| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Revolutionary Guards patrolling gulf region, says Khamenei advisor |
| 2008-09-17 |
| (AKI) - A former general with Iran's Revolutionary Guards, now military advisor to Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has announced that the Revolutionary Guards have been tasked with patrolling the Persian Gulf and protecting ports in the south of the country. The armed forces, who were until now involved in the defence of the country's maritime borders, have been removed and the navy is only been deployed on the northern maritime boundary of the Caspian Sea. The decision was taken after news that other foreign navies, particularly the US Navy, was headed towards the Persian Gulf. "The US fleet is afraid of the fast ships of the Revolutionary Guards and their capacity for immediate reactions to every violation in our national waters," said Rahim Safavi. In the past 12 months, the Revolutionary Guards' ships have come close to US ships in international waters several times and on more than one occasion they narrowly avoided an accident at the last minute. Rahim Safavi has also announced that the Revolutionary Guards' missiles cover the entire region of the Persian Gulf. "No vessel can navigate this area without coming in sight of our missiles," he said. In June, the leader of the Revolutionary Guards, Mohammad Ali Jaafari, had threatened the closure of the Strait of Hormuz through which 40 percent of the world's oil passes, if Iran was attacked. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #11 As for "adjustments", I think the best thing the US could do would be to put Apache Longbow helis on all Navy ships - anywhere from one to 30 each, whatever they can support. The Apache chain gun would turn anyone in a small boat to hamburger, and attract every shark in the Indian Ocean. Anything smaller than a Frigate would be dead on sight, and anything larger would be taken out by anti-ship missiles from the cruisers and destroyers protecting the carriers. What would REALLY be neat is to be able to fly off and land a squadron of A-10s from a carrier, but that's just wishful thinking... |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2008-09-17 21:58 |
| #10 The pros don't look at it as 'strutting talk', Richard. If the Iranian govt is putting the fanatics in place and removing the regulars, that makes things more unstable. It means some... adjustments have to be made. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2008-09-17 13:59 |
| #9 Just sounds like 'strutting talk' to me. |
| Posted by: Richard of Oregon 2008-09-17 12:09 |
| #8 Hey guys - those Silkworms? First thing to get blown to shit." |
| Posted by: mojo 2008-09-17 11:48 |
| #7 Interpretation: Regular Iranian armed forces, particularly the navy, aren't trusted by the regime to engage in agressive actions against US/allied forces. how difficult would it be to sink everything Iranian at the opening of hostilities? Provided the US gets the choice of when, not Iran. Everything? Not likely. What could be hit are missile emplacements, support facilities, harbors, bases, 'major' vessels, etc. Who says we have to do it by ourselves? We won't. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2008-09-17 11:40 |
| #6 Wouldn't it be a hoot, if one of those aircraft carriers happened to have on board about a hundred small, fast boats, each of which equipped with weaponry like ma deuce, with ball and incendiary? With a 2000m max effective range, it would be like a small boat version of the Marianas Turkey Shoot. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-09-17 09:53 |
| #5 Who says we have to do it by ourselves? Shouldn't the EUropeons be more worried about this? Since they are 10X more affected by energy disruptions than us? What about China? Not a peep out of them. Australia will help with the heavy lifting, that's their nature, to do their share. But the rest of the world seems like a bunch of worthless deadasses on this. |
| Posted by: bigjim-ky 2008-09-17 09:40 |
| #4 Pappy, if you're reading this, how difficult would it be to sink everything Iranian at the opening of hostilities? Provided the US gets the choice of when, not Iran. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2008-09-17 01:16 |
| #3 See also MEDVEDEV: AN ATTACK ON IRAN WILL ENDANGER THE ENTIRE WORLD. IMO Medvey likely means NUCLEAR MILITANCY-TERRORISM, and NOT necessarily ISLAMIST??? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-09-17 00:52 |
| #2 Iran's Army is repor in charge of the CASPIAN SEA + GULF OF OMAN, which undoubtedly gives Russia peace of mind??? ION WAFF > PENTAGON PROPOSES SALE OF THAAD [US GMD] TO UAE, + MOSCOW DEFENSE BRIEF [MDB.ru] > IMPLICATIONS OF THE RUSSIAN-GEORGIAN CONFLICT ON GLOBAL POLITICS. Interesting - Artic proclaims RUSSIA is a WORLD POWER AND STATE WID REGIONAL-LOCAL INTERESTS, wid primary NATIONALIST-LOCALIST RANKED/PRIORITIZED FOCII in ITSELF EURO and EURASIA AS PERTINENT TO ITS RUSS-CENTERED AGENDUMS, whereas the USA IS A MASSIVE SUPERPOWER [hyperpower] + TRULY GLOBAL = EXTRA-WORLDLY/DIMENSIONAL POWER WHOM CAN'T AFFORD TO CONSIDER LOCAL ONLY INTERESTS OUTSIDE OF OTHER. * IMO MORE SUPPORT FOR MY CONTENTION THAT THE RUSSO-GEORGIAN CONFLICT > MORE COVERT EMPLACEMENT OF "US-NATO/EU IN ASIA", NOTSOMUCH "RUSSIA VERSUS US-NATO/EU"!? ION GUARDIAN.UK > PAKISTANI TRIBAL CHIEFS THREATEN TO JOIN TALEBAN [unless USA ceases attacks inside Pakistan]. Chiefs are believed to represent approxi 500,000 locals, + also threaten to merge/join AFGHAN MILITANTS IN JOINT MILOPS AGZ USA. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2008-09-17 00:47 |
| #1 They probably aren't aware that "seeing" and "hitting" aren't the same thing. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2008-09-17 00:10 |