Freedom of Navigation. It's not just a good idea, it's the law!

"As Iranians say, it will be easier than drinking a glass of water."

That's not a very creative saying.

will france successfully complete their surrender?

Watch Obama get blamed for something with this. For no reason.

Frankly, this is great. Bluff called, blockade broken, Iran humiliated. All without firing a shot.

That is how you show off military power without being a complete asshole.

Bloody William: Watch Obama get blamed for something with this. For no reason.

Frankly, this is great. Bluff called, blockade broken, Iran humiliated. All without firing a shot.

That is how you show off military power without being a complete asshole.

There never was a blockade. There was a threat.

C'mon, Iran. Let's think this through. Killing brown people while destabilizing the middle east is practically our national pastime.

B-9


Miss

Iran's pissing and moaning is for internal consumption more than anything else. Their younger generation hates them and they're trying some kind of yellow journalism (see: Hearst and the Spanish American War) to wave their dick around and rally people to the flag.

Dinnerjacket knows the following:
-Sinking the nice carrier right off your coast with its reactors will fark up your fishing industry and cause problems. Nothing helps topple a regime like a nice spike in food prices.
-In the ensuing airstrikes by America you will lose most of your oil extraction capacity. This means no source of income to pay for your security forces.
-You also will have caused a global spike in oil prices and pissed everyone else in the industrialized world off. Thus they will remain silent or actively help America kick your head in (see: Libya).
-Your entire economy will be set back two or three decades.

As it stands Iran makes threats like they every couple of years. We sail ships through, they keep biatching, and eventually some kind of civil unrest makes them forget to issue the press releases and they go back to oppressing their population.

Operation Mind Your Own Goddamn Business and Stop Causing Pointless Wars still on the backburner.

JohnAnnArbor: There never was a blockade. There was a threat.

...threat of a blockade?

Either way, bluff called, Iran humiliated.

Sock Ruh Tease: "As Iranians say, it will be easier than drinking a glass of water."

That's not a very creative saying.

It is if you live in the desert.

You hear that Britain?

+1 headline subby

dkimball: You hear that Britain?

Que?

Freakin Rican: will france successfully complete their surrender?

Its the law of the red white and blue flaggettes

Molavian: C'mon, Iran. Let's think this through. Killing brown people while destabilizing the middle east is practically our national pastime.

You are such a dumb fark

So we're going to have 3 carrier groups there by march.

http://rt.com/news/aircraft-carrier-hormuz-iran-391/

Bloody William: Either way, bluff called, Iran humiliated

Looks at children
Looks at tax return
Looks at expenditure

Screw it, TOTALLY worth the spending ?

This is a pissing contest facing upwind
A very very expensive pissing contest

/zomfg they might develop nukes and use them on civilians
// ya know, like we did

Why put your carriers at even the slightest risk?
Isn't this exactly the use for which the neutron bomb would be perfect?
Kill the people, leave the oil field production intact.

// Snark indicator fluctuates wildly.

ha-ha-guy: Iran's pissing and moaning is for internal consumption more than anything else. Their younger generation hates them and they're trying some kind of yellow journalism (see: Hearst and the Spanish American War) to wave their dick around and rally people to the flag.

Dinnerjacket knows the following:
-Sinking the nice carrier right off your coast with its reactors will fark up your fishing industry and cause problems. Nothing helps topple a regime like a nice spike in food prices.
-In the ensuing airstrikes by America you will lose most of your oil extraction capacity. This means no source of income to pay for your security forces.
-You also will have caused a global spike in oil prices and pissed everyone else in the industrialized world off. Thus they will remain silent or actively help America kick your head in (see: Libya).
-Your entire economy will be set back two or three decades.

As it stands Iran makes threats like they every couple of years. We sail ships through, they keep biatching, and eventually some kind of civil unrest makes them forget to issue the press releases and they go back to oppressing their population.


All true...

But wouldn't it be nice if we weren't so dependent on petroleum so when the Iranian regime made threats like this they'd look like they were taking swings at their own shadow and we could just shrug and laugh and continue ignoring them?

/disproportionately high amount of "America: F*ck Yeah." in the article's picture.

along with one warship from the French navy.

just in case somebody needs to surrender?

Slartibartfaster: Looks at children
Looks at tax return
Looks at expenditure

Screw it, TOTALLY worth the spending ?

This is a pissing contest facing upwind
A very very expensive pissing contest

/zomfg they might develop nukes and use them on civilians
// ya know, like we did

In this case, yes. Like in this case, it was also right to do military action (if this counts) to ensure the flow of oil. Iran's been waving its dick around, and this was the cleanest way to make sure one of the biggest routes of oil stays open and doesn't become an international football held by a crazy country.

Have you heard the phrase "a stitch in time saves nine?" This was that stitch. A single show of force, non-violent but threatening, to prevent an all-out war or energy crisis from happening.

I'd be against attacking Iran, because we don't have to, it would be costly, and it wouldn't get anything done. This actually helps stop a bigger problem from forming at a relatively low cost.

Joe Blowme: Molavian: C'mon, Iran. Let's think this through. Killing brown people while destabilizing the middle east is practically our national pastime.

You are such a dumb fark

Where the hell have you been for the last decade?

generallyso: Operation Mind Your Own Goddamn Business and Stop Causing Pointless Wars still on the backburner.

Well the Straight of Hormuz pretty much IS the American's business and the business of every other western nation that relies on shipping through there.

Dinnerjacket knows the following:
-Sinking the nice carrier right off your coast with its reactors will fark up your fishing industry and cause problems. Nothing helps topple a regime like a nice spike in food prices.
-In the ensuing airstrikes by America you will lose most of your oil extraction capacity. This means no source of income to pay for your security forces.
-You also will have caused a global spike in oil prices and pissed everyone else in the industrialized world off. Thus they will remain silent or actively help America kick your head in (see: Libya).
-Your entire economy will be set back two or three decades.

yup on the #1. An attack on the carrier alone would give the United States everything they wanted. Wouldnt even need to sink it.

mongbiohazard: ha-ha-guy: Iran's pissing and moaning is for internal consumption more than anything else. Their younger generation hates them and they're trying some kind of yellow journalism (see: Hearst and the Spanish American War) to wave their dick around and rally people to the flag.

Dinnerjacket knows the following:
-Sinking the nice carrier right off your coast with its reactors will fark up your fishing industry and cause problems. Nothing helps topple a regime like a nice spike in food prices.
-In the ensuing airstrikes by America you will lose most of your oil extraction capacity. This means no source of income to pay for your security forces.
-You also will have caused a global spike in oil prices and pissed everyone else in the industrialized world off. Thus they will remain silent or actively help America kick your head in (see: Libya).
-Your entire economy will be set back two or three decades.

As it stands Iran makes threats like they every couple of years. We sail ships through, they keep biatching, and eventually some kind of civil unrest makes them forget to issue the press releases and they go back to oppressing their population.


All true...

But wouldn't it be nice if we weren't so dependent on petroleum so when the Iranian regime made threats like this they'd look like they were taking swings at their own shadow and we could just shrug and laugh and continue ignoring them?

We could. We get our petroleum from the western hemisphere.

We also take a dim view about countries shutting down international shipping routes.

Slartibartfaster: Bloody William: Either way, bluff called, Iran humiliated

Looks at children
Looks at tax return
Looks at expenditure

Screw it, TOTALLY worth the spending ?

This is a pissing contest facing upwind
A very very expensive pissing contest

/zomfg they might develop nukes and use them on civilians
// ya know, like we did

4/10. The spending part what meh, then you jumped completely overboard with the nukes part.

What we really need is is one of the Gouald ships from Stargate. Just have it float omniously like a pyramid of inscrutable threat.

Molavian: Joe Blowme: Molavian: C'mon, Iran. Let's think this through. Killing brown people while destabilizing the middle east is practically our national pastime.

You are such a dumb fark

Where the hell have you been for the last decade?

According to you killing brown people just because they are brown.

>HMS Argyll, (pictured in 2005), a Type 23 frigate from the Royal Navy, was one of the escort vessels making up the carrier battle-group

gregscott: Why put your carriers at even the slightest risk?


Ah, finally someone asks the right question. This is a classic tethered goat scenario. If anything happens to the carrier it will be blamed on Iran. Who can we trust to scuttle our carriers?

Marine1: [i40.tinypic.com image 500x400]

/disproportionately high amount of "America: F*ck Yeah." in the article's picture.

Fat targets for their first nuklear test.
/just say'n

Feels like 1907 again...

tankjr: gregscott: Why put your carriers at even the slightest risk?


Ah, finally someone asks the right question. This is a classic tethered goat scenario. If anything happens to the carrier it will be blamed on Iran. Who can we trust to scuttle our carriers?

The French?
Friendly fire (IE one of us?)
Frenchie fire?

generallyso: Operation Mind Your Own Goddamn Business and Stop Causing Pointless Wars still on the backburner.

Oh, you'd think so.

Listening to BBC this morning, apparently the Middle East and U.N. is angry the U.S. isn't doing enough to support democratic change in the middle east, and is supporting dictators because it promotes stability.

At this point, I think the U.N. no longer has Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya as Facebook friends.

"Waaaah, stop interfering."
"Waaaah, you aren't interfering enough."

At this point, I think we should send a bunch of missiles to a bunch of random cities in each country, that is accompanied by airdrops of tampons, and call it our new foreign policy called "Deal with it yourself".

tankjr: gregscott: Why put your carriers at even the slightest risk?


Ah, finally someone asks the right question. This is a classic tethered goat scenario. If anything happens to the carrier it will be blamed on Iran. Who can we trust to scuttle our carriers?

Let's not forget that we have ten (ten? eleven?) more carriers. As the article stated, each one of them individually has more striking power than the entire Iranian air force. Each one of them is surrounded by a carrier battle group that can defend the main ships from most attacks. And like you said, at the end of the day, if the Iranians do attack the American carriers... it will not end well for them.

mongbiohazard: ha-ha-guy: Iran's pissing and moaning is for internal consumption more than anything else. Their younger generation hates them and they're trying some kind of yellow journalism (see: Hearst and the Spanish American War) to wave their dick around and rally people to the flag.

Dinnerjacket knows the following:
-Sinking the nice carrier right off your coast with its reactors will fark up your fishing industry and cause problems. Nothing helps topple a regime like a nice spike in food prices.
-In the ensuing airstrikes by America you will lose most of your oil extraction capacity. This means no source of income to pay for your security forces.
-You also will have caused a global spike in oil prices and pissed everyone else in the industrialized world off. Thus they will remain silent or actively help America kick your head in (see: Libya).
-Your entire economy will be set back two or three decades.

As it stands Iran makes threats like they every couple of years. We sail ships through, they keep biatching, and eventually some kind of civil unrest makes them forget to issue the press releases and they go back to oppressing their population.


All true...

But wouldn't it be nice if we weren't so dependent on petroleum so when the Iranian regime made threats like this they'd look like they were taking swings at their own shadow and we could just shrug and laugh and continue ignoring them?

Yes, and what is why when the Pentagon says "getting off foreign energy is a national security issue" I agree. However 35% of the world's oil goes through that shipping lane and it's a global econ they days. If 35% of the world's oil gets disrupted, the world econ is going to take a hit, and I don't want that. if Europe or Asia goes to shiat, we feel a ripple.

When you say we not being dependent on oil, that we has to encompass a good 5 billion or so (accepting the fact that Africa's economy went to shiat years ago and we'd barely notice if they got worse) and that isn't happening any time soon. So deploy the CVNs until it happens.

Slartibartfaster: Looks at children
Looks at tax return
Looks at expenditure

Screw it, TOTALLY worth the spending ?


Yeah because the US wouldn't have paid those sailors if they hadn't gone through the straight or fueled the planes or anything.

Sock Ruh Tease: "As Iranians say, it will be easier than drinking a glass of water."

That's not a very creative saying.

It doesn't have to be if it illustrates its point well. How many voluntary actions do you know that are simpler than drinking a glass of water?

It's not as classy as, "Easier than passing gas," either.

Molavian: Joe Blowme: Molavian: C'mon, Iran. Let's think this through. Killing brown people while destabilizing the middle east is practically our national pastime.

You are such a dumb fark

Where the hell have you been for the last decade?

Decade? When was the last time we farked around in Iran, destabilized the country, and caused a revolution? Oh yeah the 1950's, where have you been the last 60 years?

Evil Mackerel: Marine1: [i40.tinypic.com image 500x400]

/disproportionately high amount of "America: F*ck Yeah." in the article's picture.

Fat targets for their first nuklear test.
/just say'n

The Iranian leadership is a lot of things, but they're not stupid. A nuclear attack on a multinational carrier battle group (particularly one led by the US) is suicide.

OniNeko: Sock Ruh Tease: "As Iranians say, it will be easier than drinking a glass of water."

That's not a very creative saying.

It doesn't have to be if it illustrates its point well. How many voluntary actions do you know that are simpler than drinking a glass of water?

It's not as classy as, "Easier than passing gas," either.

I'd have to know the quality and availability of the water. If you were say in Mexico, drinking the water paves the way for a lot of bad shiat.

The spice must floooooooooow....evil harkonen voice over....