Saturday, January 21, 2012

Iran Backs Away from Threat Against US Warships Passing Through Strait of Hormuz

IRGC Deputy Commander Maj. Gen. Hossein Salami said today in Tehran that the return of U.S. aircraft carriers to the Persian Gulf was part of “routine activity.”

“U.S. warships and military forces have been in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East region for many years and their decision in relation to the dispatch of a new warship is not a new issue and it should be interpreted as part of their permanent presence,” Gen. Salami said [IRNA, 21 January].

On 3 January, the commander of Iran’s Army, Maj. Gen. Ataollah Salehi, had warned the US against sending a carrier through the Strait of Hormuz. Gen. Salehi had added that he was not in the habit of repeating his warning.

Today’s statement by IRGC deputy commander is backing away from the military commander’s unambiguous warning. Salami's statement came on the eve of traveling of a U.S. carrier back into the Persian Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz. On Thursday, the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln arrived in the Arabian Sea joining the USS Carl Vinson and returning the U.S. Naval standard two-carrier presence in the region. One of the two carriers is now posed to enter into the Persian Gulf.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I believe the warning was in reference to CVN-74. It was sort of an empty warning as both side knew this carrier to be in rotation.

The IRGCN and USN know each other well in the PG, as this Dep. Commander is acknowledging.

Cyrus said...

It was a stupid and childish warning. How about letting some adults be in charge for a while?

Anonymous said...

not anymore childish than keeping things "on the table" regarding Iran to please and fool the Israelis

Cyrus said...

One big difference. The Americans can keep things "on the table" all day long, where as the Iranians have no means of keeping the aircraft carrier out without starting a shooting war. Unless of course that moron general actually wants a war. In which case, I question both the man's loyalty and sanity, in many respects, like how I question that of the warmongers here in the U.S.

Cheers!

Anonymous said...

One big difference. The Americans can keep things "on the table" all day long, where as the Iranians have no means of keeping the aircraft carrier out without starting a shooting war. Unless of course that moron general actually wants a war. In which case, I question both the man's loyalty and sanity, in many respects, like how I question that of the warmongers here in the U.S.

Cheers!



Yeah.Why not??? They've been keeping things on the table for the past ten years in Afghanistan.Personally, I would like them to keep things on the table as long as they want.Last time I heard, they're frantically suing for peace with the Taliban. That "all options on the table" is a as hollow as hollow can be..It's a nice soundbite meant for domestic consumption and to please their reactionary/paranoid "allies" and also to look/sound tough.Do you dispute Iran can sink a US carrier in the Persian Gulf? I'm glad you're not a US military chief coz your hubris will land you in another stupid war you can't win.

You really believe the US is in a position to launch a war? Well, I've got news for you..THEY'RE BROKE!!!

TLAM Strike said...

"Yeah.Why not??? They've been keeping things on the table for the past ten years in Afghanistan."

I don't think you understand what the US means when it says that "options are on the table". We are talking about our bombs that burn sand to glass and turn mountains to lakes; we never bothered to threaten Afghanistan with those.

"You really believe the US is in a position to launch a war? Well, I've got news for you..THEY'RE BROKE!!!"

Our bombs are already paid for. We don't need to "buy" fuel for AFGSC's birds for them to fly, they are already fueled.

Cyrus said...

Yah, sure. They're "broke." Unfortunately all their weapons are long since bought and paid for.

Can Iran sink a U.S navy CVN? Yes, and the Americans have another ten where that came from, and now have an excuse for an all out long term war, to distract their own population from all of the other economic problems.

Attacking and sinking a carrier would play out on American television, just like another Pearl Harbor or 9/11.

Anonymous said...

That halabi beh doosh "general" must've taken crack that week to give his warning!
Now he has woken up to reality and foreseen his ass being whopped!

Anonymous said...

Tit-4-Tat, the US president sent a message to the Supreme Leader for direct negotiation; canceled the Austere Challenge 12 military exercise with Israel; saved a few Iranians stranded at sea; strongly disavowed the assassination of Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan by practically implicating Israel; and P5+1 are begging Iran to return to the bargaining table; this is the first public sign that Iran is warming up to these overtures.

Unless you have an antidote to worldwide radiation poisioning, this is a good thing. A face-saving jesture for all sides may be near.

Now, if Monday comes and the EU embargoes Iranian oil - all bets are off.

2Cold.

Anonymous said...

Our bombs are already paid for. We don't need to "buy" fuel for AFGSC's birds for them to fly, they are already fueled.

Of course they're already paid for, general keyboard - with money borrowed from China lol.Bombs don't win wars, Einstein..Get that in your head. The US dropped all kinds of bombs in their arsenal on the Taliban and still managing to loose miserably against the goat herders in Afghanistan.Last time I heard they're suing/begging for peace talks.These are facts.Do some reading before you post you dribble here.

I wish "keyboard generals" like you will be equipped with real weapons and shipped to the frontlines.Then you can come back here and post your garbage. You won't be missed. ;)