Iranian developments

rick1 wrote:

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7106845/Iran-six-months-away-having-NUCLEAR-WEAPONS-former-IAEA-deputy-warns.html

Another update. Iran getting closer to becoming a nuclear power.

Proverb says "I foresee a glass parking lot being developed."

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:Another update. Iran getting closer to becoming a nuclear power.

Even if we do absolutely nothing, no way Israel just sits back and lets it happen. That maywill spark a regional conflict drawing other parties in.

...ominous situation.

TRex2 wrote:

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:Another update. Iran getting closer to becoming a nuclear power.

True, but not for several more months.
At least.

Even if we do absolutely nothing, no way Israel just sits back and lets it happen. That maywill spark a regional conflict drawing other parties in.

...ominous situation.

Exactly.
[I had to edit the quoted part a bit, in blue]

Front Altair had been chartered by Taiwan's state oil refiner CBC Corp and was carrying 75,000 tonnes of naphtha, a petrochemical feedstock, when it was "suspected of being hit by a torpedo" around noon Taiwan time (0400GMT), Wu I-Fang, CPC's petrochemical business division CEO, told Reuters. He said all crew members had been rescued.

Norway's Frontline shipping company, which owns the Front Altair, said its vessel was on fire.

Operator of tanker says sailors saw 'flying objects' just before attack

The Japanese operator ship operator of one of two oil tankers attacked near the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday said that sailors on board its vessel, the Kokuka Courageous, saw "flying objects" just before the attack, suggesting the tanker wasn't damaged by mines.

That account contradicts what the U.S. military has said as it released a video it says shows Iranian forces removing an unexploded limpet mine from one of the two ships in the suspected attack.

Yukaka Katada is the owner of the Kokuka Courageous, which was hit port side by a limpet mine in the Gulf of Oman, according to the U.S. assessment. But Katada said that’s wrong — his ship, he maintained, was hit starboard side, and not by a mine.

The attack didn’t even come from within the water, he said, but rather by a flying projectile.

“It seems that something flew towards them. That created the hole, is the report I’ve received,” Katada said.

Katada also asserted that the “impact was well above the water,” according to reporting from The Daily Beast. He did not have any opinion on who was responsible for the attack.

Some have openly questioned the speed at which Pompeo and the State Department came to their conclusions.

TRex2 wrote:I definitely saw a ship with damage above the water line.

Just a hunch with nothing to back it, but could it be that the
Iranians placed a mine, when it failed to detonate, they hit
the ship with a rocket. After the ship stopped they went to
retrieve the dud mine.

dmwalsh568 wrote:

TRex2 wrote:I definitely saw a ship with damage above the water line.

Just a hunch with nothing to back it, but could it be that the
Iranians placed a mine, when it failed to detonate, they hit
the ship with a rocket. After the ship stopped they went to
retrieve the dud mine.

That's possible, but I find it interesting that the Japanese owner of the ship said the damage was on the opposite side from what Pompeo was telling the media...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/japanese-oil-tanker-owner-says-us-is-wrong-about-gulf-attack

Maybe the owner was wrong, or maybe our government is lying about this....time will tell.

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:...
...
From what I've read most stories say both ships were damaged on their starboard side. If both ships were exiting the straight of Hormuz this would be the sides of the ship opposite of the Iranian coast.

TRex2 wrote:

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:...
...
From what I've read most stories say both ships were damaged on their starboard side. If both ships were exiting the straight of Hormuz this would be the sides of the ship opposite of the Iranian coast.

I noticed that too, but the map I saw showed they were
a substantial distance from the actual straight, so that
could have some bearing on this situation.

...

https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2019/06/pompeo-blames-tanker-attacks-iran-offers-no-evidence/157719/ wrote:“At 8:09 a.m. local time a U.S. aircraft observed an IRGC Hendijan class patrol boat and multiple IRGC fast attack craft/fast inshore attack craft (FAC/FIAC) in the vicinity of the M/T Altair [one of the damaged tankers],” he said.

Tehran, Iran (CNN) - Iranian forces have shot down a United States military drone, a move that appears to have escalated the volatile situation playing out between Washington and Tehran in the Middle East.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard said it had shot down an "intruding American spy drone" after it entered into the country's territory Thursday, according to state-run Press TV.

A US official confirmed to CNN a drone had been shot down, but said the incident occurred in international airspace over the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most vital shipping routes.

dmwalsh568 wrote:Ok, it's looking more like Iran really does want to go to war with us. Sigh.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/06/20/middleeast/iran-drone-claim-hnk-intl/index.html

Tehran, Iran (CNN) - Iranian forces have shot down a United States military drone, a move that appears to have escalated the volatile situation playing out between Washington and Tehran in the Middle East.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard said it had shot down an "intruding American spy drone" after it entered into the country's territory Thursday, according to state-run Press TV.

A US official confirmed to CNN a drone had been shot down, but said the incident occurred in international airspace over the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world's most vital shipping routes.

Still waiting for response from DC....

rick1 wrote:I don't believe that the drone was in international airspace, no matter what the fake news says or the white house. This is the U.S., of course it was flying over Iran.

Dave58 wrote:I think I will just put this here....https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9335064/pentagon-nuclear-weapons-chilling-new-doctrine/

dmwalsh568 wrote:

Dave58 wrote:I think I will just put this here....https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9335064/pentagon-nuclear-weapons-chilling-new-doctrine/

Well that's not good.

Nothing like a doctrine to scare opponents into a use it or lose it proposition. I'm not sure how many people realize there has never been a limited nuclear war. In WW2 we used all the bombs we had on hand to get Japan to surrender, sure we had more in production, but we used every bomb we had ready at the time. https://www.thedailybeast.com/us-planned-to-drop-12-atomic-bombs-on-japan

Guess I need to make sure my bicycle is in good shape in case I need to get to work without using gasoline. Probably should get some spare tubes and a couple of repair kits.

dmwalsh568 wrote:

rick1 wrote:I don't believe that the drone was in international airspace, no matter what the fake news says or the white house. This is the U.S., of course it was flying over Iran.

That said, I have to ask what do you consider fake news media? Checking Breitbart, Foxnews and CNN they all say the same thing - that Iran claims one thing, and the US claims another.

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:President Trump's response to Iran

https://www.yahoo.com/news/iran-shoots-down-us-drone-042503816.html

“They made a very big mistake,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, alongside Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

“I find it hard to believe it was intentional, and it could have been someone who was loose and stupid,” he added.

TRex2 wrote:They shot down a drone in international airspace, not surprising, but Trump is giving them an "out" if they will take it. Trouble is, they will likely view any such "out" as showing weakness, and refuse to go that route.

Trump doesn't bluff, but I suspect his response will be measured and restrained. It would take us about 4 or 5 months at this point to spin up the war machines for taking Iran nose to nose (or is it toe to toe) for a fight to the death. But we could bloody their nose in any hour.

As for the Pentagon Paper, if you peruse places like the War Colleges and such on a regular basis, you will soon see that papers like that come and go on a routine basis. Could be a signal to Iran, or it could be nothing at all.

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:This is super interesting.

Apparently last night we were in the process of launching a strike against Iran and president Trump called it off.

https://www.yahoo.com/gma/president-trump-ordered-military-strike-iran-reversed-last-033400920.html

Iran is an altogether more complex challenge both militarily and politically. Some in the White House clearly want regime change. They are likely to be disappointed. So rule out a major land war.

Any follow-up Iranian attack on US ships or aircraft would almost certainly be met by an escalation from the Americans. Iranian naval installations, air bases and so on would be hit by aircraft and cruise missiles with the focus, in part, on the Revolutionary Guard Corps whose naval arm appears to have played a prominent role in recent events. wrote:

The existence of Hezbollah sleeper cells with their Iranian agents in the U.S. is already known to intelligence officials. Just last year, two Hezbollah terrorists were arrested for planning attacks in the U.S.

One had already scouted potential targets in New York City including JFK International Airport. Both terrorists were U.S. citizens, meaning they had free rein to exit and re-enter the U.S. at will, which they did. Under questioning, one admitted he was a “sleeper” agent of Hezbollah’s Islamic Jihad tasked to carry out “black ops” for Hezbollah and “the Iranians.”

In 2007, Iranian agents were caught trying to blow up fuel tanks and pipelines going to JFK.

“It is clear that Hezbollah has the will and capacity,” said King. “Hezbollah is probably the most experienced and professional terrorist organization in the world.”

TRex2 wrote:The good news is that some of our guys hacked the Iranian's systems and shut down their air defense batteries, by remote command.

The bad news is: that is a trick that, if they are smart,
we can only do once, since they may well plug that hole.

DTKA wrote:Agreed. I think it shows how close we were to dropping bombs. We wouldn't have done this if an attack was not imminent.

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:Iran publicly flaunting they are already over the enrichment threshold.  Not good development.  They are well on their way to enough fissile material for warheads.

Israel can't be happy. You know they won't allow Iran to get much farther than they are at this point.



Then this just happened. Maybe it's related, maybe something else entirely??

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-07-02/vp-pence-recalled-white-house-emergency-airforce-2-diverted

https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/en/news-page/world/breaking-news-vice-president-ordered-to-immediately-return-to-white-house-for-unspecified-emergency

Drinkthekoolaid wrote:Iran publicly flaunting they are already over the enrichment threshold.  Not good development.  They are well on their way to enough fissile material for warheads.
...

https://www.breitbart.com/middle-east/2019/07/07/iran-blames-europe-as-it-breaches-uranium-enrichment-cap wrote:Government spokesman Ali Rabiei told a news conference Iran will go beyond the limit of 3.67 percent enrichment Sunday and the new percentage “will be based on our needs,” without specifying any further details,
...
Sunday’s decision came less than a week after Iran acknowledged breaking the deal’s 300-kilogram (661-pound) limit on its low-enriched uranium stockpile. Experts warn higher enrichment and a growing stockpile narrow the one-year window Iran would need to have enough material for an atomic bomb, something Iran denies it wants but the deal prevented.

"(SNIP) ... The Ministry of Defence said Type 23 frigate HMS Kent would deploy to the Gulf later this year as part of Operation Kipion, the UK's mission in the region, after days of threats to British shipping. (SNIP) ... The MoD insists that the movements are 'long-planned' and not an escalation, but they come after weeks of tension in the Gulf which heightened further when Britain seized an Iranian tanker off Gibraltar two weeks ago." wrote:

TRex2 wrote:If you read the article, we cannot seem to prove the Iranians grabbed it, but that does seem the most logical explanation. I think we are slowly moving towards the wars described in prophesy, but am slightly confused that that some of the signs seem out of sequence.

Thankfully, it looks like we are moving very slowly towards war, and not rushing headlong into it.