Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!
The World Affairs Board is the premier forum for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include military and defense developments, international terrorism, insurgency & COIN doctrine, international security and policing, weapons proliferation, and military technological development.
Our membership includes many from military, defense, academic, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Made of barges and sheet metal and she still kicked their asses.
It's always amusing to see rhetoric meet with rhetoric. IRGCN finally grabbing their gonads and deciding to use the damn replica, and Fox news trying to turn it into something bigger than what it really is.
I would simply thank them for the most helpful demonstration.
Looks to me like some in power are trying to build perception of a stronger position (real or imagined) from which to negotiate with the US, and also from which to negotiate with their internal political opposition who might prefer to have nuclear weapons.
It's always amusing to see rhetoric meet with rhetoric. IRGCN finally grabbing their gonads and deciding to use the damn replica, and Fox news trying to turn it into something bigger than what it really is.
I would simply thank them for the most helpful demonstration.
A truly funny piece of TV all round. Apparently America can't negotiate with people who sink pretend ships.
Yah, maybe Iran is such a paper tiger KSA, Jordan, Egypt, Qatar, UAE and Israel are all just being cry babies. And, oh yeah......remind me again about that other country called Yemen?
Looks to me like some in power are trying to build perception of a stronger position (real or imagined) from which to negotiate with the US, and also from which to negotiate with their internal political opposition who might prefer to have nuclear weapons.
Agree with the underlined bit. For them any agreement with the US means Iran is weak.
if there is any agreement then they will say its a bad agreement. same on the other side.
But the hawks have been sidelined for now anyway.
They don't hog the limelight as much as they used to
Agree with the underlined bit. For them any agreement with the US means Iran is weak.
if there is any agreement then they will say its a bad agreement. same on the other side.
But the hawks have been sidelined for now anyway.
They don't hog the limelight as much as they used to
That's an interesting point of view. If those in Iran advocating the building of nuclear as a defense against American aircraft carriers can be convinced that a carrier can be defeated by means already possessed by Iran, maybe their support will weaken. That would imply though that the people behind the building of the mock carrier would also be those not in favor of nuclear weapons and it was clearly the IRGCN that was involved in the exercise since they are charged with enforcing Iran's policies in the Gulf. I'm sure what Iran does makes sense from some angle, but I'm not sure what it is. I'd have guessed that the fake carrier was to test a weapon designed to be able to distinguish between a carrier and other vessels on it's own. Were any long range weapons launched at this that anyone is aware of?
That's an interesting point of view. If those in Iran advocating the building of nuclear as a defense against American aircraft carriers can be convinced that a carrier can be defeated by means already possessed by Iran, maybe their support will weaken. That would imply though that the people behind the building of the mock carrier would also be those not in favor of nuclear weapons and it was clearly the IRGCN that was involved in the exercise since they are charged with enforcing Iran's policies in the Gulf. I'm sure what Iran does makes sense from some angle, but I'm not sure what it is. I'd have guessed that the fake carrier was to test a weapon designed to be able to distinguish between a carrier and other vessels on it's own. Were any long range weapons launched at this that anyone is aware of?
I read a NYT article saying that the man's voice in the video is calling the missile the FATEH 110. But, at the beginning you can see that the carrier is pointed bow towards coast. The supposed "FATEH" comes in, sea-skimming, on the starboard side. The previous images Iran released of the FATEH 110 come from overhead, and they're shore-fired, which lead me to assess this missile as a common C-802, possibly the indigenous upgrade.
And yes, this was all IRGCN. They operate mostly small boats in the SOH/AG.
I read a NYT article saying that the man's voice in the video is calling the missile the FATEH 110. But, at the beginning you can see that the carrier is pointed bow towards coast. The supposed "FATEH" comes in, sea-skimming, on the starboard side. The previous images Iran released of the FATEH 110 come from overhead, and they're shore-fired, which lead me to assess this missile as a common C-802, possibly the indigenous upgrade.
And yes, this was all IRGCN. They operate mostly small boats in the SOH/AG.
As has been their MO since the Revolution. Running gunfights were de rigueur during the so called "tanker wars," and great fun it was too.
As has been their MO since the Revolution. Running gunfights were de rigueur during the so called "tanker wars," and great fun it was too.
Well, since you mention the IRIN...and the "tanker wars."
On our last deployment we pulled into Salalah a day after the SABALAN...
They were literally on the pier perpendicular to ours , no more than a 1/8mi away.We were seeing their sailors out in town. Oh how the times have changed!
It reminded me of Wayne's World when they are playing hockey in the street: "Game off! Game on!"
That's an interesting point of view. If those in Iran advocating the building of nuclear as a defense against American aircraft carriers can be convinced that a carrier can be defeated by means already possessed by Iran, maybe their support will weaken. That would imply though that the people behind the building of the mock carrier would also be those not in favor of nuclear weapons and it was clearly the IRGCN that was involved in the exercise since they are charged with enforcing Iran's policies in the Gulf. I'm sure what Iran does makes sense from some angle, but I'm not sure what it is. I'd have guessed that the fake carrier was to test a weapon designed to be able to distinguish between a carrier and other vessels on it's own. Were any long range weapons launched at this that anyone is aware of?
I do not know the connection between nuclear and taking on a cv.
I'm referring solely to whether they are allow to enrich and what the terms would be. Earlier it was out of the question but things seem to have become more flexible of late. Both sides seem to be quiet which is a good sign.
Comment