What nasty surprises await our warmongers in the Gulf?

Stuart Littlewood February 29, 2012 13
What nasty surprises await our warmongers in the Gulf?

If Hague, Hammond and Cameron love Israel so much let them and the regime’s other admirers don uniform and flak-jacket and go play battleships in the Gulf’s “bathtub” themselves.

Who in their right mind would volunteer to be that trio’s cannon-fodder?

 

by Stuart Littlewood

The most important thing I've read these last few days is the excellent article 'Armageddon Approaches' by Dr Lasha Darkmoon http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2012/02/armageddon-approaches/ , a cautionary piece which points the reader towards some very scary background information.

For example, according to Russ Winter of The Wall Street Examiner http://www.standupamericaus.org/iran-2/the-sunburn-capable-and-versatile-hormuz-weapon/ , Iran’s Sunburn missiles, acquired from Russia and China over the last 10 years, have the capability of creating "a world of hurt" for the US Navy’s 5th Fleet.

"The Sunburn is perhaps the most lethal anti-ship missile in the world, designed to fly as low as 9 feet above ground/water at more than 1,500 miles per hour (mach 2+). The missile uses a violent pop-up maneuver for its terminal approach to throw off Phalanx and other US anti-missile defense systems. Given their low cost, they’re perfectly suited for close quarter naval conflict in the bathtub-like Persian Gulf.”

With its 90-mile range, the Sunburn can be fired from practically any platform, including a flat bed truck, and could hit a ship in the Strait in less than a minute.

Mark Gaffney http://www.rense.com/general59/theSunburniransawesome.htm adds this warning: "The US Navy has never faced anything in combat as formidable as the Sunburn missile.”

He mentions the even more-advanced SS-NX-26 Yakhonts missiles, also Russian-made (speed: Mach 2.9; range: 180 miles) deployed by the Iranians along the Gulf's northern shore.

“Every US ship will be exposed and vulnerable. When the Iranians spring the trap, the entire lake will become a killing field…

“In the Gulf's shallow and confined waters evasive manoeuvres will be difficult, at best, and escape impossible. Even if US planes control of the skies over the battlefield, the sailors caught in the net below will be hard-pressed to survive. The Gulf will run red with American blood."

As both writers point out, the Iranians will have mapped every firing angle along their Gulf coastline. And the rugged terrain will not make detection easy.

“Shooting fish in a barrel”… but who are the fish this time?

Britain recently announced the deployment of HMS Daring, a new Type 45 destroyer, to the Gulf in order to send a significant message to the Iranians because of the firepower and world-beating technology carried by this warship. A Daily Telegraph report says she has been fitted with new technology that will give it the ability to "shoot down any missile in Iran's armoury. The £1 billion destroyer… also carries the world's most sophisticated naval radar, capable of tracking multiple incoming threats from missiles to fighter jets." Her 48 Sea Vipers can shoot down fighters as well as sea skimming missiles.

Apart from HMS Daring, Britain is believed to have at least 3 other vessels in the Persian Gulf, and more can be sent. Are they all equipped with the same world-beating technology?

Dr Darkmoon observes:

"Both America and Israel are unfortunately just not ready to wage the type of warfare they prefer to wage and at which they so excel: shooting fish in a barrel. Unlike Iraq, which the warmonger neoconservatives told us would be a  ‘cakewalk’ — easily conquered in six weeks — Iran is unlikely to offer its American and Israeli antagonists easy opportunities to indulge in their fish-in-a-barrel fantasies."

The spectacle of the world's school-yard bully, the United States, flanked by hooligan helpmates Britain, France and Canada all menacing Iran is building up to a chilling climax. If what I'm reading is correct, British ships in the bathtub of the Persian Gulf will be among the fish in the barrel on this occasion, with Iran doing the shooting. Britain's chief hooligans, Hague and Cameron, could be courting disaster for the much-vaunted HMS Daring. Why are they getting us involved anyway? It's obviously not for Britain, whose best interests are served by making friends and doing business with Iran.

No, they suffer the same delusions as their erstwhile partner in crime, the disgraced former Defence Secretary Liam Fox and the many others in our Parliamentary establishment who have swallowed the daft idea that Israel's enemies are Britain's enemies. How much sense can you expect from people who are signed-up Friends of Israel – in Hague’s case since the tender age of 15?

Diplomacy? What diplomacy?

As the whole world surely knows by now the US-British track record in Iran doesn’t bear examination. And when they get on their high horse and spout about democracy everyone falls about laughing. Who overthrew Iran’s fledgling democracy in 1953? Who trashed Palestine’s democracy in 2006? Who keeps banging on about Israel being the “only democracy in the Middle East” when, actually, it’s a racist ethnocracy?

For over 30 years Britain has had no high-level diplomatic contact with Iran except for Jack Straw’s visits a decade ago. Hague won’t answer questions about the diplomatic efforts he has made, if any. In a fit of lunacy he shut down the embassy in Tehran last year and chucked the Iranians out of London, and he’s now straining at the bit to get our young men needlessly embroiled in what is essentially a nuke-bristling US/Israel quarrel with non-nuke Iran… the ulterior motive and ultimate prize being Iran’s oil.

The US hasn’t had a proper embassy in Tehran since 1979. But a few months ago it set up a virtual embassy with this sick-making address to the Iranian people http://iran.usembassy.gov/about-us.html :

“We have created Virtual Embassy Tehran to offer you another perspective and another source of information, so you can make up your own minds about the US, our concerns about the Iranian government’s activities at home and abroad, and our serious efforts to achieve a resolution to those concerns. 

“This website is not a formal diplomatic mission, nor does it represent or describe a real US Embassy accredited to the Iranian Government.  But, in the absence of direct contact, it can work as a bridge between the American and Iranian people.  As President Obama said earlier this year and Secretary Clinton affirmed in her recent VOA and BBC appearances, ‘You – the young people of Iran – carry within you both the ancient greatness of Persian civilization, and the power to forge a country that is responsive to your aspirations. Your talent, your hopes, and your choices will shape the future of Iran, and help light the world.   And though times may seem dark, I want you to know that I am with you.’ 

“It is in that spirit that we launch our Virtual US Embassy Tehran.  It is our Mission to the Iranian people.”

Yeah. A US mission that’s accompanied by vicious sanctions imposed with the help of gullible friends like Britain and the EU and calculated to cripple Iran’s economy and make the lives of its young people hell. The consequences for us are damaging too. Britain’s defence chief Philip Hammond, who replaced Fox after the scandal that exposed his 'special friend' Adam Werritty and behind-scenes plotting with Israel against Iran, has publicly warned Iran that any blockade of the Strait of Hormuz would be "illegal and unsuccessful".

But why escalate matters to the point where a blockade becomes likely?

And why, asks Dr Darkmoon, do it for Israel anyway?

"Cui bono? Iran has much more to offer America than Israel does.

"Iran has oil in abundance, Israel has none. Iran does not hold America’s political class to ransom. Iran does not try to browbeat successive American administrations into putting Iranian interests before American ones. Iran’s dual citizens do not spy on America or sell American military secrets to Russia and China—there are no Iranian Rosenbergs or Jonathan Pollards. Iran does not coerce Americans into fighting and dying for it in foreign wars. Iran does not expect $3 billion a year in handouts, and even more in loan guarantees that never get repaid.

"Iran would be a far greater asset to America than Israel could ever be. Israel is a liability and a burden.

"More fool America for cuddling up to a ‘friend’ who has stabbed it in the back in the past — the Lavon affair, the USS Liberty incident, the Jonathan Pollard betrayal — and is more than likely to stab it in the back again at some time in the foreseeable future.

"Dump Israel. That’s my advice. Before Israel sets the world on fire, taking America with it."

The question certainly needs to be asked, she says.

"What hold does Israel have over America? Is America prepared to sustain immense damage to its vital interests on behalf of an unstable and insolent ally that remains, if numerous polls are to be believed, the world’s most hated nation?"

Ask it here too. What hold does Israel have over Britain? The only people impressed by Israel are MPs and ministers whom the pro-Israel lobby has 'groomed' and funded, the Jewish community (though by no means all of them) and a rabble of Christian Zionists. No-one else.

And no-one else wants to fight Israel's unjust wars or help America do Israel’s dirty work.

So if Hague, Hammond and Cameron love Israel so much let them and the regime’s other admirers don uniform and flak-jacket and go play battleships in the Gulf’s “bathtub” themselves. Who in their right mind would volunteer to be that trio’s cannon-fodder?

13 Comments »

  1. Cold Wind February 29, 2012 at 11:35 pm - Reply

    For lack of courage and conviction, neither the US or Britain have the political means to successfully prevent an Israeli orchestrated attack on Iran. Such is the strength of the Jewish Lobby in both countries. The 99% must confront this simple fact and soon.

    • Altyn December 12, 2012 at 1:05 am - Reply

      Nasser since your post is completely wrong and out of touch with reality. I will just answer it point by point based on RECORDED history:“Imagine there was no revolution in Iran and the Pahlavi dynasty remained in place.

       

      Do you not think that Iran would have benefited significantly from the fall of the Soviet Union, in terms of territory?”No. I do not believe that. My reason? History my friend history:Ottoman Empire fell and disintegrated in 1923. Iran went under Reza Shah (officially) in 1923. WHAT WAS THE RESULT?Did we gain any territory? ON THE CONTRARY WE LOST: Tehran convention of 1932!!The policies that you advocate, were followed to the letter by Turkey after the fall of USSR. Do you see them being in love with USA? or do you see every single politician who wants to make a score in public eyes distancing himself from Israel/USA? In fact USA has the lowest sympathy in the world in Turkey!

       

      By the way, don't you guys feel even slightly bad that you suggest that we should do the foot work for Americans to rob the central Asia and Caucasus, so that we can get rich?? I’ll say it again had the Shah not purchased those weapons and after his collapse Saddam invaded, Iran would have been completely defenseless. I am afraid that again you are forgetting the history: in the first two years of the war when all those military gadgets were still very leading edge and fancy , Iran was on the defensive and was losing territory.On the contrary, during the final 6 years when we had very limited number of tanks and almost all of aircrafts were sitting in hangars for the lack of spare components and amunition (all of which was made in the West and was not being given to us because of the sanctions) we were on the OFFENCE and we were advancing in the Iraqi territory.

       

      In fact, Khomeini in his infinite wisdom carried out numerous purges and abolished the nuclear program which I think has had disastrous long term consequences. It is beyond me (and almost all intellectuals, and even Green people such as Abbas Abdi and Hajjarian) why we would need a nuclear power for electricity which would be always dependent on foreign provided Uranium, and this is when we are sitting on an ocean of oil and gas and ABUNDANT amount of sun shine (for solar energy) and Wind power. Germany and Denmark despite their much higher rate of energy demand and much less amount of sun shine are powering up entire cities using the solar power.In fact if there is any use to the Iranian nuclear power it is its deterrence capability.

       

      Now Shah was going to deter whom from attacking Iran? USA? or Israel?!?!? I take issue with the characterization of Iran’s rudimentary military industry as adequate or self sufficient when Iran barely has an air force. And I very highly doubt it can shut off the strait of Hormuz which receiving severe consequences and not just from the US. The concern is more that such attempts would drive up insurance prices and the price of oil but no one seriously considers Iran capable of taking on the fifth fleet. In the shalow waters of persian gulf using assymetric tactics Iran is said by US military analysists to be capable of inflicting heavy damage on the 5th fleet.

       

      You can search on You tube to find the footage of Iranian drone hovering over the US aircraft carrier for over 20 minutes. That by itself, shah could not imagine in his wildest dreams. This [Hezbollah beating Israel] is truly laughable, I highly doubt anyone believes Hezbollah can take on the IDF as you say and I am a Shia. But it is true that they cannot be wiped out without inflicting catastrophic civilian casualties and so can be said to have won in the guerilla sense.

       

      Now I am afraid you are way too much under the influence of the zionist propaganda:Israel in 2006 received it's most humiliating military defeat since 1956. Entire armoured coloumns were destroyed at the hands of Hezbollah fighters, and one of their corvets was nearly sunk by the anti-ship missiles made by Iran and given to Hezballah. During the entire conflict they could not occupy a single spot in the Lebanese territory and had to retreat from every single attack that they made on the land. If this is not victory, then I would guess Vietnam was not a victory for the Vietnamese either!!

       

      As for the civilian casualties: It is an inevitable part of defending your homeland against an aggressor. Then perhaps because of the mounting civilian casualties you would suggest that the Soviets lost the battle of Stalingrad too?!?!?

       

      I wont debate you on the economic issues as it seems you have very strongly bought into to the IRI propaganda. But I’ll relay on this old wisdom from economists that self sufficiency is the road to poverty and trade is the road to prosperity. It is not an old wisdom, it is a bankrupted idea proposed by the likes of Milton Friedman, to fool people like us not to pursue our economic independence and self-reliant industrialization.

  2. Howard T. Lewis III March 1, 2012 at 4:28 am - Reply

    Cui bono? If Britain, France, and the U.S. punch themselves out in attacking Iran, it will leave the Vatican and the CIA as the stable entity of the west. Puke.

  3. mick March 1, 2012 at 5:12 am - Reply

    Nice article ,Israel needs to be held accountable for it's crimes .Let's hope sane heads rise to stop what seems ineviable ,another Israeli inspired bloodbath .

  4. robertsgt40 March 3, 2012 at 3:21 am - Reply

    "…carries the world's most sophisticated naval radar, capable of tracking multiple incoming threats from missiles to fighter jets." Her 48 Sea Vipers can shoot down fighters as well as sea skimming missiles."…Just curious.  What happens when #49 and #50 arrive? 

  5. TheMan March 3, 2012 at 3:22 am - Reply

    I give it 6 months or less then the stuff will hit the fan get ready this is not going to be a cake walk iran is not iraq.Iran has better weppons and friends than iraq did so get you n your family ready food,water,guns,and alot of ammo before we can't no more

  6. john March 3, 2012 at 4:15 am - Reply

    we are with you iran, stop these nazis, USA, ISRAEL, NATO

  7. Anti-Demopublican March 3, 2012 at 8:24 am - Reply

    @ Cold Wind: The "99%" doesn't have any say in the matter, although if the USA was more than a democracy in more than name-only, things might be different this day.  Because of Citizens United, because of corporate-controlled mass-media, because of the elimination of  constitutional protections for American citizens (First Amendment amongst others), and because of train-to-test and the otherwise dumbing-down of our public education system (not to mention willful ignorance and apathy) it'd be safe to plan for the consequences of this war.  And do it now.

  8. gmathol March 3, 2012 at 11:49 am - Reply

    Face it the Jewish bankers of London controll the World.

  9. 30.06 March 3, 2012 at 3:48 pm - Reply
  10. Naeem March 4, 2012 at 4:41 am - Reply

    Lets say for argument sake that the sunburns fail to hits it target. Iran will unleash their anti ship missiles  i.e  noor ,nasr 1, kowsar  along with their 100 mile range 1000 lb artillery in the fateh and  zelzel 2   In the hundreds  this would overwhelm the the defence systems. For America to survive they have to pull back to the indian ocean. But that means iran can close the straits, you see its the US's arrogance that will lead to its destruction

  11. rosemerry March 5, 2012 at 5:33 am - Reply

     A great article. I wonder if any MSM publish the latest speech by Iranian Supreme leader Khamenei again reiterating that Iran will NOT develop or use a nuke and will NOT start a conflict.
    Juan Cole has a great post on all this today; why not believe the truth from the real leader, rather than twist words from a President whose powers do not extend to foreign policy. War can be averted!!!

    • mick March 5, 2012 at 5:40 am - Reply

      Roasemerry ,your comment assumes averting another war is the objective.

Leave A Response »

Copy this code

and paste it here *