Is anyone keeping an eye out for North Korea at the moment? Hmm.
If Iran executes.....
- Thread starter Sgt.Banes
- Start date
- Status
Australia already has a frigate (HMAS Toowoomba) in the same area and performing the same tasks as HMS Cornwall. In the worst case scenario (unlikely though it is) that we are discussing in this thread, there would almost certainly be very strong Australian support for any action initiated by the UK. Any military contribution would most likely be a naval one as the army (including its special forces) is stretched to the limit maintaining existing commitments in Iraq, Afghanistan, Timor Leste, etc.
Cheers
Sorry, off-topic response to LazerLordz.
Foal Eagle war games conducted last week with SK off west coast of Korea. Task force included CVN-76 Reagan & there was a squadron of F-22A's deployed to Okinawa in Feb/Mar. 1st overseas deployment for Raptors.
Neutral Zone
New Member
I also believe that this situation will be resolved diplomatically, as was said earlier the Iranians are many things but they aren't stupid. There are enough pragmatists in the regime even amongst the hardliners to ensure that the captives will come to no harm. The usual preoccupation of a regime like Iran's is survival, and smart regimes do not jepordize their own survival by going too far.
However, if they did go too far, and that should include putting the captives on trail, then military action would be necessary. It was mentioned earlier about blowing up the Abadan refinery, I read somewhere recently that Iran's refining capacity is so limited that it has to import 60% of it's petrol, so as well as the refineries, I'd go after the fuel distribution depots. We saw in Britain in 2000 how a few protestors were able to bring the country to a virtual standstill within a few days, Iran's economy is in bad shape as it is. Cutting off the petrol supply would collapse the economy in a matter of days. I'd also stop every tanker leaving Iran, the Chinese are big customers of Iranian oil so this should have Hu Jintao screaming down the phoneline to Tehran telling them to sort it out. The downside of this is that it would place the captives in even more danger and would cause an oil shock with all the worldwide economic chaos that that would cause. And that's why this scenario won't happen, all sides have too much to lose.
However, if they did go too far, and that should include putting the captives on trail, then military action would be necessary. It was mentioned earlier about blowing up the Abadan refinery, I read somewhere recently that Iran's refining capacity is so limited that it has to import 60% of it's petrol, so as well as the refineries, I'd go after the fuel distribution depots. We saw in Britain in 2000 how a few protestors were able to bring the country to a virtual standstill within a few days, Iran's economy is in bad shape as it is. Cutting off the petrol supply would collapse the economy in a matter of days. I'd also stop every tanker leaving Iran, the Chinese are big customers of Iranian oil so this should have Hu Jintao screaming down the phoneline to Tehran telling them to sort it out. The downside of this is that it would place the captives in even more danger and would cause an oil shock with all the worldwide economic chaos that that would cause. And that's why this scenario won't happen, all sides have too much to lose.
I wouldn't be to sure about this ending soon. It doesn't really matter if they have "pragmatists" over there, which they don't, but even if they did the power in Iran rests with a few religious fanatics who cant be counted on to make rational decisions. Especially since they ordered the hostage taking in the first place.
Instead I suspect they will hold them a long, long time while floating their stupid ideas out to the world about how it was America who caused this hostage taking because of their actions our Iraq. There will be a ready audience for this nonsense because there's always a ready audience for such tripe. They did the same thing in '79 when they took the hostages in Tehran.
Because why not? They have already been assured they wont be attacked. The UN has been gelded by the Russians, who need Irans business, and the Chinese, who need Irans oil. So there will be no meaningful sanctions put on Iran, no attack, no penalty. So why not hold these sailors for a year or two?
The regime is safe because the Iranian people have no power and their opinions are meaningless. Ive seen how Govt.'s like that deal with dissent. Believe me its not pretty, and this collection of Mullahs and their thugs would crush any internal dissent that threatened them. Just a few weeks ago there was a protest by teachers over their low pay. The Police beat them to a pulp and arrested them, 150 are still in jail.http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=10467
This is the kind of guy your dealing with here. http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=2605
sound rational to you?
Here's some more of what that regime does to protesters, or anyone else it wants to torment, http://www.iranian.com/Arts/2002/September/Ardavan/1.html
I bet these prisoners of the regime, in Evin prison, or any other torment center, would far rather be in Guantanamo.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #29
North Korea, is always on watch regardless if its mentioned by news outlets.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #30
Russia and China rely on western investments just to stay somewhat a float. They merely bluff, as if they have any real presence.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #31
Not on that level but there will be a large number of strategic bombers taking out specified facilities across the country.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #32
Iran's Government isn't quite as dumb as some despotic rulers of the past. But their more brazen that the norm, that's because of that OPEC factor. Although from what I've heard Iran has no real refining capabilities other than one refinery. That also should be considered a target if Iran pulls more serious measures into place.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #33
I wouldn't say that's entirely true, Iran has been able to get away with many things in the past without much western action being taken. And I don't think anyone is a sadist on here, at least I hope not. I can honestly see more action being taken by Iran to possibly invade Iraq once coalition troops move out. Since Shi'a groups virtually are the largest supporting groups for Iran to more easily take over Iraq.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #34
Whether its 15 or 5,000, you still have to consider the fact that if Iran had killed them it is still one Nation killing another Nation's military personel and if I last recall that is an act of war.
Sometime some government may willing to sacrifice some personals lives due to some considerations on some certain issues. Then a should-be act of war will become an unfortunate incident.:unknown
I don't believe UK will watch its citizen die, Especially when those things are shed in the light.
If they do, UK and NATO members will be regarded as paper tigers by Mao's standard. A more complicated situation will occur for sure.
I don't believe UK will watch its citizen die, Especially when those things are shed in the light.
If they do, UK and NATO members will be regarded as paper tigers by Mao's standard. A more complicated situation will occur for sure.
What does Mao have to do with it... he's dead, rot, and forgot. It's not like Maoist forces did so well in their day against Vietnam.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #37
Mao was not a brilliant military tacticionary, though he may have had luck with undermining he Nationalist forces. But other than that, even considering going up against several million troops can be resolved with larger weapons. Not to mention Mao made that statement over 40 years ago, our (U.S.) military has changed dramatically within that time span.
I think Mao did have a place on Guerrilla warfare and Mobile Warfare
Luck is an important factor, but you do not call that luck as Mao has indeed a much inferior army when the 1946~1949 civil war started.
You can play Heart of Iron II and try to determine how much luck do you need to survive when using CCP
I guess you may not understand my points
I mean if a country fails to protect its own citizen, others might take it as a sign of showing weakness
And Mao called the strong force with a weak policy paper tigers
Indeed their is nothing to do with Mao
agree. But that's a hot debate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese-Vietnamese_War
Anyway, another misunderstanding:shudder
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #40
I understand your points, but I'm simply saying that our policies have changed since World War two. And you may not want to use wikipedia for sources.
- Status