Blogger won’t let me comment on my own blog…typical difficulty.
So I’ll comment here.
WSF – We can blockade the Basra area with naval mines that are exceptionally difficult to sweep and can sink ships or shoot down helicopters that try. Commercial insurance rates and coverage will keep tankers from running the blockade. I’m not sure that’s the right move at this point, but it chokes off their revenue from oil sales.
As to Feinstein and Obama, the word traitor naturally comes to mind. With his ‘legacy’ in tatters, Barack may be working to undermine the president in the hopes of building a new legacy of skulduggery. If Congress should declare war (don’t hold your breath), he might find himself on the wrong end of a rope. Of course, the left would call it racist…
Ed – Iran is claiming the shoot-down. They hope to whip their angry population into a patriotic froth, and turn their fury from the beards to the Great Satan. At this point, I think that they’ve miscalculated.
Jim – Unless I miss my guess, we’re drowning Iran with white noise and jamming. It serves to blind them, increase their anxiety, etc. Just like President Trump’s ‘abortive attack’. PSYOPS. Keep them guessing.
LSP – The US has a LOT of options available and my sense is that they’re all on the table as we formulate the most effective response. I’m sure that invasion is very low on the list. It doesn’t accomplish much. Rods from God delivered to Qom, may deliver the desire martyrdom…except that the beards don’t want to be eliminated. They can’t get loaded and rape teenage boys if they’re vaporized.
VALUISM – John, we need to work this so that it backfires on the turbans. Let the public see who is running things, and let the world grow a spine. I know, not much chance of that.
I think Iran's population doesn't have the gumption, not to mention the firepower, to topple the mullahs: for better or worse, thick or thin, they are stuck with these religious fanatics. Look at Cuba: they have had a God awful economy since 1959, most of them hate the Castros, but are powerless to do anything about it.
Unless someone outside the country removes the mullahs from power, this will the way things will be. I wonder who could possibly do that?
Fredd certainly has a point and while I'm no expert, I'd say that 45 was wise in this latest face-off.
Speaking of rods, I'd imagine we might want to test some of those hypersonic critters.
Every article I see says, like CNN "Iran's Revolutionary Guard said it had shot down an 'intruding American spy drone' after it entered into the country's territory Thursday."
The IRCG is doing the talking. They are not mullahs, et al.
I suspect the IRCG did this trying to force the regime to follow. They may be the rogue element in a rogue regime.
I'm no expert on Iran, but the IRGC reminds me a bit of the Japanese Kwantung Army in the 1930s. It doesn't appear to be entirely under the control of the civilian government, and may drag the country in directions it doesn't necessarily want to go.
At least, sometimes it may do so.
It's also of note that Iran's "final option" of closing the Straits hurts the US very little, and hurts Iran and the PRC a great amount.
Win-win!
-Kle.
Quite possible.
However the same could have been said about the Shah, and look how that turned out.
-Kle.
That was my point also Larry.
It looks to me like the Administration is looking for ways to hurt Iran without traditional weapons. For example, there is a Wired story out today about US use of cyberweapons to hurt their missile systems; it was claimed to be something it will take a while to recover from.
I think the most our response should be is a few bombs or cruise missiles. If the Admin is looking at unconventional responses that use our strengths, that is a good thing – Iran has used unconventional means to hit us; I think it is best to respond in unconventional ways, particularly in ways that hurt those who actually carried out he attacks, both the Global Hawk shootdown and the tanker attacks.
Comments are closed.