2011-12-29, 00:02 | Link #18741 |
Gamilas Falls
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Republic of California
Age: 47
|
Can they stop at least six Carrier Strike Groups? Because that is what is suppose to be able to be active pretty much anyplace within 30 days, with two more possible within 90 days out of 11 total (though realistically only 10 since one carrier is almost always out of commission for refit or refueling).
__________________
|
2011-12-29, 00:21 | Link #18742 |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
But wouldn't deploying a few hundreds of naval mine and their Kilo submarines in the straits a good and almost passive way to block it and to make the tast to re-open it a hellish one?
__________________
|
2011-12-29, 07:34 | Link #18743 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
|
Quote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:St...ormuz_full.jpg Deploying submarines in such shallow waters without air superiority is pretty much suicidal. I highly doubt they are going to do that unless they are really desperate. As for mines, how are they going to deploy them? They don't have any advantage in the air, on the surface or below. They might have some success once or twice, but that leads to a situation in which their ships or planes are never going to enter the gulf again. They actually have an easier alternative, which are anti-ship cruise missiles. The oil tankers are massive targets without any defense. If they have mobile launch vehicles then such attacks are hard to prevent.
__________________
Last edited by Tom Bombadil; 2011-12-29 at 07:52. |
|
2011-12-29, 08:17 | Link #18744 | ||
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 35
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2011-12-29, 08:31 | Link #18745 |
temporary safeguard
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Germany
|
You are all assuming there is a war already.
Shooting at submarines, gaining air superiority, that is just that. If that area developes into a warzone, then that alone would greatly hinder civilian traders. Also, if you look closely at the map, there is no international water in that passage. It either belongs to Iran, or Oman. So it would be interesting to ask first, if any foreign entity besides those two has any grounds in forcing a passage with means of violence. |
2011-12-29, 08:37 | Link #18746 | |
NYAAAAHAAANNNNN~
Join Date: Nov 2007
Age: 35
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2011-12-29, 08:59 | Link #18747 | |
Knight Errant
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 36
|
Quote:
Minding your own business is an important thing to do, the tricky thing is to know when to set that idea aside. To use the family analogy, you might not agree with how that family raises their kids, as a conservative you may feel it's an atrocity that their neighbour is not bringing god into their children's lives, as a more pacifist individual you might be horrified that your neighbour slaps his children. However, your neighbour isn't going to appreciate a busybody neighbour telling him how to raise his kids, so it's best to live and let live in such a circumstance. Of course, if there's a clear abuse, as agreed by some outside authority (IE the law), then it's a good idea to call the cops. Unfortunately, there are very few "outside authorities" in terms of nations. There is the United Nations, but we are all aware of it's weaknesses. There's also the International Criminal Court, or the declaration of Human rights, but not all countries signed up to that. Ultimately we have to leave them alone and bite our tongues. But at least they're not trying to inflict their ways on us either. |
|
2011-12-29, 10:20 | Link #18749 | |
I disagree with you all.
Join Date: Dec 2005
|
Quote:
|
|
2011-12-29, 10:24 | Link #18750 | |
✘˵╹◡╹˶✘
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Australia
|
Quote:
And frankly, Iran's army is showed to be quite decent. Not to win against Israel , US and the allies, but should be capable to deal some great damage.
__________________
|
|
2011-12-29, 12:05 | Link #18751 | |
Aria Company
Join Date: Nov 2003
|
Quote:
I honestly don't know why this is a difficult concept, considering there are two very obvious counter examples. I'd say it's based on learning the wrong lessons from Vietnam, but Japan's thinking behind attacking the US shows it predates Vietnam by decades. Is it because, even including the Civil War, the US has never really had a war on its soil as bloody as those in Europe and Asia? The Philippine insurgency following the Spanish American war maybe? Edit: I'll also add that the Iranians on the other hand seem to realize this and their planning is centered around making sure they'll be able to conduct an insurgency with maximum effectiveness after an American invasion rather than stopping said invasion.
__________________
Last edited by Kamui4356; 2011-12-29 at 12:41. |
|
2011-12-30, 06:08 | Link #18752 |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Can crowdsourcing shake up education?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...llBusinessNews
__________________
|
2011-12-30, 08:39 | Link #18753 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
|
||
2011-12-30, 08:55 | Link #18754 | |
temporary safeguard
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Germany
|
Quote:
Operating trade routes through a warzone would make insurance costs sky rocket, which would likely eat up all profit. This is, if you are actually willing to risk your tankers, because they are easy targets. So none of those "we shoot stuff" options are really a solution to the problem at hand. Which is: oil prices rising due to Irans actions. |
|
2011-12-30, 09:19 | Link #18755 |
books-eater youkai
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Betweem wisdom and insanity
|
Russia submerges nuclear submarine to douse blaze
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...7BS0MJ20111229 Strange than we didn't hear much of this ,considering than it's about a ''boomer'' not a ''hunter killer'' sub .
__________________
|
2011-12-30, 09:30 | Link #18756 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2007
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
2011-12-30, 13:11 | Link #18757 | |
Um-Shmum
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 40
|
Quote:
I threaten you, you threaten me, we both deter one another and thus war is prevented. the problem is that in the west, threats are viewed as... well, threats. declarations of intent. and often enough, this leads to the very conflict that the original threats were meant to prevent.
__________________
|
|
2011-12-30, 13:55 | Link #18760 | |
Um-Shmum
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 40
|
Quote:
there's a type of dagger called a Khanjar that you often see being worn as part of a "formal" grab by many arab gulf political figures. it dates back a very long time, going all the way back when such weapons were actively used for combat among the various tribes in the middle east. its part of the "system" that had developed during the centuries of war and is symbolic of the "rules" established during that time to prevent warfare. wearing it came to represent and state a very clear message. "I can kill you, but for now i choose not to" "don't place me in a situation where i might choose otherwise" that, in a nutshell, is the middle eastern political mindset when it comes to preventing conflicts. its not based on rationality alone, but always includes an element of deterrence. its the reason why Egypt for decades after the peace treaty with Israel, still kept conducting military drills that seem as if they are aimed at repelling an Israeli invasion for example. its a way of keeping the peace treaty "relevant" by showing the other party that they have good reason for keeping it. its also the reason why the military "parade" culture in the mid east is so well developed while its mostly laughed at by much of the western world. deterrence, in the middle east, is far more important then you think.
__________________
|
|
Tags |
current affairs, discussion, international |
|
|