be disasterous.

Traders and analysts believe it is unlikely Iran will actually carry out its threats to block the strait.

"We've seen this movie before," said Cliff Kupchan, an Iran analyst at the Eurasia Group. "Neither side wants a war. A lot of this rhetoric is overstated."


And, quite frankly, it seems to me that the rhetoric, at least on the US side, is significantly less overheated than it has been in the recent past (see 2000-2008).

It looks to me like the US is trying to apply pressure to get another round of internal protests going, as opposed to actually starting a hot war. Of course, that could still happen, but I don't get the feeling that is the desired end game.
 
2012-01-06 09:28:13 AM
JoeCamelToe: This is going to drag in China, the US, The EU and most of the Middle East.

A full house beats a strait.


If it came to conflict it the EU nations would certainly join in militarily. China would lean on them economically and diplomatically but I doubt militarily. Its not going to come to a military option though.

Having another war game is something they can point to when their populace asks "what are you doing in response to these threats?!" Where as everyone else is going to yawn, turn on all the passive surveillance equipment, and push "record."

As someone else just stated: unless navigation rights are disrupted in this exercise its just another show. What would be best is for everyone to publically ignore it so as not to needlessly and stupidly escalate the situation.
 
2012-01-06 09:28:59 AM
Skleenar: bungle_jr: we're (USA) going to screw around and end up at war with iran. we do not need that. that would be disasterous.

Traders and analysts believe it is unlikely Iran will actually carry out its threats to block the strait.

"We've seen this movie before," said Cliff Kupchan, an Iran analyst at the Eurasia Group. "Neither side wants a war. A lot of this rhetoric is overstated."

And, quite frankly, it seems to me that the rhetoric, at least on the US side, is significantly less overheated than it has been in the recent past (see 2000-2008).

It looks to me like the US is trying to apply pressure to get another round of internal protests going, as opposed to actually starting a hot war. Of course, that could still happen, but I don't get the feeling that is the desired end game.


i didn't actually rtfa, so i could be wrong. i just hear about iran far too much on the news, etc, and i have a feeling that one of these days someone will follow thru. problem, of course, is unlike iraq, afghanistan, et al, iran IS a powerful country with a strong military and a fair amount of money to spend on such things
 
2012-01-06 09:30:47 AM
Skleenar: bungle_jr: we're (USA) going to screw around and end up at war with iran. we do not need that. that would be disasterous.

Traders and analysts believe it is unlikely Iran will actually carry out its threats to block the strait.

"We've seen this movie before," said Cliff Kupchan, an Iran analyst at the Eurasia Group. "Neither side wants a war. A lot of this rhetoric is overstated."

And, quite frankly, it seems to me that the rhetoric, at least on the US side, is significantly less overheated than it has been in the recent past (see 2000-2008).

It looks to me like the US is trying to apply pressure to get another round of internal protests going, as opposed to actually starting a hot war. Of course, that could still happen, but I don't get the feeling that is the desired end game.


I concur. If the desire were in fact to get people much more nervous, instead of just bluster about, they would do the military exercises unannounced. Giving a press release ahead of time doesn't have nearly the same effect as watching half their navy sortie and start launching shiat.
 
2012-01-06 09:31:33 AM
Of course you can win, as long as your dice rolls are decent and the cat doesn't try to eat your soldiers.
 
2012-01-06 09:32:51 AM
TFA: "China has also cut its imports by more than half in January and February while haggling with Tehran over the size of the discount it wants in return for doing business with it."

Usually, a country's pay-off for tolerating a putative ally's bullshiat dick-waving is less obvious.
 
2012-01-06 09:35:27 AM
Wicked Chinchilla: Having more war games makes no logical sense, strategically or tactically. What it does do however is give the US Navy and any/all other interested party's an unfettered view of their doctrine, skill, and technical capabilities. Sure, in exercises I know NATO and the Soviets/Russians used to hold back a bit to keep their choicest cuts of tech under their respective hats but you can't hide ALL of it.

Looks like sabre rattling for domestic consumption.


True. But the bastids caused the gas price to rise by $.40/Gal. For that, they should at least get a few drone attacks.
 
2012-01-06 09:37:06 AM
bear in mind the internal power struggle between the hard-liners.

the hard-liners started getting their purge on some time ago.

the war-gaming is likely to be a distraction from the purging, imo, both to re-instill confidence and also distract from (or create excuses for) a fresh round of purges within the higher echelons of iranian command and the armed forces. it will also be used as a final attempt to try to unite the people behind the regime and a cover for the regime as it ramps up to stop any revolution
 
2012-01-06 09:38:28 AM
Skleenar: "It looks to me like the US is trying to apply pressure to get another round of internal protests going"

Whereas Iran wants to hype the US as an impending military threat and the Europeans as meddlers, to give more weight to their inevitable claims that the protests are a work of the CIA and MI6.
 
2012-01-06 09:38:37 AM
Prediction, ITT we'll see chickenhawks telling us how Iran will wipe the floor with the US military, and "battledoves" (a neologism of mine: vets that'd really rather not go to war again) pointing out Iran's a paper tiger.
 
2012-01-06 09:39:24 AM
mulletor: Wouldn't you prefer a nice game of chess?

No, let's play global thermal nuclear war.
 
2012-01-06 09:41:49 AM
21-7-b: bear in mind the internal power struggle between the hard-liners.

the hard-liners started getting their purge on some time ago.

the war-gaming is likely to be a distraction from the purging, imo, both to re-instill confidence and also distract from (or create excuses for) a fresh round of purges within the higher echelons of iranian command and the armed forces. it will also be used as a final attempt to try to unite the people behind the regime and a cover for the regime as it ramps up to stop any revolution


I agree with you insofar as its use as a distraction and command structure purges, but not as a cover for the regime mobilizing troops. This is for two reasons:
1) Its a naval exercise so using it as cover for mobilizing troops for a domestic crackdown makes no logical sense. Even oppressed peoples know mobilizing tanks for a naval exercise is probably not copacetic.
2) What need do they have of providing cover for said mobilization? They don't give a rats ass about the population or international opinion anyway as evidenced by the previous crackdowns and their preposterous blustering over the straights. If they want to mobilize they will just do it like they have in the past.
 
2012-01-06 09:56:13 AM
Wicked Chinchilla

good point - although i must say that i see it as setting a precedent regarding contemporaneous military movements, which can be transferred to other assets. thus, they give the regime the ability to further ratchet up anti-revolution measures (which are going to (almost certainly) include a full-on state of emergency from the get-go) whilst reducing (to some degree) the threat to the people that such movements would imply
 
2012-01-06 10:03:05 AM
21-7-b: Wicked Chinchilla

good point - although i must say that i see it as setting a precedent regarding contemporaneous military movements, which can be transferred to other assets. thus, they give the regime the ability to further ratchet up anti-revolution measures (which are going to (almost certainly) include a full-on state of emergency from the get-go) whilst reducing (to some degree) the threat to the people that such movements would imply


That is true. I was primarily thinking of the active side of the exercise rather than the logistical elements set in motion to get all the assets moving which was an oversight on my part. I still am hesitant to think they feel any need to hide movements.
 
2012-01-06 10:06:50 AM
PsiChi: This is like taking advantage of a retarded kid (Imanutjob) to get your war on. I guess O-f-head has to do what his military-industrial complex overlords tell him to do.

You have absolutely no intention for people to take you seriously, do you?
 
2012-01-06 10:10:04 AM
Wicked Chinchilla

that'll depend on how they are gaming the threat and their reaction to it.
 
2012-01-06 10:10:43 AM
Goddammit, I'd piss on a spark plug if I thought it'd do any good!

img832.imageshack.us
 
2012-01-06 10:13:29 AM
bungle_jr: Skleenar: bungle_jr: we're (USA) going to screw around and end up at war with iran. we do not need that. that would be disasterous.

Traders and analysts believe it is unlikely Iran will actually carry out its threats to block the strait.

"We've seen this movie before," said Cliff Kupchan, an Iran analyst at the Eurasia Group. "Neither side wants a war. A lot of this rhetoric is overstated."

And, quite frankly, it seems to me that the rhetoric, at least on the US side, is significantly less overheated than it has been in the recent past (see 2000-2008).

It looks to me like the US is trying to apply pressure to get another round of internal protests going, as opposed to actually starting a hot war. Of course, that could still happen, but I don't get the feeling that is the desired end game.

i didn't actually rtfa, so i could be wrong. i just hear about iran far too much on the news, etc, and i have a feeling that one of these days someone will follow thru. problem, of course, is unlike iraq, afghanistan, et al, iran IS a powerful country with a strong military and a fair amount of money to spend on such things


Notsureifserious.jpg
/Google Iran/ Iraq war.
//Slashies!
 
2012-01-06 10:24:57 AM
Well.... Obviously in an Iran vs US war there would be a clear cut winner (Hint: It's not Iran), but with a little effort they could still manage to do some considerable damage and bloody a few noses. For example, lets not forget the lessons of just a few short years ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
http://www.rense.com/general64/fore.htm

In that particular US wargame a grumpy old naval guru managed to sink an entire carrier battlegroup using a ball-point pen, a paperclip, and a few fishing boats. On the first day of a two week wargame. Then he resigned his post when they "re-floated" the American fleet and delivered a scripted war plan for him to follow that had "LOSE" written in bold print across the front of it.

Of course, I seriously doubt that the leadership of Iran is crazy enough to attempt anything beyond rattling their curved swords. America is getting war weary, but easily taken by the bloodlust and history has not been kind to those who attack our naval forces unexpectedly... I have no doubt a determined enemy with relatively low tech in a space-constrained area such as the Persian gulf could sink a carrier, but it would be absolutely suicidal.
 
2012-01-06 10:26:38 AM
Wicked Chinchilla

/just to add (although it's stating the obvious): the regime is preparing to kill a lot of its own people - they know now that that is the only way they will hold power (they know the revolution won't be stopped simply by taking out people they have identified as leaders)
 
2012-01-06 10:33:26 AM

oh - picked this up yesterday, might be of interest - i guess i can pass it on on behalf of the kurdish people

The Honorable Barack H. Obama

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20500



Dear President Obama:

On the night of December 28, 2011, 39 Kurds, all citizens of Turkey, came under an aerial attack by two Turkish F-16 fighter planes on the mountains of Kurdistan at an arbitrary borderline separating Turkey from Iraq. When the residents of a nearby village, Roboski, rushed to the scene of calamity, they discovered the dead bodies of 35 of their loved ones. Of these, 19 were in their teens; 27 bore the same last name. The President of Turkey, Abdullah Gul, expressed his "regrets." The Kurdish families are asking for more: an apology as well as a thorough investigation of what really happened on that forsaken night. No one is counting on either.

As Kurds and friends of Kurds, we are writing to you to draw your attention to a statement of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, which implicates your government in the death of these innocent Kurds. "Our unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)," he said, "mistook the villagers for the terrorists [of the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK).]" We see two problems with his statement. The UAVs that he is talking about were leased to his air force by the United States. The "terrorists" that he is referring to are the armed, uniformed, and militarily organized Kurds who have been battling the tyranny of successive Turkish governments since 1984.

Mr. President, you are fond of repeating a quote that is often attributed to Dr. King, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice." The same sentiment animated citizen Abraham Lincoln when he said, "When the white man governs himself," it is called self government; but when he "governs another man, [he was referring to the black man] that is more than self-government -- that is despotism." Jonathan Alter, your biographer, says you revere the memory of America's 16th president and view the Lincoln Bedroom in the White House as a shrine.

To us, the Kurdish struggle for liberty is no different than the black struggle for emancipation in the United States. You may not know this, but we Kurds looked forward to your presidency as a black man. After your election to the highest office in the land, some Kurdish farmers sacrificed 44 sheep in your honor (as the 44th president of the United States). The recent history of the White House notwithstanding, these Kurdish villagers wanted to believe that you stood for freedom. Do you?

If you do, you can't stay indifferent to the merciless assault and insult on freedom by the thugs of the Turkish government. We believe a reorientation of your policy is needed to distinguish your potential friends who are shedding their blood for freedom from your potential foes who are bent on extirpating it from the sight of the Kurds. This, we submit to you, is not just our call, but also history's invocation to gather on its side, which was Lincoln's side, which was King's side and today, it has become the Kurdish side.



We remain sincerely yours,
 
2012-01-06 10:38:40 AM
Dearest Iran,

i268.photobucket.com
 
2012-01-06 10:39:35 AM
Hey guys, whats going on in this thread?

www.thenewnewinternet.com
 
2012-01-06 10:58:27 AM
21-7-b: oh - picked this up yesterday, might be of interest - i guess i can pass it on on behalf of the kurdish people


The Honorable Barack H. Obama

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20500



Dear President Obama:

On the night of December 28, 2011, 39 Kurds, all citizens of Turkey, came under an aerial attack by two Turkish F-16 fighter planes on the mountains of Kurdistan at an arbitrary borderline separating Turkey from Iraq


On a somewhat related note I saw a documentary about the PJK (Kurds focusing on Iran that want an independent Kurdish state) and they mentioned the PKK (Kurds focusing on the Turkish side of that front). It was a few years old but it said the US considered the PKK to be a terrorist group but didn't seem to have a problem with the PJK although we didn't acknowledge supporting them and they didn't say we were either but it hinted that we just might secretly be.
 
2012-01-06 11:16:50 AM
bungle_jr: It looks to me like the US is trying to apply pressure to get another round of internal protests going, as opposed to actually starting a hot war. Of course, that could still happen, but I don't get the feeling that is the desired end game.

i didn't actually rtfa, so i could be wrong. i just hear about iran far too much on the news, etc, and i have a feeling that one of these days someone will follow thru. problem, of course, is unlike iraq, afghanistan, et al, iran IS a powerful country with a strong military and a fair amount of money to spend on such things


If the Wikileaks scandal has taught us anything it should be how much planning and subtlety goes into US foreign policy, Fox news and Tom Clancy novels would have us believe it's all saber rattling and bombing the bad guys but it's become increasingly clear the the US regularly brings its military economic and diplomatic resources to bear to get what they want and that it's not always obvious from State-side news coverage the effect these things are really having. It would not surprise me at all if the US was trying to precipitate more protests in Iran and will do so without direct military involvement.
 
2012-01-06 11:52:14 AM
Happy Hours

it's the freedom fighter v terrorist or devil v angel distinction / loop, i guess.

turkey has maintained a number of policies towards the kurds - but the basic strategy is to fark them up as much possible. this includes killing them, obviously, but also attempting to ban and destroy their culture - even though kurds make up about a quarter of the turkish population. pkk is a reaction to that, but you have to bear in mind their is a long-standing policy that amounts to ethnic cleansing (really - no more, no less) by the turks


but turkey is a nato ally
 
2012-01-06 11:55:50 AM
their / there

/sheesh that's twice in a week i've done that :(

//on a more serious note, turkey needs to get with the program rather than the pogram
 
2012-01-06 12:52:34 PM
I approve this greenlight
 
2012-01-06 01:12:48 PM
Stephen_Falken: I approve this greenlight

Perfect Fark handle.

Now if we could only guess his password... Josh something or other...
 
2012-01-06 01:14:03 PM
Can't we just send them some coke and be friends?
www.adrants.com
 
2012-01-06 03:11:37 PM
ncinerate: For example, lets not forget the lessons of just a few short years ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
http://www.rense.com/general64/fore.htm

In that particular US wargame a grumpy old naval guru managed to sink an entire carrier battlegroup 16 ships using a ball-point pen, a paperclip, and a few fishing boats an "armada" of small boats, kamikaze planes, and a "massive salvo" of cruise missiles. On the first Starting on the second day of a two week wargame.


You linked directly to the information...
 
2012-01-06 03:49:24 PM
Prediction: (no matter how irrational it may seem)

They are going to use these 'naval games' as a way to set up strategic defensive positions and dig in.

Theory:
They have something that nobody is expecting. Some sort of secret treaty, weapon, whatever it may be. This will be used to contol the strait if anyone makes an offensive.

Aftermath: This will bring Iran's bargaining power to another level. No matter what happens, the world will have to approach them with seriousness, even if it is just to figure out a way to approach them militarily to lesson casualties.

/ or I could be completely way off
 
2012-01-06 04:38:17 PM
novusordo: ncinerate: For example, lets not forget the lessons of just a few short years ago:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
http://www.rense.com/general64/fore.htm

In that particular US wargame a grumpy old naval guru managed to sink an entire carrier battlegroup 16 ships using a ball-point pen, a paperclip, and a few fishing boats an "armada" of small boats, kamikaze planes, and a "massive salvo" of cruise missiles. On the first Starting on the second day of a two week wargame.

You linked directly to the information...


Novu, he was going for the MacGuyver analogy in his post, but you already knew that, right? And besides, 16 ships sounds an awful like the average size of a carrier battle group.

More telling is the fact he did it all using "outdated" technology and tactics (WW2 light signals in place of radio communication, fishing boats to scout enemy locations, motorcycle couriers, etc.)

Fact of the matter is, the military leaders refuse to admit that all their high-tech gear is weak against an enemy that fights using battle strategy instead of relying on high-tech gadgets..
 
2012-01-06 07:12:56 PM
I wonder if Iran's weapons are programmed with 8-inch floppy disks and an IMSAI 8080.
tapenoisediary.files.wordpress.com
 
Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »