• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Strait of Hormuz standoff: Iran films US aircraft carrier

j-mac

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
41,104
Reaction score
12,202
Location
South Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
By Raf Sanchez, Washington
7:51PM GMT 29 Dec 2011


The commander of Iran's navy said the reconnaissance mission was proof that his fleet had "control over the moves by foreign forces" but it was unclear what intelligence could be derived from the grainy video, which was played triumphantly on state television.

Admiral Habibollah Sayyari's statement came as Iranian ships, helicopters and submarines continued a 10-day war game exercise designed to give credibility to the country's threat to close the Strait and choke off the world's oil supplies if the West moves ahead with sanctions.

The drill is underway in international waters near the Strait and only a few hundred miles from America's Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet. The US Navy has vowed to prevent any closure of the channel, through which 15 million barrels of oil pass every day.

Strait of Hormuz standoff: Iran films US aircraft carrier - Telegraph


So, my question here. If Iran tries to block the Straight, 1. is that an act of war? and 2. Would the US be justified in taking out Iran's navy, and possibly further action in Iran?


j-mac
 
So, my question here. If Iran tries to block the Straight, 1. is that an act of war? and 2. Would the US be justified in taking out Iran's navy, and possibly further action in Iran?


j-mac

If Iran tries to block the international waters of the Strait of Hormuz, it would be an act of war. The U.S. would be justified in using such force as is necessary to clear and safeguard the Strait.
 
If Iran tries to block the international waters of the Strait of Hormuz, it would be an act of war. The U.S. would be justified in using such force as is necessary to clear and safeguard the Strait.

Would it be just the US being called on, or do you see a more global response?


j-mac
 
Would it be just the US being called on, or do you see a more global response?

Why would the Pitbull need or want the help of a bunch of Chihuaha's to fight its battles?
 
This just may be the excuse the civilized world needs to go in and give Iran the spanking this naughty nation deserves.

But on the other hand, it also may be the catalyst that causes Russia and/or China to go to arms against the US. Which would then result in the gathering of allies. Which then could result in WW3. Which could then, possibly, cause this Islamic armegaddon the Islamists in Iran propagandize about. Which would pretty much be part of Iran's doomsday plan to begin with.

They may be just playing us like a fiddle.

Much to ponder.
 
Why would the Pitbull need or want the help of a bunch of Chihuaha's to fight its battles?

Why is it the pitbull's battle alone?
 
Why is it the pitbull's battle alone?

Not necessarily the Pitbull's battle alone, but it's easier to fight the battle when your supposed "allies" aren't always getting in the way rather than doing anything truly useful. Then again I'm not sure the US is really a Pitbull anymore. I doubt our current administration has the intestinal fortitude to fight a war all-out. Obviously the last one did not, nor have any since the end of WWII.
 
I would think this would be a battle for UN-nations forces instead of the US unilaterally. We don't need a repeat of the Iraqi invasion.
 
So, my question here. If Iran tries to block the Straight, 1. is that an act of war? and 2. Would the US be justified in taking out Iran's navy, and possibly further action in Iran?


j-mac

You can be confident that the Obama Administration carrying on the Bush tradition will do whatever it takes to involve another Muslim country in a war. There's no doubt that if the current ploy of daring the Iranians into some type of action doesn't work, we will try something else until we can find a moment to be righteously pissed off. We will then attack them and say, "I didn't want to do it man, but he bumped into on the way to the restroom. I'm not taking that from anybody."
 
If Iran tries to block the international waters of the Strait of Hormuz, it would be an act of war. The U.S. would be justified in using such force as is necessary to clear and safeguard the Strait.

Uh, and it the U.S. didn't have a large presence there do you think Iran would try to block the Strait of Hormuz?
 
I would think this would be a battle for UN-nations forces instead of the US unilaterally. We don't need a repeat of the Iraqi invasion.

I agree darlin', but you know the neocons have to have a war. They can't stand not killing nations into submission. Karma happens!
 
I would think this would be a battle for UN-nations forces instead of the US unilaterally. We don't need a repeat of the Iraqi invasion.

Exactly how many soldiers does the United Nations have? I don't believe they have ANY.
 
So, my question here. If Iran tries to block the Straight, 1. is that an act of war? .............

I believe it far more likely to be shown to be an act of stupidity. It would greenlight our taking out every offensive weapon Iran has that would even remotely threaten the sea. That would include every ship in its Navy, and anythng else we put in crosshairs. It would also remove all political barriers to wiping out their nuke program. Iran would be suing for peace in a matter of days, and Imanutjob would be toppled. We'd never have to put a soldier on the ground.

 
I love how Risky is calling Obama & Team Neocons now... that's funny stuff.

Iran can block the Straits - the U.S. ain't gonna do diddly. Suggesting such a thing would require a sack with balls... and Iran knows we're sackless especially when Iran doesn't have to fire first. Plausible deniability will send Obama's Admin to the U.N. crying foul. Our generals and Admirals will be screaming to kick some ass and Obama will not --- this is an ELECTION YEAR PEOPLE! Get friggin real here... he's not going to fire on Iran unless Iran fires on our ships first and even THEN he may retaliate.

Iran knows how weak Obama is - they're playing with him like a cat plays with a ball of yarn. The question is how risky is Iran going to be and how far will they push it? They're not worried about Obama, they're more worried someone on those ships DOES have sack and balls and kicks the **** out of them and forces the issue.
 
Nope, not going to happen, so realistic options would be appreciated, instead of the predictable Ron Paul craziness.

j-mac

In truth you are correct. There are those of you who want war: for the sake of conquest; because of racial hatred, because of oil; because of a selfish need to fulfill supposed religious prophecy; because of the belief that war is good for the economy; because of the misguided belief that America can do anything it wants. War with Iran will happen.

The war drums have been beating for a while now. Washington believes it may be the only way to salvage the economy (if so, they are wrong). Obama pulled the troops out of Iraq in preparation for Iran. Does anyone not believe that? The rapidly increasing loss of American fundamental rights is yet another bellwether. TSA is ramping up in a major way for war within the U.S. All the signs are there. We are going to go to war with Iran.

The war will not be a short one and it will not be a cake walk and it will come to the soil of the United States and its allies. Bet on it. Oil prices will increase, stocks will decrease. The U.S. will be involved in a long protracted war, not just with Iran, but with its allies. Iran's army will not be a push over and we WILL be involved in a ground war. Will be go for another "regime change"? No one knows.

As the war escalates who else will be involved? Eqypt? Probably, which side? Syria? Probably. Turkey? Not likely. Saudi Arabia? As the war escalates, maybe. Israel? Let's hope not. Once Israel gets involved the war will take on new and volatile dimensions. Russia? We could realistically look at a large number of nations who would or could have dogs in the fight. That is one reason the war will escalate. The other is that the war WILL come to the United States. Washington knows this. Americans are in no way prepared for the shock of war on American soil. It will be nasty. It will last a long time.

When will we win?
Will it destroy the already wobbly American economy?
How much more freedom are you willing to give up to fight a protracted war?
How will we know we won?
What will we will?
What will it cost in terms of lives, money and international relations?
What will be the net gain?

No one, no one can answer any of those questions with any certainty. All we know is that America wants to go to war again and some people are chomping at the bits.
 
if we attacked Iranian ships in the Straits, would we also attack their nuke sites inland?
 
I love how Risky is calling Obama & Team Neocons now... that's funny stuff.

That's because you are a partisan sheep.

Iran can block the Straits - the U.S. ain't gonna do diddly. Suggesting such a thing would require a sack with balls... and Iran knows we're sackless especially when Iran doesn't have to fire first. Plausible deniability will send Obama's Admin to the U.N. crying foul. Our generals and Admirals will be screaming to kick some ass and Obama will not --- this is an ELECTION YEAR PEOPLE! Get friggin real here... he's not going to fire on Iran unless Iran fires on our ships first and even THEN he may retaliate.

Iran knows how weak Obama is - they're playing with him like a cat plays with a ball of yarn. The question is how risky is Iran going to be and how far will they push it? They're not worried about Obama, they're more worried someone on those ships DOES have sack and balls and kicks the **** out of them and forces the issue.

When the fit hits the shan I suggest you pony your narrow ass down to the recruiter and re-enlist so you can be sure and get some. It'll be fun. I want you to be one of the first to enjoy it.
 
I would think this would be a battle for UN-nations forces instead of the US unilaterally. We don't need a repeat of the Iraqi invasion.

Is this even possible? What with China and Russia having veto power and all.
 
That's because you are a partisan sheep.

When the fit hits the shan I suggest you pony your narrow ass down to the recruiter and re-enlist so you can be sure and get some. It'll be fun. I want you to be one of the first to enjoy it.

wow, is this how you debate?
 
That's because you are a partisan sheep.
Awww... did I hit a nerve? Isn't everyone but you a partisan sheep and a neocon? :lamo



When the fit hits the shan I suggest you pony your narrow ass down to the recruiter and re-enlist so you can be sure and get some. It'll be fun. I want you to be one of the first to enjoy it.

Sorry, I'm now over the age limit and already served. Unlike you I actually picked up a gun and trained in defense of my country.
 
Back
Top Bottom