Article

2006-04-05 Syria-Lebanon-Iran

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by JAB 2006-04-05 18:15|| || Front Page|| [11135 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I fear it's all a red herring. This show of new weapons and craft. There is something quite different that they're actually proud of.

I think in part, given the lack of invective towards Israel in the last weeks, and this deflection to such a specific area, this is a diversion towards a build-up of Iranian-sponsored hit on Israel. A closer look at the Al Q build up in Paleostine and arms in surrounding territory is wise. How many gunnies are ammassed in surrounding areas now (Syria, Leb, Egypt, jordan - and close by enough to move within 24 hours?).

I do smell fish - not that the show isn't to be taken seriously.

Posted by Thinemp Whimble2412 2006-04-05 18:45|| 2006-04-05 18:45|| Front Page Top

#2 One question that has occured to me:

* If there's an incident in the Gulf, where a sub shoots a tanker and sinks it and the sub is then sunk or chased off or whatever...

How will we know that sub is Iranian?

Are we sure noone else is going to show up to the dance?

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2006-04-05 18:50|| 2006-04-05 18:50|| Front Page Top

#3 Lots of countries have Kilo diesel-electric subs. You can't tell what country they're from from their accoustic signatures...

Posted by Abdominal Snowman 2006-04-05 19:05|| 2006-04-05 19:05|| Front Page Top

#4 Re JAB's question, I think the best thing to do from here until Showtime is to take EVERYTHING we hear with double the normal grains of salt-- if for no other reason than there's going to be a lot of disinformation floating around from both sides of the conflict. It was that way in the runup to Gulf War I, I recall.

As to the Snowman's question, I suspect we're simply going to announce that any sub attack will be assumed to be Iranian and will be responded to appropriately; that should keep any underwater rubberneckers away.

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2006-04-05 19:41|| 2006-04-05 19:41|| Front Page Top

#5 Ya'think that maybe pulling their money out of the Swiss banks might be a strong hint of something afoot?

I find it hard to believe that Ahmadinejad would confront the US and/or Isreal at this point. Otherwise, where could Iran go on the tactical offensive?

Lebanon: Establish Shia supremacy over Sunnis and Christians.
Iraq: Consolidate the position of the Sadrists through violence.
Iraq or Afghanistan: Increase tempo of insurgency.
Gulf: Hit and run attacks on shipping
WMD: Nuclear test.

Posted by 11A5S 2006-04-05 19:52|| 2006-04-05 19:52|| Front Page Top

#6 Yanking the money out of the Swiss banks was the result of fear of sanctions resulting from the referral to the Security Council.

I suspect they're blowing hot air as far as these weapons go in an attempt to provide support to the anti-war forces in the west. The U. S. forces will be able to handle the Iranians with little difficulty as long as we control the tempo, i.e. they might pull off a "Peral Harbor" sneak attack for a few days at most, but that's it.

But the most important battle will be the one fought by the MSM and Iran against the United States in the living rooms of America. What will be interesting to see is which side the Democrats chose.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-04-05 20:13|| 2006-04-05 20:13|| Front Page Top

#7 I think all of the latests tests and such are for Iranian internal consumption. The people know they were held to a standstill for nearly a decade by Iraq and that the Allies took Iraq down in weeks. They need to bolster some confidence pretty badly and the Iranian folks this is aimed at aren't going to be as knowledgable or doubtful as the posters on Rantburg are.

Posted by rjschwarz">rjschwarz 2006-04-05 20:43|| 2006-04-05 20:43|| Front Page Top

#8 If they had real confidence, they wouldn't need bluster.

Posted by Crock Thrager2875 2006-04-05 21:45|| 2006-04-05 21:45|| Front Page Top

#9 John Batchelor, who I believe to be a radio host, keeps posting these gloomy assessments of the US/Iran conflict. The common theme is that they are in great shape vs. the US militarily.

You know I heard the same thing all during the Cold War that the Soviet soldier was 10 foot tall and immune the the harsh conditions of combat. Then their arab allies kept getting their ass handed to them by the Israelis. Oh, that was just poor arab performance was the chorus. Then Afghanistan and then Chetchnya, and the doom and gloom assessements of superior Soviet capabilities were laid to rest. Then there was the 'terrible' Afghan winter and the victors over the Soviets who were doing to teach the Americans their place. One of the quickest campaigns in history. Then there was the Republican Guard [tm] which was suppose to give the American forces a fight for their lives, especially with the absolutely necessary northern thrust removed from the operation by Turkish politics. However, it was a sand storm that slowed the Americans down more than any action by Saddams' forces. But wait, taking Baghdad was going to be Stalingrad Part Deux. Instead we got live feed from the front balcony of the press hotel as Saddam's statute falls.

When are these idiots going to get a grip?
By playing into the enemy propaganda these twerps make conflict more probable. They play primitive warfare. Its a show, a display of posture and territory. Americans approach warfare like an engineering project. The hand wringer create a misunderstanding on the part of the posturing enemy that they have some effect. Let the record show the reality. They are about the face the most professional and deadly armed force in human history. They are about to get their collective asses handed to them. Sure there's going to be some degree of foul up. That goes along with the friction of war. However, when the dust settles they are going to end up in the same situation as Saddam does today. Don't screw with the thousand pound gorrilla in the living room.

Posted by Juck Sleath3598 2006-04-05 22:03|| 2006-04-05 22:03|| Front Page Top

#10 I think Batchelor is not so much afraid of a confrontation with Iran as he is agitating for one. He has been implicating Iran in the difficulties in Iraq for several years, and I think he is trying to use what influence he has to convince people to take Iran more seriously. To that end, he occasionally indulges in hyperbole.

Posted by tibor742 2006-04-05 22:20|| http://incompetenttibor.blogspot.com/]">[http://incompetenttibor.blogspot.com/] 2006-04-05 22:20|| Front Page Top

#11 "But the most important battle will be the one fought by the MSM and Iran against the United States in the living rooms of America. What will be interesting to see is which side the Democrats chose."

Please. By now, you should already know what side they are on.

Posted by newc">newc 2006-04-05 22:32|| 2006-04-05 22:32|| Front Page Top

#12 I think America should take a long, hard look at how hard we want to press Iran, regardless of how . Forty percent of the world's oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz. All of you gas-guzzling SUV drivers with your predictable Bush/Cheney 04 stickers and your oxymoronic Support our Troops stickers on your rear windows are finally going to recka-nize that the Iranians have us by the proverbial balls, and that the use of force is economically disastrous. They tested two missiles, two torpedos and a ridiculous excuse for a flying boat in the Strait, and the price of oil shot up to $70/barrel. If/when the shooting starts, you'll have CARRY your kids to soccer practice. Nevermind if they get lucky and plug a super-tanker. I'm interested to see how this plays out, but definitely don't want to see the US, or anyone trading hot punches with Iran. The American economy can't afford it. And neither can the Iranian economy if they can't use their prime resource. I think there's room for a creative, non-military solution here...if only cooler heads would prevail.

Posted by GradStudent06">GradStudent06 2006-04-05 23:10|| 2006-04-05 23:10|| Front Page Top

#13 So far the security council has shown no motivation to impose sanctions.

Maybe Iran is about to do something that would precipitate sanctions?

Posted by 11A5S 2006-04-05 23:33|| 2006-04-05 23:33|| Front Page Top

#14 John Batchelor belongs oh the radio show "Coast to coast". You know the one about aliens, UFO's, etc. Or he could have his own radio show "Chicken little returns". Of course, he might eventually get something right?

Posted by FeralCat 2006-04-05 23:46|| 2006-04-05 23:46|| Front Page Top

00:01 ex-lib
23:58 FOTSGreg
23:46 FeralCat
23:33 11A5S
23:32 SteveS
23:13 Old Patriot
23:10 GradStudent06
23:03 Captain America
22:59 SPoD
22:58 Frank G
22:51 Captain America
22:45 Frank G
22:32 newc
22:20 tibor742
22:20 trailing wife
22:19 plainslow
22:11 xbalanke
22:10 phil_b
22:08 Robert Crawford
22:05 trailing wife
22:03 Juck Sleath3598
22:01 Alaska Paul
21:51 lotp
21:50 Robert Crawford