tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post6421843166574176629..comments2024-03-28T07:56:09.239-07:00Comments on Navy Matters: Poop Or Get Off The PotComNavOpshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comBlogger174125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-50789261716431990672019-07-13T15:09:41.065-07:002019-07-13T15:09:41.065-07:00"As Iran correctly points out, at the narrowe..."As Iran correctly points out, at the narrowest part of the Straight there is NO international water. Its all either Iran or Oman."<br /><br />That's not quite right. UNCLOS makes provision for international shipping passage through exactly those kind of overlapping borders. <br /><br />As far as airspace, I have no idea what the international laws are regarding that.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-44784178711785803152019-06-24T14:26:21.189-07:002019-06-24T14:26:21.189-07:00"Which Russian military bases in Syria were b..."Which Russian military bases in Syria were bombed by Israel?"<br /><br />Somewhat along those lines, in April 2018 Israel attacked the T4 airbase which Russian aircraft have reportedly used but that's not a Russian base. It is unknown whether Russian aircraft were present during the attack. Russian reports suggested that Russian advisors were present at the base but that none were hurt in the attack.<br /><br />Russia's Hmeimim air base in Latakia province has been attacked by mortars and drones although I have not heard that Israel was responsible.<br /><br />I'm not aware of other Israeli attacks on Russian bases although you need a score card to keep track of who's attacking who!ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-87924364499875214062019-06-24T13:26:55.398-07:002019-06-24T13:26:55.398-07:00Peter G -
Which Russian military bases in Syria w...Peter G -<br /><br />Which Russian military bases in Syria were bombed by Israel? As far as I understand they struck IRGC that were in or near Syrian bases, but not on Russian bases. It is true that the have made several stikes against IRGC bases in Latakia. But that was in Latakia Province, NOT in Latakia City which is near the Russian base at Hmeimim.mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09123137206598163451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-77739067600295541062019-06-24T12:15:40.173-07:002019-06-24T12:15:40.173-07:00Yes. Nico.Yes. Nico.Peter Gnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-57841969081692562232019-06-24T08:46:04.774-07:002019-06-24T08:46:04.774-07:00You're fine. Feel free to question politely! F...You're fine. Feel free to question politely! For future reference, you might want to include the name/ID of the person you're asking a question of or include a quote that you're asking about just so the person you're asking knows it's them!<br /><br />For instance, I think your question is directed at NICO but I'm not 100% sure.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-88716746141076484512019-06-24T08:41:44.430-07:002019-06-24T08:41:44.430-07:00"if China back stops Iran and moves military ..."if China back stops Iran and moves military hardware in defiance of US sanctions and UN sanctions, that sure complicates the US strategy of regime change and reduces military strikes."<br /><br />China is not bound by US sanctions, of course. I don't what, if any, UN sanctions exist about transferring Chinese military equipment to Iran but if they did exist and China violated them, there's your built in justification FOR military action.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-79967556486524185432019-06-24T08:16:16.996-07:002019-06-24T08:16:16.996-07:00Not attacking you. Just questioning.Not attacking you. Just questioning.Peter Gnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-40329682174699956172019-06-24T08:13:44.408-07:002019-06-24T08:13:44.408-07:00If china moves military forces into iran that will...If china moves military forces into iran that will not change our moves. Even Israel bombs iranian guard depots on russian military bases in Syria. Why would you think we are scared of bombing chinese military positions in iran? Peter Gnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-35302771511803364522019-06-24T05:28:23.669-07:002019-06-24T05:28:23.669-07:00"There is no legal basis for the US to attack..."There is no legal basis for the US to attack Iran as I see it unless the US can provoke an attack against its forces (human)."<br /><br />There is no 'human' clause in any self-defense law or doctrine. You're just making this one up. Iran attacked US forces twice (more, if you go back through recent events) so an armed response has been justified.<br /><br />Beyond that, I've laid out the case for attacking countries that have forfeited their international rights through irresponsible behavior.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-31159100768295569422019-06-24T05:25:24.844-07:002019-06-24T05:25:24.844-07:00"Whether the drone was in International airsp..."Whether the drone was in International airspace is actually irrelevent. If a foreign force made threats and then parked forces in International waters off New York, it would be considered self defense if the US attacked."<br /><br />You are just flat out wrong. No country can attack another in international air/water. The Soviets flew aircraft up to our borders and sailed ships up to our borders all the time during the Cold War. We had no right to attack them.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-63698256560454684002019-06-23T23:30:34.938-07:002019-06-23T23:30:34.938-07:00Reading between the lines on this one. Trump talks...Reading between the lines on this one. Trump talks about proportionate response. This to is covered under article 51. There is no legal basis for the US to attack Iran as I see it unless the US can provoke an attack against its forces (human). I think Trump has been very wise or more likely one of his advisers has explained the legal position they are in. There is currently no legal justification for a military attack. If the US attacks without legal justification it opens the floodgates for attacks in countries by Iran harbouring US forces. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12880601121069657708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-52565653117968138252019-06-23T21:16:09.733-07:002019-06-23T21:16:09.733-07:00Whether the drone was in International airspace is...Whether the drone was in International airspace is actually irrelevent. Iran has the right to self defense under international law/ UN Charter. The US has made multiple threats and then parked forces off the coast of Iran. If a foreign force made threats and then parked forces in International waters off New York, it would be considered self defense if the US attacked. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12880601121069657708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-67912389041494943282019-06-23T19:17:25.856-07:002019-06-23T19:17:25.856-07:00With Trump saying that further sanctions will hit ...With Trump saying that further sanctions will hit Iran tomorrow, I only see few remaining options long term for the survival of the Iran regime:<br /><br />1. Drag this as long as possible, crack down on all dissent, keep the economy going somehow, try to stir up anti Americanism as much as possible with hoping US strikes first to rile up the population. Hoping that US elects a new POTUS in 2020, very tough plan as I really don't think the hawks in WH will let Iran play the long game. Sooner or later, they will convince Trump to use force...<br /><br />2. The other option is Iran leaders need to understand that going alone isn't possible anymore, they need outside help and lot more "muscle". Iran needs to talk to Chinese leaders and strike a deal, it probably will hurt but without a "big brother" behind them, eventually Iran is toast. Now, if China back stops Iran and moves military hardware in defiance of US sanctions and UN sanctions, that sure complicates the US strategy of regime change and reduces military strikes. I have no clue what Iran could offer China since it would really have to be a sweet deal for XI to go for it but stranger things have happened in history...NICOhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14567491909555759918noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-91960923164853343372019-06-23T15:57:38.756-07:002019-06-23T15:57:38.756-07:00Well, based on your scenario, the only thing I'...Well, based on your scenario, the only thing I'm puzzled about is why Iran hasn't taken over the entire Middle East (sounds like it would be an automatic!) and invaded the US yet, given their overwhelming advantages?<br /><br />Hey, you're entitled to your opinion. I'll leave it at that.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-58082064777857336412019-06-23T13:20:21.308-07:002019-06-23T13:20:21.308-07:00Do I think all of the these elements would come in...Do I think all of the these elements would come into play on D-day? No. But what contingency planning is there in place if one of them happens? Two? Three? Honestly, are you yourself even remotely confident that people preparing the Iran war made required provisions? Or are we again going into the war planning for a swift and decisive victory by D+14 only?<br /><br />Now into specifics. <br /><br />Turks. NATO membership as such has little to do with eventual war with Iran. In 2016, Incirlik was shut down, all our flights grounded, personnel removed from facilities under guard and constrained to barracks for two days. Likewise, in 2003 they have denied use of any of bases on against Saddam. Would our forces be interned for the duration of the conflict? How have we recently treated Erdogan? What should we expect him to do? <br /><br />Likewise, do you really think Qataris will allow us to use Al Udeid? If it was not for Turks and Iranians, they would be long gone already. Even if they do, how do you operate an air base in range of Iranian short-range ballistic missiles that has six small hardened shelters of really dubious quality. Open tarmacs for the rest. <br /><br />Emirates. They have one interconnect to Oman and one to the Kingdom. None of them is capable of supplying more then 3% to 5% of their average demand. None of them will be functional. All these city states are 90% expats. Millions of slave laborers. Depending on time of year, there are between 50K and 100K U.S. citizen in Dubai alone. How are you going to evacuate them? March them into the desert?<br /><br />Syria, ISIS, Israeli raids all gave Iranians time, pretext and opportunity to build up a massive network of militias, from Lebanon to Pakistan, staff them with trusted cadre, bloody and train them in working with each other and with IRGC directly. Most importantly, we gave them a shared cause and opportunity to connect that simply was not there in 80s or in 2003 for that matter. Last year, over 30 million Shia made the Arbaeen pilgrimage to Iraq.<br /><br />BTW, there is an ongoing Shia insurgency in the Eastern Province already. Three quarters of 250-300 people executed in KSA last year were Shia political prisoners. It might ignite with or without our war with Iran.<br /><br />Logistically, financially, doctrinally we are not prepared, postured, positioned or even capable of fighting a conventional war against Iran or inflicting a lasting damage. Our "allies" contribute nothing. Iranians will not allow us to keep this conflict contained. Such a war will leave us greatly weakened and Russia and China stronger. I still need to learn what the objectives would be in such a war and how they they feature into our Grand Strategy.<br /><br />Hopefully, Trump's common sense will prevail over plethora of Beltway wormtongues surrounding him.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-67211179577528406042019-06-23T11:14:48.181-07:002019-06-23T11:14:48.181-07:00Speaking of Iraq, they are a potential peacemaker ...Speaking of Iraq, they are a potential peacemaker between Iran and the US.<br /><br />Iraq is sending a delegation to Iran to try to stop rocket attacks targeting US forces in Iraq. Iraqi government believes Iraqi militia supported by Iran is responsible for attacks. They don't want to be caught in the middle.<br /><br />Plus Iraqi Army, directed by Prime Minister Abadi, did a large-scale deployment to the vicinity of seven bases to protect US troops from rocket attack. Those forces have surrounded those seven locations at a distance of 15 kilometers which is believed to be outside the range of Katyusha rockets that have been recently targeting US locations. Of course that encirclement could be construed as a siege rather than protection - making sure that no US action in Iraq is directed at Iran or Iranian based militias?mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09123137206598163451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-62834397804263920642019-06-23T09:24:42.223-07:002019-06-23T09:24:42.223-07:00"How would basing and logistics for even a li..."How would basing and logistics for even a limited conflict with Iran look like? "<br /><br />That's a valid question, as it is for any conflict throughout history. Logistics are always key.<br /><br />"are we prepared to fight a major counterinsurgency effort"<br /><br />Wow. That's quite an imposing hypothetical scenario you put forth - a regional, simultaneous, coordinated Shia uprising across the entire Middle East! Well, let's see if there are any events of actual history that support or refute your proposition.<br /><br />The US attacked Iraq in Desert Storm and there was no massive, coordinated uprising.<br /><br />The US again attacked, invaded, and occupied Iraq in 2003 and there was no massive, coordinated uprising.<br /><br />The US has, multiple times, imposed crippling sanctions on Iran and there has been no massive, coordinated uprising.<br /><br />The ongoing civil war in Syria has sparked no massive, coordinated uprising.<br /><br />US attacks on Syrian bases have sparked no massive, coordinated uprising.<br /><br />Israeli has attacked Iran, Syria, and Iranian forces in Syria and there has been no massive, coordinated uprising.<br /><br />Iraq and Iran engaged in an eight year war and there was no massive, coordinated uprising.<br /><br />The US withdrew its support for the JCPOA and reimposed crippling sanctions and there has been no massive, coordinated uprising.<br /><br />Hmmm … I'm beginning to think your proposition may not be supported by actual history!<br /><br />Let's look at some other aspects of your proposition.<br /><br />" Iranians will shut down power and water to Dubai and Emirates will cease to exist."<br /><br />The UAE obtains 98.8% of its water from the Dubai Electricity and Water Authority desalination plant so Iran would seem to have to ability to shut down water.<br /><br />The UAE has its own electrical power stations and is part of an electrical grid arrangement with neighboring, friendly states to provide electricity to member states in order to balance loads and mitigate emergencies so electrical power does not seem to be an issue.<br /><br />As a NATO member, it seems highly unlikely that Turkey would 'forcefully intern' US personnel.<br /><br />Iraq's government and armed forces have already sided with and operated with US forces in many operations including those involving Shia personnel so your proposition that they would side with Iran seems unbelievable. Having fought an eight year war with Iran, it seems unlikely that Iraqi forces would turn around and fight with them.<br /><br />I'm beginning to think that few, if any, of your predictions are likely to occur.<br /><br />In short, you've concocted a fictional supposition (to put it politely) that is completely unsupported by any facts or history and is, in fact, contradicted by all historical events.<br /><br /><br />ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-88242102345060392952019-06-23T06:32:24.896-07:002019-06-23T06:32:24.896-07:00How would basing and logistics for even a limited ...How would basing and logistics for even a limited conflict with Iran look like? <br /><br />- Iraq and Afghanistan, at least the most valuable parts of their armed forces, will be de facto Iranian allies in such a conflict.<br />- Oman and Turkey will be neutral and lock down our bases on their respective territories. Turks are protectors of Qatar and Qataris will follow their suit. Given the current state of relationships with Turks, I would not put it beyond them to forcefully intern all personnel present on D-day in these bases and feed Iranians intelligence throughout the conflict.<br />- Bahrain and Saudi Eastern Province will be consumed by massive Shia uprising, all already well prepared by IRGC.<br />- Also on D-day, Iranians will shut down power and water to Dubai and Emirates will cease to exist. <br />- Pakistanis will be neutral, standing aside while Shia militias clean up all of CIA drone lily pads. <br />- All of Caspian region will be a protected Sino-Soviet resupply highway for Iranians.<br /><br />I left out a couple of minor players, such as Lebanon, Syria or Yemen.<br /><br />Before we engage Iran, are we prepared to fight a major counterinsurgency effort to maintain Saudi stability? Do we have plans for evacuating 50K US civilians from Dubai before they (and any other White or Arab in sight) are eaten alive by millions of starving Bangladeshi slaves? Without access through Persian Gulf, destroyed airports?<br /><br />Realistically, after the initial Tomahawk wave, we will be reduced to once-per-week strikes of our 8 flyworthy B1s and 10 B2s from Diego Garcia. Maybe some pinpricks from max stand-off carriers. All while we are stripping West Pacific of all munitions and assets that we can not easily replace anymore. <br /><br />Further engagement in Middle East is neither beneficial nor affordable. Time to start getting serious about the big one with ChiComs.<br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-31988770605822957772019-06-22T19:41:57.948-07:002019-06-22T19:41:57.948-07:00"One could have said that about US v. Vietnam..."One could have said that about US v. Vietnam, too"<br /><br />And, if we fight another war that we're not really serious about winning then, sure, it could happen again and, yes, our efforts in Afg have been pretty half-assed.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-26981113115167457382019-06-22T18:07:37.091-07:002019-06-22T18:07:37.091-07:00"Your fear is valid, however, the discrepancy..."Your fear is valid, however, the discrepancy in technology and force levels is just too great to produce anything other than an overwhelming US victory no matter how poorly managed."<br /><br />One could have said that about US v. Vietnam, too, but it didn't work out that way. I wouldn't expect an Iran war to be as poorly managed as that one was, but more recently we haven't exactly dominated Afghanistan, either.<br /><br />I think you are probably right, the discrepancy is just too great, but I just have this nagging fear and doubt. <br />CDR Chipnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-53508883493238780562019-06-22T14:56:07.710-07:002019-06-22T14:56:07.710-07:00The Turks claim they that their Stingray naval min...The Turks claim they that their Stingray naval mine can be activated from safe to armed by acoustic signal.<br /><br />And there has been suspicion for years that the Russians also have remote activated mines. I have no clue as to whether that is true. But the following statement from a Director of Gidropribor suggests they have that capability:<br /><br /><i>"Mine barriers permit vast sea and ocean theaters of operations to be kept under control and when the status (armed – unarmed – sterilizer) of the planted mines is controlled remotely, friendly forces can cross the minefield."</i><br /><br />http://milit.ru/mines.htm<br /><br />Gidropribor also hints that their smart mines can operate as a part of an undersea surveillance system. <br /><br />mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09123137206598163451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-21937229020948250062019-06-22T14:11:43.771-07:002019-06-22T14:11:43.771-07:00Actually, a very good and well presented comment. ...Actually, a very good and well presented comment. I disagree but that's immaterial. While I may argue you your position, I value a contrary view if it is reasoned and well presented - and you have done that. Your contrary view is an asset to the blog. Thanks for contributing and I look forward to future comments from you whether I agree or disagree! ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-54522274682232623322019-06-22T14:04:12.538-07:002019-06-22T14:04:12.538-07:00"The us never apologised for that snafu."..."The us never apologised for that snafu."<br /><br />You are incorrect. Here are some sentences from a public letter from Ronald Reagan:<br /><br />"This is a terrible human tragedy. Our sympathy and condolences go out to the passengers, crew, and their families. … We deeply regret any loss of life."<br /><br />Additionally, the US sent a message of "deep regret" to Iran. I have not seen a public display of the full text of that message.<br /><br />Finally, the US agreed to pay $62M in compensation to the families.<br /><br />None of that excuses the incident in any way but it does demonstrate that you statement is factually false.<br /><br />The standards of this blog insist on facts and logic. You appear to have authored several comments on the Vincennes incident and all of them have been factually incorrect. Another incorrect comment will not be allowed.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-2897226693304020732019-06-22T13:54:15.313-07:002019-06-22T13:54:15.313-07:00"The benefits are clear and immense"
we..."The benefits are clear and immense"<br /><br />we're talking past each other at this point--i.e. too far apart on basic assumptions--so I think I will end with the following, and then you can chew me out with the final word :) <br /><br />Of course the benefits are obvious on paper. Just as were the benefits to defeating Ho Chi Minh or Saddam or the Talaban or Qaddafi, etc. Or indeed, the benefits Hitler expected to gain when he invaded Poland, or Napoleon when he invaded Russia... :)<br /><br />What comes out of starting a war is almost never what the initiators hoped. The knock-on effects are deeply unpredictable, and this is particularly true in the modern Mideast. Yes we have a huge preponderance of force, but that is not the only variable in play.<br /><br />Again, this is not to counsel that we be paralyzed by caution, but to treat war as truly a last resort. I don't see us being anywhere close to the point where an attempted mass decapitation strike followed by invasion is the most logical and reasonable course of action.<br /><br />I sense that you feel our past wars would have had the good effects we hoped, except that we just didn't fight them forcefully enough. Or you might classify some as victories where I would disagree.<br /><br />Also, my sense of your moral framing is that it is comparatively black and white, with a great deal of faith that the deaths of many many innocents are acceptable given the long term benefits of supporting freedom and removing "bad actors."<br /><br />My moral posture is different. In Iraq, somewhere between 200,000 and 600,000 people died. In Syria, some 400,000-500,000 have died (thankfully not on our consciences). Though the situations are not identical, I have no reason to think that an invasion of Iran, a still larger country, wouldn't create carnage on a similar scale, if not greater. I'm not comfortable just claiming that any fallout is Khamenei's fault, when I don't see an invasion as either necessary or proportional to the provocations. <br /><br />Nor do I believe so strongly that the only reason some recent wars did not go our way is that we pursued them in too lily-livered a manner. In particular, with respect to your war plan, I don't see that past history gives any indication that it's possible to take out a decisive proportion of Iran's leadership--though it is true that many could be killed and the others' hold on power weakened. <br /><br />So when I think about an Iran left flailing, with many of their leaders emerging after going to ground, and a population more embittered against us than ever, the possibility that weill have have spawned still greater and less predictable future violence and terrorism strike me as a very real reason for caution. Throwing out something bad does not preclude creating something worse--and the conditions we would leave on the ground seem the kind that would be likely to do so.<br /><br />OK, thanks for an interesting conversation--you can chastise me now and we'll have done :) <br />FMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5579907756656776056.post-65791080860193952862019-06-22T13:53:08.721-07:002019-06-22T13:53:08.721-07:00This is not a political blog. If you wish to disc...This is not a political blog. If you wish to discuss politics they must be directly tied to a military matter.ComNavOpshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09669644332369727431noreply@blogger.com