What's new

International Community Will Ensure Strait Of Hormuz Stays Open

You mean the World wont turn against those who want to 100% block Iran's oil exports?

If US and co 100% blocks Iran oil exports anyway, Iran will have nothing to lose but to press the issue and close the Strait altogether. Iran wont wait for a decade to get weaken and then get attacked. If war is coming anyway, Iran will prefer to fight when they are strong, not down and weakened.

They have a choice and everything to lose they can allow the IAEA 100% unfettered access to nuke sites and stop enriching to 20% or more. But we both know they won't do that. Short of the Iranian people toppling the Mullahs there will be a major war over Iran's nukes. And there is only one outcome to that. The complete devestation of Iran's infrastructure and military.
 
.
They have a choice and everything to lose they can allow the IAEA 100% unfettered access to nuke sites and stop enriching to 20% or more. But we both know they won't do that.

Lift the sanctions and invite them over for some tea, that might work.....while you at it a couple of apologies for not keeping you end of the bargains in the past might help as well.
 
.
They have a choice and everything to lose they can allow the IAEA 100% unfettered access to nuke sites and stop enriching to 20% or more.

Iran is already allowing 100% access to nuclear sites, with 24/7 monitors in all sites.

What Iran isnt allowing is 100% access to conventional military sites, and why would they? To get US/Israel up to speed in all conventional advancements? How stupid do you think they are?

20% enrichment in place is because Iran needs it for medical/research reactors, since West declined to supply, and US sabotaged fuel swap (3% -> 20%) deal with Brazil.

But we both know they won't do that. Short of the Iranian people toppling the Mullahs there will be a major war over Iran's nukes. And there is only one outcome to that. The complete devestation of Iran's infrastructure and military.

War is highly likely, since US wont stop till install puppet regime in Iran, by all means possible. If fake "color revolutions" wont work, invasion will happen.

What concerns outcome, Iran infrastructure will be destroyed, same as most US bases, same as most of US navy, same as harmed whole World already fragile economics. It will be a long war of attrition which US cant win.
 
.
Iran is already allowing 100% access to nuclear sites, with 24/7 monitors in all sites.

What Iran isnt allowing is 100% access to conventional military sites, and why would they? To get US/Israel up to speed in all conventional advancements? How stupid do you think they are?

20% enrichment in place is because Iran needs it for medical/research reactors, since West declined to supply, and US sabotaged fuel swap (3% -> 20%) deal with Brazil.



War is highly likely, since US wont stop till install puppet regime in Iran, by all means possible. If fake "color revolutions" wont work, invasion will happen.

What concerns outcome, Iran infrastructure will be destroyed, same as most US bases, same as most of US navy, same as harmed whole World already fragile economics. It will be a long war of attrition which US cant win.

Fake color revolutions? so to you any Iranians wanting an end to the Mullahs controlling the Government are US puppets? Any Syrians wanting an end to Assad's repressive rule is a terrorist and US puppet? Any Libyans that wanted an end to Gadhafi’s brutal rule is a US puppet? Anyone wanting to put and end to decades of repressive rule is a US puppet?

There will be no invasion of Iran after 1 week Iran will have no air force or navy left. After 2 - 3 weeks all coastal military installations will be no more. as well as all known nuke sites will have been hit multiple times with the exception of bushehr which will get a pass rather than cause a meltdown. After 2 months allied forces will start running out of targets to hit. Iran’s bridges, Government buildings, refineries, power stations, and industrial infrastructure will be in ruins.

The straights will be shut down for about a week till mines are cleared, coastal batteries eliminated, and Iran’s navy is destroyed
 
.
Fake color revolutions? so to you any Iranians wanting an end to the Mullahs controlling the Government are US puppets? Any Syrians wanting an end to Assad's repressive rule is a terrorist and US puppet? Any Libyans that wanted an end to Gadhafi’s brutal rule is a US puppet? Anyone wanting to put and end to decades of repressive rule is a US puppet?

There will be no invasion of Iran after 1 week Iran will have no air force or navy left. After 2 - 3 weeks all coastal military installations will be no more. as well as all known nuke sites will have been hit multiple times with the exception of bushehr which will get a pass rather than cause a meltdown. After 2 months allied forces will start running out of targets to hit. Iran’s bridges, Government buildings, refineries, power stations, and industrial infrastructure will be in ruins.

The straights will be shut down for about a week till mines are cleared, coastal batteries eliminated, and Iran’s navy is destroyed

You are the best product of your media brainwashing system.They can be proud of you.Especially Fox news.
You don't even know that right now,Iran has gave IAEA 100% access to its sites.There are no nuclear sites that IAEA hasn't visited already.There are surveillance cameras in every site showing every activity 24/7.Even CIA and Mossad admitted in 2011,that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons.But since its the best tool to put pressure on Iran,they simply continue their rhetoric and lying about Iran.

And about attack on Iran,you are so naive,your calculations and assumptions show that.So you think U.S can easily come here and defeat Iran for 3-4 weeks?Thank God Obama is not as stupid as Bush to think in such way.If U.S,in any possible way,had even 30% assurance that it can defeat Iran without losing and sacrificing huge resources and lives,they would've attacked Iran years ago,when Iran was much more weaker.The minute you attack Iran,you bases in Bahrain,Qatar,UAE,Afghanistan and other neighboring countries,are gone.Just 1 day after the strait of Hormuz is closed,the oil will reach $250 per barrel and this is enough to push currently ill economy of the world more in to Sh**.U.S will pay the price just becasue Israel asks it to do so.No offense,but Israel is riding U.S foreign policy in ME as easy as a man rides a horse.You may not agree with me,but many of ordinary Americans and analysts know that.U.S knows very well that Iran is not a threat to it.The problem is here:Israel doesn't want a strong deterrence to it's hegemony in ME,especially to its nuclear weapons arsenal.That's why the west is turning a blind eye on Israel's illegal nuclear weapons (which actually are built by U.S and French help in 50s and 60s) and crying a river on Iran's peaceful nuclear program.This is just an excuse,before nuclear program,it was something else,and I'm sure after the nuclear issue is solved,they will bring another excuse.Their problem is Iran itself,just as it has been since 1979. Because Iran is a strong force against U.S and Israel's interests in region.
I'm in odds with your hypocrisy,you see nuclear weapons as Israel's unquestionable rights,while accusing Iran for trying to make bombs.So what is your opinion about Israel's nukes?Of course I know your answer won't surprise me or anyone else.
 
.
You are the best product of your media brainwashing system.They can be proud of you.Especially Fox news.
You don't even know that right now,Iran has gave IAEA 100% access to its sites.There are no nuclear sites that IAEA hasn't visited already.There are surveillance cameras in every site showing every activity 24/7.Even CIA and Mossad admitted in 2011,that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons.But since its the best tool to put pressure on Iran,they simply continue their rhetoric and lying about Iran.

And about attack on Iran,you are so naive,your calculations and assumptions show that.So you think U.S can easily come here and defeat Iran for 3-4 weeks?Thank God Obama is not as stupid as Bush to think in such way.If U.S,in any possible way,had even 30% assurance that it can defeat Iran without losing and sacrificing huge resources and lives,they would've attacked Iran years ago,when Iran was much more weaker.The minute you attack Iran,you bases in Bahrain,Qatar,UAE,Afghanistan and other neighboring countries,are gone.Just 1 day after the strait of Hormuz is closed,the oil will reach $250 per barrel and this is enough to push currently ill economy of the world more in to Sh**.U.S will pay the price just becasue Israel asks it to do so.No offense,but Israel is riding U.S foreign policy in ME as easy as a man rides a horse.You may not agree with me,but many of ordinary Americans and analysts know that.U.S knows very well that Iran is not a threat to it.The problem is here:Israel doesn't want a strong deterrence to it's hegemony in ME,especially to its nuclear weapons arsenal.That's why the west is turning a blind eye on Israel's illegal nuclear weapons (which actually are built by U.S and French help in 50s and 60s) and crying a river on Iran's peaceful nuclear program.This is just an excuse,before nuclear program,it was something else,and I'm sure after the nuclear issue is solved,they will bring another excuse.Their problem is Iran itself,just as it has been since 1979. Because Iran is a strong force against U.S and Israel's interests in region.
I'm in odds with your hypocrisy,you see nuclear weapons as Israel's unquestionable rights,while accusing Iran for trying to make bombs.So what is your opinion about Israel's nukes?Of course I know your answer won't surprise me or anyone else.

1. I rarely watch fox news these days actually. I bet you’re a heavy press TV follower though.

2. Though they have said they will consider it Iran does not currently allow snap inspections of all nuke sites. Or sites suspected of having military nuke projects. It is one of the positions the IAEA is currently in talks for. And it is the enrichment problem that is the biggest sticking point.

3. I never said Iran would be defeated in 3-4 weeks. But you will find much of your country in ruins in that time. And I never said or implied a war with Iran would be easy. I simply stated what the outcome would be. Iran does not have the resources to fight a dozen countries or more who do have the resources. It's navy and air force is to small and much of its equipment antiquated. Once the allies have air superiority and SAM defenses destroyed it will be pretty much a turkey shoot.
 
.
F
There will be no invasion of Iran after 1 week Iran will have no air force left.

Iran's main aircrafts will be hidden from the first attack, Iranian officers will regroup and that is when **** will not be going the invader's way and the reality that you are no longer in Kansas (or Iraq/Afghan) will set in with flashbacks to vietnam. Iran is a large country and the terrain is a natural fortress and you be dealing with a very well trained and battle smart officers.

Most Americans do not support a war with Iran.....any bombing or all out invasion will unite all Iranians reguardless of how they feel about the current regime.
 
.
There will be no invasion of Iran after 1 week Iran will have no air force or navy left. After 2 - 3 weeks all coastal military installations will be no more. as well as all known nuke sites will have been hit multiple times with the exception of bushehr which will get a pass rather than cause a meltdown. After 2 months allied forces will start running out of targets to hit. Iran’s bridges, Government buildings, refineries, power stations, and industrial infrastructure will be in ruins.
Ya, this is US.

Liberators-Kultur-Terror-Anti-Americanism-1944-Nazi-Propaganda-Poster.jpg


Btw it seems you are thinking US will attack and Iran and its allies e.g. Hezbollah just sit and watch everything untill their utter destruction and also nothing bad will happen to your pals, Zionists, then war is over, US and its allies are the winner, everyone is happy :tup: (though just several other thousands of Americans die oh but that's not important at all cause actually the security of the Zionist regime is more important to your govt than lives of your people). I suggest to read this article by Philip Giraldi. (though within these months many things have been changed, e.g. Persian Gulf missiles, also the author has not mentioned many other options Iran have.)

1. I rarely watch fox news these days actually. I bet you’re a heavy press TV follower though.
Actually comments of Iranians are far more fair then that of Americans; we know your language and -- willingly or unwillingly -- are under influence of your govt's propaganda too. What about Americans? I was recently debating with some Americans on internet, surprised by number of your brainwashed people who didn't know that this "wiping Israel off the map" story was a mistranslation.
2. Though they have said they will consider it Iran does not currently allow snap inspections of all nuke sites. Or sites suspected of having military nuke projects. It is one of the positions the IAEA is currently in talks for. And it is the enrichment problem that is the biggest sticking point.
Stop repeating this "nuke ... nuke" nonsense. Your govt has not provided even one evidence for its BS's about Iranian nuclear programe. Oh btw, I wonder where are those WMDs that you claimed are in Iraq before the invasion?
3. I never said Iran would be defeated in 3-4 weeks. But you will find much of your country in ruins in that time. And I never said or implied a war with Iran would be easy. I simply stated what the outcome would be. Iran does not have the resources to fight a dozen countries or more who do have the resources. It's navy and air force is to small and much of its equipment antiquated. Once the allies have air superiority and SAM defenses destroyed it will be pretty much a turkey shoot.
Firstly, you no longer can start another war, especially against Iran. But anyhow, even if Iran be attacked and defeated and US and its allies become the 'winner', one thing is for certain Thomas, you American people will gain nothing (and loose many things). The only winner is probably then Zionist govt. Your people are dying thousands of miles far from your boders, because of a tiny brutal regime which is 11063.74 km far from your home.

Iran's main aircrafts will be hidden from the first attack, Iranian officers will regroup and that is when **** will not be going the invader's way and the reality that you are no longer in Kansas (or Iraq/Afghan) will set in with flashbacks to vietnam. Iran is a large country and the terrain is a natural fortress and you be dealing with a very well trained and battle smart officers.

Most Americans do not support a war with Iran.....any bombing or all out invasion will unite all Iranians reguardless of how they feel about the current regime.

Yes, I personally don't support our govt and am somehow neutral to them for some reasons, but between US / US puppet and our govt, I definitely choose our govt, they are at least Iranian and produce of our own society and, though they may fail, but try to do whatever that they believe is good for us, but US even don't give a **** for lives its own people/troops.
The only things US love are war, oil, bullying, and pressure on nations.
 
. .
@Thomas

Lets get to the bottom of things so we wont be returning to the same themes over and over again.

* Do you agree now "They have a choice and everything to lose they can allow the IAEA 100% unfettered access to nuke sites and stop enriching to 20% or more." is factually incorrect and/or unreasonable?

If yes, we can move on, if not - facts on the table and we can discuss them.

Fake color revolutions? so to you any Iranians wanting an end to the Mullahs controlling the Government are US puppets? Any Syrians wanting an end to Assad's repressive rule is a terrorist and US puppet? Any Libyans that wanted an end to Gadhafi’s brutal rule is a US puppet? Anyone wanting to put and end to decades of repressive rule is a US puppet?

There is opposition in every. Single. Country. In The. World. Including US. As long as they are minority - they cant have a final say over how the country is run, agreed? Majority speaks for the country, not minority. Regardless if you prefer that opposition over majority or not.

Now about uprisings - there are two different kinds:

1) Internal, like Iranians overthrew brutal US puppet Shah. It was a decision by a majority of Iranians, no external meddling.


2) External, when foreign country induces the change of unfavorable to its interests government to puppets. Like US spends hundreds of millions (400 mln. for Iran's regime change just in 2007, and just by Congress, there are more funds for it), arms and trains opposition and terrorists cells. Sabotages targeted country by all means possible, while incites (and pays) disgruntled by foreign sanctions hardships people to raise against government, etc.

I have no problems with 1), people should decided who runs the country, not foreign countries with their own goals. Thats why I oppose US approach. How would you like if foreign countries would do that to US?
 
.
@Thomas

Lets get to the bottom of things so we wont be returning to the same themes over and over again.

* Do you agree now "They have a choice and everything to lose they can allow the IAEA 100% unfettered access to nuke sites and stop enriching to 20% or more." is factually incorrect and/or unreasonable?

If yes, we can move on, if not - facts on the table and we can discuss them.



There is opposition in every. Single. Country. In The. World. Including US. As long as they are minority - they cant have a final say over how the country is run, agreed? Majority speaks for the country, not minority. Regardless if you prefer that opposition over majority or not.

Now about uprisings - there are two different kinds:

1) Internal, like Iranians overthrew brutal US puppet Shah. It was a decision by a majority of Iranians, no external meddling.


2) External, when foreign country induces the change of unfavorable to its interests government to puppets. Like US spends hundreds of millions (400 mln. for Iran's regime change just in 2007, and just by Congress, there are more funds for it), arms and trains opposition and terrorists cells. Sabotages targeted country by all means possible, while incites (and pays) disgruntled by foreign sanctions hardships people to raise against government, etc.

I have no problems with 1), people should decided who runs the country, not foreign countries with their own goals. Thats why I oppose US approach. How would you like if foreign countries would do that to US?

Everyone has a choice the question is is it the right one. choices can have profound consequences especially so when it concerns the direction of a nation. Iranians had a choice and the right when they toppled the Shah. But right away they made a choice to become enemies when they took Hostages and declared they would export thier Islamic revolution to other countries. They also made choices to help found, train, supply, and fund terrorist organizations like Hezbollah.

Then you have Iran's leaders like Ahmadinejad who has said in speech's that the main mission of the Islamic Revolution is to pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam. and who also says that during one of his speech's at the UN he was surrounded by an aura and people gazed at him transfixed without blinking. And this guy is the president of a country that wants nukes?

As far as opposition in Iran There is a reason the hardliners are always trying to stack the elections in thier favor. They know they would have a hard time with free and open elections. The youger generation of Iran are unhappy with rule of the mullahs they don't like the oppresion and lack of freedom.


Iranian Youth Ditch Oppressive Islam - YouTube
 
.
Everyone has a choice the question is is it the right one. choices can have profound consequences especially so when it concerns the direction of a nation. Iranians had a choice and the right when they toppled the Shah. But right away they made a choice to become enemies when they took Hostages and declared they would export thier Islamic revolution to other countries. They also made choices to help found, train, supply, and fund terrorist organizations like Hezbollah.

Then you have Iran's leaders like Ahmadinejad who has said in speech's that the main mission of the Islamic Revolution is to pave the way for the reappearance of the 12th Imam. and who also says that during one of his speech's at the UN he was surrounded by an aura and people gazed at him transfixed without blinking. And this guy is the president of a country that wants nukes?

As far as opposition in Iran There is a reason the hardliners are always trying to stack the elections in thier favor. They know they would have a hard time with free and open elections. The youger generation of Iran are unhappy with rule of the mullahs they don't like the oppresion and lack of freedom.


Iranian Youth Ditch Oppressive Islam - YouTube

Haden't U.S became Iranian enemy,after overthrowing democratically elected governmnt of Iran in 1953?
Once again,a typical American with a selective memory.Maybe they haven't taught you that in your history books?
What's goes around,comes around.What Iranians did to you,was a backlash of what you did to us during the Shah time.
The elections was free and fair.But you are blind to see that.

Now tell me about reelection of G.W Bush.That leaves 2 possibilities about that election:1-The whole election was a fraud.2-American people are so stupid that they choose a nutjob apocyptic man like him as their leader.
Guess the first one is true.
 
.
US fears nightmarish conflict with Iran in Persian Gulf: Experts

The US and Middle East analysts have described Iran's new naval capabilities to strike American warships in the Persian Gulf as a “nightmare” scenario for the US navy.


“Some [US] Navy ships could find themselves in a 360-degree threat environment, simultaneously in the cross hairs of adversaries on land, in the air, at sea and even underwater,” leading US daily The Washington Post reported Friday, quoting “a Middle Eastern intelligence official” that helps coordinate Persian Gulf strategy with his American counterparts.

“This is a scenario that is giving people nightmares,” the report added, quoting the unnamed official on the strategy for reacting to possible Iranian strikes on US warships in case a clash erupts in the Persian Gulf. The official, says the Post, spoke on condition of anonymity.


Pointing to a Pentagon decision to send more ships to the Persian Gulf in response to concerns expressed by Iran's Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi, describing the presence of US warships in the area as a “real threat” to regional security, The Post cites its sources to argue that Iran's ability to inflict “significant damage” on American naval forces is “substantially greater” than it was a decade ago.

The report then cites a US Defense Department study in April, warning that Iran had made gains in the “lethality and effectiveness” of its arsenal, which “now includes ballistic missiles with ‘seekers’ that enable them to maneuver toward ships during flight.”

The Pentagon’s April assessment also cautions on Iran's “steady progress in developing ballistic missiles capable of striking targets in Israel and beyond,” the Post notes.


According to the report, Iran's growing naval capabilities have led some American military experts “to question the wisdom of deploying aircraft carriers and other expensive warships to the (Persian) Gulf if a conflict appears imminent.”

It then quotes a 2009 study by the US Naval War College, which warns of Iran's increasing ability to “execute a massive naval ambush” in the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway dotted with small islands and inlets and “perfectly suited for the kind of asymmetric warfare preferred by Iran's commanders.”


Although, the new US warships are equipped with multiple defense systems, “such as the ship-based Aegis missile shield,” Iran, according to the report, has sought to “neutralize the US technological advantages by honing an ability to strike from multiple directions at once.” The Iranian naval strategy, it adds, “relies not only on mobile missile launchers, but also on new mini-submarines, helicopters and hundreds of heavily armed small boats known as fast-attack craft.”

The Post then expresses fear that the small Iranian vessels can “rapidly deploy” anti-ship mines against hostile ships in the Persian Gulf “or mass in groups to strike large warships from multiple sides at once, like a cloud of wasps attacking much larger prey.”

“It is a dilemma,” says the Middle East intelligence official cited in the report. “When the [US] Navy ships are in the strait, they are vulnerable to attack. But if you were to take them away, the (Persian) Gulf (Arab) countries would feel more vulnerable. And already they feel very, very vulnerable.”


American officials have announced new war games with regional Arab sheikhdoms in the Persian Gulf region, including the deployment of new radar stations and land-based missile-defense batteries in Qatar.

Meanwhile Iran's Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari reiterated on Tuesday that the country’s naval forces are fully capable of providing security for the Middle East region.

Rear Admiral Sayyari also pointed out that Iran's Navy possesses all the required capabilities to conduct surface, submarine, aerial and missile operations aimed at safeguarding regional security.

Relying on efficient human resources, the Iranian Navy has enhanced the deterrence power and security of the region, he noted.

PressTV - US fears nightmarish conflict with Iran in Persian Gulf: Experts
 
.
why don't these countries make a canal from Dubai to gulf of Oman ?. same like Suez and Panama canals for by pass from Hormuz and close this chapter ?
 
.
why don't these countries make a canal from Dubai to gulf of Oman ?. same like Suez and Panama canals for by pass from Hormuz and close this chapter ?
UAE has made one,but it's only enough to transfer 80% of it's oil exports to Gulf of Oman.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom