# Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes'



## elvis (Jul 5, 2012)

http://news.yahoo.com/iran-hit-35-us-bases-minutes-151115760--abc-news-topstories.html


and up goes the rhetoric.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 5, 2012)

Right....And what do they do after a thorough and professional counter-attack, with precision guided ordinance rammed up their asses?

Not that I'm necessarily for such a thing, but who do those little goat fuckers think that they're dealing with?


----------



## elvis (Jul 5, 2012)

Oddball said:


> Right....And what do they do after a thorough and professional counter-attack, with precision guided ordinance rammed up their asses?
> 
> Not that I'm necessarily for such a thing, but who do those little goat fuckers think that they're dealing with?



who says we'd be counter attacking?  and if so,  what of the counter counter attack?


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 5, 2012)

Iran's pres would be pissing his pants when the bunker busting smart bombs started dropping.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 5, 2012)

Really?  Really?

Why oh why do I want our foreign policy response to be 3 words long.

"Bring it, bitch!"  That'd win the election for the man who got OBL and Colonel Gaddafi.



Pardon my silliness, but dang.  Sick of these guys at times.


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 5, 2012)

elvis said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> > Right....And what do they do after a thorough and professional counter-attack, with precision guided ordinance rammed up their asses?
> ...



surface to air missiles.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 5, 2012)

I think he means would P-BO have the guts to go all gangstah on Iran?


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 5, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> I think he means would P-BO have the guts to go all gangstah on Iran?



I believe he would bust a cap in dat azz.


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 5, 2012)

We want Iran back.


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 5, 2012)

If done right it would be a stabilization move in the ME. After Hussien jr falls in Syria.

Can you say military dictatorship in pan alliance with the US and the UN?


----------



## Oddball (Jul 5, 2012)

elvis said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> > Right....And what do they do after a thorough and professional counter-attack, with precision guided ordinance rammed up their asses?
> ...


You cut loose the ACC and carrier forces, there won't be no counter-counter attack.

Diplomacy hasn't seemed to work...Sanctions haven't worked (they never do)...

How 'bout a president with some spine go out and just laugh in their faces?


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 5, 2012)

Oddball said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > Oddball said:
> ...


Saw a special on the Iranian hostage crisis.  When it was looking like Reagan could win, the captors were a little worried because all they knew about Reagan was his movies.  So one of the guards asked this captive about what he thought Reagan would do if elected.  The captive looked at him then mimed with his hands an explosion and with a happy vengeance charged grin on his face said "BOOM!"  The former captive said it unsettled the guard very much.


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 5, 2012)

reagan did play the part well.
That is what helped after the pschichy of the US after Nam, Nixon, and runaway inflation, not to mention the Shah thing. Price of wheat.Strange diseases at a convention.Swine flu announcements.Nuclear winter.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 5, 2012)

Moonglow said:


> reagan did play the part well.


"Power is not just what you have, but what your opponent THINKS you have."
Saul Alinsky "Rules for Radicals"

Huh.  isn't that a little surprise.  More Sun Tsu than Saul, but if you're going to steal ideas, steal from the best I guess.


----------



## GHook93 (Jul 5, 2012)

elvis said:


> Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes' - Yahoo! News
> 
> 
> and up goes the rhetoric.



Yep and we can hit the entire Persia country in seconds!


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jul 5, 2012)

If Iran were to attack our bases in Europe they would then face attack from the Countries in whom those bases reside.

And some of you idiots think it would be ok to let Iran get nukes.


----------



## Oddball (Jul 5, 2012)

RetiredGySgt said:


> If Iran were to attack our bases in Europe* they would then face attack from the Countries in whom those bases reside.*
> 
> And some of you idiots think it would be ok to let Iran get nukes.



And you're fool enough to think that Iran with a couple of nukes would be any danger?


----------



## Artevelde (Jul 6, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> Really?  Really?
> 
> Why oh why do I want our foreign policy response to be 3 words long.
> 
> ...



I prefer the more classy Ronald Reagan line (borrowed from that great philosopher Clint Eastwood): "Go ahead, make my day."

Another option would be the other Clint Eastwood classic: "Do you feel lucky, punk?"


----------



## Artevelde (Jul 6, 2012)

Oddball said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > If Iran were to attack our bases in Europe* they would then face attack from the Countries in whom those bases reside.*
> ...



Yes, it would be.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 6, 2012)

Oddball said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > If Iran were to attack our bases in Europe* they would then face attack from the Countries in whom those bases reside.*
> ...


Could always just open the backyard gate for Israel and let em do that voodoo they do so well (kick arab ass).


----------



## ekrem (Jul 6, 2012)

Moonglow said:


> surface to air missiles.



Missiles to intercept flying objects is very costly.
The cost-advantage is with the side who launches surface-to-surface.
A single  SM-3 missile of AEGIS system costs 15 million $. For that money the Iranians probably can produce 15-100 missiles. And there's no guaranteed success of interception.
The USA can not protect all of its assets in that area.


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 6, 2012)

elvis said:


> Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes' - Yahoo! News
> 
> 
> and up goes the rhetoric.



Their blowing smoke up our asses.


----------



## Trajan (Jul 6, 2012)

there would be a flurry of asymmetrical naval warfare, they have no air force worthy of the term, basically water borne hit and run and indirect fire weapons, via mobile and some static launch sites. 

you can bet we have been cataloging them for years, their movements etc etc...it would be short,  lively and result in the destitution of Irans forces period.

 age old conundrum;if you dissipate your forces you no longer have those forces to threaten anyone with......


----------



## Trajan (Jul 6, 2012)

ekrem said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > surface to air missiles.
> ...




there may be a few leakers and we may even lose a few ships, agreed, BUT, they had better act all at once, because as soon as the the balloon goes up,  their forces are on a very short timeline for life.


----------



## mudwhistle (Jul 6, 2012)

elvis said:


> Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes' - Yahoo! News
> 
> 
> and up goes the rhetoric.



Yeah, but Obama got Bin Laden. 

Oh, and talk is cheap Iran. 

We've got Obama. He'll protect us.......or hire better Firsts Reponders.


----------



## Liability (Jul 6, 2012)

elvis said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> > Right....And what do they do after a thorough and professional counter-attack, with precision guided ordinance rammed up their asses?
> ...



The first day of the Romney Administration.

That's the way Reagan came in when the first Carter went out.


----------



## Liability (Jul 6, 2012)

Obama is planning a decisive campaign of bowing to Pres. Ahmanazinutjob!


----------



## elvis (Jul 6, 2012)

Yeah.....


What's a few pissed off Persians?


----------



## Trajan (Jul 6, 2012)

elvis said:


> Yeah.....
> 
> 
> What's a few pissed off Persians?



shia sect  Persians..


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 6, 2012)

Liability said:


> Obama is planning a decisive campaign of bowing to Pres. Ahmanazinutjob!


That's Mymood Imminajihad.


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 6, 2012)

elvis said:


> Yeah.....
> 
> 
> What's a few pissed off Persians?



Maybe they can make us saffron rice and kababs after we kick their asses?


----------



## bobcollum (Jul 6, 2012)

Iran is trolling...hard.


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 6, 2012)

It is way too optimistic to imagine that obama would be interested in mounting any kind of defense or retaliatory attack.


----------



## nitroz (Jul 6, 2012)

We would give Israel the OK to go kick Iran's ass and storm them with a joint assault/invasion.


----------



## tererun (Jul 7, 2012)

Though I thin Iran would be far more problematic than the recent wars we have been in, they really are not a problem for the US military. We would probably see a much higher US soldier death toll, but unless iranian allies get involved they really cannot do much. I also think Iran's leadership are blustering. A military base has to be designed with being hit in mind. This means heavier defenses, quicker recovery, and heavier protection for key parts. Possibly they could even have mobility or just offsite resources to re-establish the base. 

O course, such a response would cause an escalated confrontation and the US no longer holding back as much lie they do in some places. In places like afganistan there are concerns about allied forces and civilians. This ties US hands, but if the entire country is considered hostile the US has a much easier time. 

At the very least there is no threat to the US lands from Iran. They can bluster all they want way down there, but that is their neighborhood. Without the ability to strike the source they cannot take a protracted and violent war.


----------



## waltky (Jul 7, 2012)

Granny says Obama needs to...

... smack dat Ammerjabberjob...

... on his beanie lil' head...

... an' den put one o' dem boots onna ground...

... uppa his butt...

... an' kick the Shiite right outta him.


----------



## Gideonprime (Jul 7, 2012)

Paper tiger.


----------



## MaryL (Jul 7, 2012)

America invented the bomb, and we pioneered  ICBM's. Over fifty years of experience. We lived with the threat of nuclear war for years.  We have mini nukes and drones... Iran is a snot nosed bunch of muslim ideologue ding-a-lings with an attitude. Who do they think they are fooling?


----------



## Truthseeker420 (Jul 7, 2012)

elvis said:


> Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes' - Yahoo! News
> 
> 
> and up goes the rhetoric.



They told us Iran's president said he wanted to wipe Israel of the map and we know that is a lie,why should we believe this?also the was the WMDs lie and the Iran threated an American warship lie during the last  presidential election.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jul 7, 2012)

Where to start?

We have 2 carrier task forces within striking distance of Iran. That's two of the most destructive forces on earth.

If we have a President with half a brain and a set of balls, We will not occupy Iran. But we will blow them back to the bronze age.

Iranian forces are a joke compared to ours.

Imajihad will be shitting his pants until we march down the street and take him out...

Did I mention that they pissed me off personally back in 79 and I haven't forgotten or forgiven the assholes?


----------



## yidnar (Jul 7, 2012)

Moonglow said:


> If done right it would be a stabilization move in the ME. After Hussien jr falls in Syria.
> 
> Can you say military dictatorship in pan alliance with the US and the UN?


Bush stated that the fall of Sadam would cause a domino efect in th ME !!


----------



## Truthseeker420 (Jul 7, 2012)

yidnar said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > If done right it would be a stabilization move in the ME. After Hussien jr falls in Syria.
> ...



Did Bush predict he would crash the American economy as well?


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 10, 2012)

The worst mistake George Bush made was in thinking that the people in the middle east wanted democracy to be a free people.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 10, 2012)

Truthseeker420,  yidnar,  Moonglow, _et al,_

Interesting views!



Truthseeker420 said:


> yidnar said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Moonglow might be correct.  If a regime change occurs (just right) in Syria, it very well may add some stability to the region.  But there is really no reason to believe, at this point, that the regime will fall; or, that if it falls, that the Syrians will ge any better at forming a reasonable government than the Palestinians _(HAMAS, a terrorist group elected) _or Egypt _(a new Government associated with the Muslim Brotherhood - another terrorist group)_.  And the regional terrorist groups are notoriously anti-Israeli in their very nature.

So, is there a reasonable expectation of a "positive" domino effect in regime change?  

The Bush Administration, pushed by the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), may have predicted a series of regime changes, but I doubt they predicted that the indigenous populations would endorse terrorist organizations and/or Islamist leaders.  

No, I wouldn't give the Administration much credit for forward thinking; at least until we see a "positive" regime change.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 10, 2012)

Oddball said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > Oddball said:
> ...



It seems the sanctions are working, that is why the threats from Iran are increasing.  Iran is playing the game of Brinkmanship, I doubt the worlds oil consuming nations will blink.


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 10, 2012)

RoccoR said:


> Truthseeker420,  yidnar,  Moonglow, _et al,_
> 
> Interesting views!
> 
> ...



The Muslim Brotherhood is not winning in Libya, at least for now.


----------



## Trajan (Jul 10, 2012)

Wry Catcher said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> > elvis said:
> ...



you apparently aren't aware that Irans top 15 or so trading partners have been given exemptions that equal in some cases 40% of their import export exchange with Iran........and we have seen this 2 step before, so many times is a joke now. 



aside from that, there is nothing that will force the mullahs to stop investing in assembling working nukes, period.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> The worst mistake George Bush made was in thinking that the people in the middle east wanted democracy to be a free people.




And you think that they don't?


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jul 11, 2012)




----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 11, 2012)

Sanctions in Iran backfired.   The people are suffering but believe that the way out of sanctions is to develop nuclear bombs as soon as possible.   Defeat Israel and the United States and the sanctions will be over.  The more sanctions, the harder the country works to accelerate development and building bombs and delivery systems.

The stores are empty.   They will be filled as soon as Iranian bombs start dropping.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> Sanctions in Iran backfired.   The people are suffering but believe that the way out of sanctions is to develop nuclear bombs as soon as possible.





What proof do you have that "the people" there believe that? Link?


----------



## ConzHateUSA (Jul 11, 2012)

Conz worried about Iran?

Who is signing up this week?

here ya go

US Marine Corps | Marine Recruiting | Marines.com

or if you arent in really great shape, try my favorite

Find a Recruiter: Navy.com

If you want Army or Air Force you can google it yourself, surely every single one of you that wants war with Iran is joining?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 11, 2012)

Another irrational lefty...


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jul 11, 2012)

ConzHateUSA said:


> Conz worried about Iran?
> 
> Who is signing up this week?
> 
> ...



Been there done that..........


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 11, 2012)

SFC Ollie said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> > Conz worried about Iran?
> ...



And got the T shirt.


----------



## RoccoR (Jul 12, 2012)

High_Gravity, Truthseeker420,  yidnar,  Moonglow, _et al,_

High_Gravity makes a valid point.



High_Gravity said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Truthseeker420,  yidnar,  Moonglow, _et al,_
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

While the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) doesn't want to admit defeat, the election of the National Forces Alliance (NFA) is a good sign _(so far)_. 

The NFA is all about rebuilding the nation and the infrastructure.  If they stick to that principle, Libya may just land on its feet.  But I think we have to wait and see if such a large coalition can actually function. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 12, 2012)

RoccoR said:


> High_Gravity, Truthseeker420,  yidnar,  Moonglow, _et al,_
> 
> High_Gravity makes a valid point.
> 
> ...



Libya is a different country than much of the Middle East, in most Islamic countries groups like the Muslim Brotherhood are allowed to exist and recruit members, so when the governments of those countries fall they can easily swoop in and take control. Libya has a pretty small population around 6 million people I think and Gaddafi never tolerated any Islamic groups during his rule, they were all either imprisoned or run out of the country, so the everyday Libyan doesn't really have any ties with the Muslim Brotherhood like people in Egypt do, Mubarak outlawed the Brotherhood but they still existed and were a familiar face for many Egyptians, Libya not so much.


----------



## Paulie (Jul 12, 2012)

elvis said:


> Oddball said:
> 
> 
> > Right....And what do they do after a thorough and professional counter-attack, with precision guided ordinance rammed up their asses?
> ...



You don't really believe we wouldn't counter attack, do you?


----------



## elvis (Jul 12, 2012)

Paulie said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > Oddball said:
> ...



My guess is we'd be attacking.  and the response would not come right away.  you know what blowback is right?


----------



## Paulie (Jul 12, 2012)

elvis said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> > elvis said:
> ...



If Iran killed US troops or at least US citizens on a base, I'm pretty sure the response would be about as quick as possible, considering I'm quite sure we already have the war plans drawn up at the ready.


----------



## elvis (Jul 12, 2012)

Paulie said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > Paulie said:
> ...


the rhetoric by Iran is in response to Bush's "world war 3" rhetoric and Obama's "I won't take anything off the table" rhetoric.   plus we have Iran surrounded by how many troops?  plus the history of 1953 and supporting saddam hussein and.  and. well you know.


----------



## Paulie (Jul 12, 2012)

elvis said:


> Paulie said:
> 
> 
> > elvis said:
> ...



You sound like you're making the case for why Iran would never be stupid enough to attack us preemptively.  If so I wholeheartedly agree.  People think these dudes are fucking stupid and don't know damn well that anything lobbed into the air towards any US interest means assured destruction.  

I believe that the reason they want the bomb is because we've never preemptively attacked anyone who has it.  Seems like a no brainer to me...I'd want it too if I was them.


----------



## Indofred (Jul 13, 2012)

elvis said:


> Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes' - Yahoo! News
> 
> 
> and up goes the rhetoric.



He also said "if the US launches offensive against it (Iran)"

So far Iran has attacked nothing other than forces invading its border such as US spy drones on illegal missions.

This reminds me of..
Revealed: the Iraqi colonel who told MI6 that Saddam could launch WMD within 45 minutes - Telegraph

Saddam can hit targets with WMD in 45 minutes.

Are you really going to believe the same old crap twice?

I like the Iranian government than I do about as much as I like doggy poo on my best shoes but that hardly means I'm stupid enough to believe this crap.


----------



## rhodescholar (Jul 13, 2012)

elvis said:


> the rhetoric by Iran is in response to Bush's "world war 3" rhetoric and Obama's "I won't take anything off the table" rhetoric.   plus we have Iran surrounded by how many troops?  plus the history of 1953 and supporting saddam hussein and.  and. well you know.



You're fucking kidding, right?  Iran deserves to be hit 1,000 times over for their war crimes and crimes against humanity.

What the US did 70 years ago does not even come close to what the cancerous dictatorship of thugs and murderers has done for the last 30.


----------



## rhodescholar (Jul 13, 2012)

Indofred said:


> He also said "if the US launches offensive against it (Iran)"So far Iran has attacked nothing other than forces invading its border such as US spy drones on illegal missions.Saddam can hit targets with WMD in 45 minutes.Are you really going to believe the same old crap twice?I like the Iranian government than I do about as much as I like doggy poo on my best shoes but that hardly means I'm stupid enough to believe this crap.



"Iran has attacked nothing than other forces invading its borders?"  Are you trying to be funny?


----------



## Indofred (Jul 13, 2012)

rhodescholar said:


> Indofred said:
> 
> 
> > He also said "if the US launches offensive against it (Iran)"So far Iran has attacked nothing other than forces invading its border such as US spy drones on illegal missions.Saddam can hit targets with WMD in 45 minutes.Are you really going to believe the same old crap twice?I like the Iranian government than I do about as much as I like doggy poo on my best shoes but that hardly means I'm stupid enough to believe this crap.
> ...



I'm sorry.
The Iranians saved a US ship's arse.

Iranian sailors chase off pirates attacking U.S. ship - CNN

Perhaps you could show me how wrong I am by linking to sites showing Iranian attacks on the US.
So far this last year or so, the US has stuck a load of forces into the area but Iran has done nothing except shoot down some US drones that invaded heir airspace.

In fact, the Iranian government are idiots but the US is the attacking force.


----------



## Indofred (Jul 13, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-WdnqvAaNs]No Fly Zone: Iran shoots down US drone - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Indofred (Jul 13, 2012)

Perhaps posters can justify acts of war against that state.
You may not like them (I think their government are pillocks) but the US has no right to do anything unless attacked.


----------



## rhodescholar (Jul 13, 2012)

Indofred said:


> I'm sorry.The Iranians saved a US ship's arse.Perhaps you could show me how wrong I am by linking to sites showing Iranian attacks on the US.So far this last year or so, the US has stuck a load of forces into the area but Iran has done nothing except shoot down some US drones that invaded heir airspace.In fact, the Iranian government are idiots but the US is the attacking force.



Sonny boy, from the beirut marine barracks and embassy bombings in '83, the kidnapped personnel during the late 80s, the relentless terrorism/assasinations in europe during the 90s, and the use of proxy army/terror units like hezbollah, islamic jihad, etc., the attacks on kurds, they have been striking outside their borders for decades.

I don't give a shit whether their troops are in uniform or not - those are attacks as any rational person would accept.  Israel, as well as the US, has every justification to crush that fake regime today, if not 10-20 years ago.


----------



## ConzHateUSA (Jul 13, 2012)

Indofred said:


> Perhaps posters can justify acts of war against that state.
> You may not like them (I think their government are pillocks) but the US has no right to do anything unless attacked.



The VAST majority of the conz on here who want war with Iran or anyone else, are what we call

*C H I C K E N S H I T

C H I C K E N H A W K S*

WHO WOULD NEVER, not for one second, actually consider enlisting and fighting...

so thank God Obama is making these decisions and not some complete idiot racist like Willard


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 13, 2012)

Indofred said:


> rhodescholar said:
> 
> 
> > Indofred said:
> ...



Please, the US did the same thing for Iranian ships.


----------



## signelect (Jul 13, 2012)

I believe that we can engineer a small accident that would accure at one of Irans necular plant and just woops, you guys need to be more careful.  My second choice would be to turn one of oilfields into a radioactive waste land and see how much they can sell the oil for.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jul 13, 2012)

I am surprised I have seen no mention of the funding and training that Iran supplied to the so called freedom fighters in Iraq. You know those people who set off the IED's and attacked US forces in a dozen different ways...


----------



## Jos (Jul 13, 2012)

SFC Ollie said:


> I am surprised I have seen no mention of the funding and training that Iran supplied to the so called freedom fighters in Iraq. You know those people who set off the IED's and attacked US forces in a dozen different ways...



If there was any proof of what you claim, you would have found and posted a link, all on your own


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 13, 2012)

SFC Ollie said:


> I am surprised I have seen no mention of the funding and training that Iran supplied to the so called freedom fighters in Iraq. You know those people who set off the IED's and attacked US forces in a dozen different ways...



They are doing this in Afghanistan too.


----------



## geauxtohell (Jul 13, 2012)

elvis said:


> Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes' - Yahoo! News
> 
> 
> and up goes the rhetoric.



It would be considerably more difficult for them to hit those bases if they weren't there in the first place............


----------



## Liability (Jul 13, 2012)

geauxtohell said:


> elvis said:
> 
> 
> > Iran: We Can Hit 35 US Bases in 'Minutes' - Yahoo! News
> ...



But it seems wrong somehow to just vaporize all of Iran.


----------



## Liability (Jul 13, 2012)

I wonder if maybe Iran would have a field day over there if there were no U.S. presence in that region.


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 13, 2012)

Liability said:


> I wonder if maybe Iran would have a field day over there if there were no U.S. presence in that region.



Of course they would love it, they would try to fill in all those gaps.


----------



## Liability (Jul 13, 2012)

High_Gravity said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if maybe Iran would have a field day over there if there were no U.S. presence in that region.
> ...



Yeah.  I think that's probably pretty much the answer.


----------



## High_Gravity (Jul 13, 2012)

Liability said:


> High_Gravity said:
> 
> 
> > Liability said:
> ...



Without us in the way they will be the regional power besides Israel, the Arabs can't fuck with them.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jul 13, 2012)

The U.S. Navy is sending unmanned underwater craft to the Persian Gulf, for use in hunting and destroying mines, officials said.

The Los Angeles Times, citing U.S. officials it did not name, reported Wednesday the SeaFox submersibles -- equipped with TV cameras, homing sonar and explosive charges -- are part of a military buildup intended to keep Iran from following through on a threat to close the Strait of Hormuz. The route is a key part of the delivery system for international oil markets.

US Sends Mine Hunters to Persian Gulf | Military.com


----------



## Desperado (Jul 13, 2012)

Like every other article where the headlines proclaims that Iran is threatening to attack someone or somewhere, when you read further into the article you find that Iran only threatens to do it in retaliation for a first strike against them.  Seriously, they would have every right to strike back.


----------



## SFC Ollie (Jul 13, 2012)

Desperado said:


> Like every other article where the headlines proclaims that Iran is threatening to attack someone or somewhere, when you read further into the article you find that Iran only threatens to do it in retaliation for a first strike against them.  Seriously, they would have every right to strike back.



What part of Iran financing and training the fighters against us in Iraq is so difficult for you to understand?


----------



## ConzHateUSA (Jul 13, 2012)

get on your uniform, either go to iran and fight and die, or shut the fuck up you chickenshit chickenhawks


----------



## Peach (Jul 13, 2012)

Moonglow said:


> Iran's pres would be pissing his pants when the bunker busting smart bombs started dropping.



Saddam promised the 'mother of all wars" also.....


----------



## rhodescholar (Jul 13, 2012)

ConzHateUSA said:


> WHO WOULD NEVER, not for one second, actually consider enlisting and fighting...so thank God Obama is making these decisions and not some complete idiot racist like Willard



Shit for brains, i was in the army longer than you are alive.  Go back to your cesspool and take another drink, douchebag moron.

How many years did you serve, you fucking weak turd?


----------



## Hollie (Jul 13, 2012)

High_Gravity said:


> Liability said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if maybe Iran would have a field day over there if there were no U.S. presence in that region.
> ...



The real danger without a U.S. presence would be an angry and reactive sunni / salafi arab block that is terrified of the dreaded "shia triangle". 

For anyone not familiar with the blood-feud between theses two religious sects, they despise each other. They share ancient hatreds that date back to the death of islam's pope/king: muhammed and which tribe of hateful nutbars would rise to ascendancy.


----------



## Mr. President (Jul 15, 2012)

I just got back from the ME and we imprisoned many suspects who had their training in Iran as well as finances and equipment being provided from them.  By the way there is a large contingency force both personnel and equipment ready to react to any misguided moves from Iran.


----------

