IRAN: Latest and Breaking News

mack8 wrote:J-10 a flying brick?! Despite being a target of theirs yourself you really believe all the american propaganda about inferior chinese copycats and all those visceral lies? Your loss friend. The J-10 is an excellent, modern aircraft far more advanced than anything Iran has right now and if Iran gets even 24 of them would significantly boost the IRIAF's potential.

Well original J10A was supposedly comparable in performance to F16 Block 40 and i guess Iran would get J10B.

mack8 wrote:J-10 a flying brick?! Despite being a target of theirs yourself you really believe all the american propaganda about inferior chinese copycats and all those visceral lies? Your loss friend. The J-10 is an excellent, modern aircraft far more advanced than anything Iran has right now and if Iran gets even 24 of them would significantly boost the IRIAF's potential.

Well.... compared to su-30 and su-35 ,  j-10 is inferior

Since 2007, there have been rumors that Iran is interested in purchasing J-10 from China for orders numbering between 24 to 150 jets..... just rumors!

All I know is that the Iranian officials are very interested in  flanker-c   (as a multirole fighter replacing the aging phantom) and  Mitten advanced trainer( replacing the old tiger) and flanker-h  air superiority fighter(replacing the tomcat)

They deny any news about  buying j-10 from china but iran still needs  stealth fighter for her air force and We all know that China is building a new fighter for export J-31



Is there any possibility of russia selling pak-fa  to Iran? especially this one

No dude PAK-FA is only for Russia & India.

max steel wrote:No dude PAK-FA is only for Russia & India.

Pak FA will eventually get export variant, Russians said 3-4 years ago that they are planning to offer it first to Vietnam and Algeria since they are long standing partners in that area. Also PAK FA already was kinda indirectly offered to Brasil and South Korea for their future fighter base.

max steel wrote:No dude PAK-FA is only for Russia & India.

What about restarting the mig 1.44 project or Mikoyan LMFS?

Militarov wrote:

max steel wrote:No dude PAK-FA is only for Russia & India.

Pak FA will eventually get export variant.

I hope so...

ShahryarHedayatiSHBA wrote:

Militarov wrote:

max steel wrote:No dude PAK-FA is only for Russia & India.

Pak FA will eventually get export variant.

I hope so...

"Based on the forecast, the potential buyers of PAK FA are distributed between the following countries: Algeria (can purchase 24-36 fifth-generation fighters in the period of 2025-2030 years), Argentina (12-24 units in the years 2035-2040), Brazil (24 - 36 units in the years 2030-2035), Venezuela (24-36 units in the years 2027-2032), Vietnam (12-24 units in the years 2030-2035), Egypt (12-24 units in the years 2040-2045). Also, Indonesia (6-12 units in the years 2028-2032), Iran (36-48 units in the years 2035-2040), Kazakhstan (12-24 units in the years 2025-2035), China (up to 100 units in the years 2025-2035), Libya (12-24 units in the years 2025-2030), Malaysia (12-24 units in the years 2035-2040), and Syria (12-24 units in the years 2025-2030)." Pravda.ru is the source.

Militarov wrote:

ShahryarHedayatiSHBA wrote:

Militarov wrote:

max steel wrote:No dude PAK-FA is only for Russia & India.

Pak FA will eventually get export variant.

I hope so...

"Based on the forecast, the potential buyers of PAK FA are distributed between the following countries: Algeria (can purchase 24-36 fifth-generation fighters in the period of 2025-2030 years), Argentina (12-24 units in the years 2035-2040), Brazil (24 - 36 units in the years 2030-2035), Venezuela (24-36 units in the years 2027-2032), Vietnam (12-24 units in the years 2030-2035), Egypt (12-24 units in the years 2040-2045). Also, Indonesia (6-12 units in the years 2028-2032), Iran (36-48 units in the years 2035-2040), Kazakhstan (12-24 units in the years 2025-2035), China (up to 100 units in the years 2025-2035), Libya (12-24 units in the years 2025-2030), Malaysia (12-24 units in the years 2035-2040), and Syria (12-24 units in the years 2025-2030)." Pravda.ru is the source.

2040!

ShahryarHedayatiSHBA wrote:

Militarov wrote:

ShahryarHedayatiSHBA wrote:

Militarov wrote:

max steel wrote:No dude PAK-FA is only for Russia & India.

Pak FA will eventually get export variant.

I hope so...

"Based on the forecast, the potential buyers of PAK FA are distributed between the following countries: Algeria (can purchase 24-36 fifth-generation fighters in the period of 2025-2030 years), Argentina (12-24 units in the years 2035-2040), Brazil (24 - 36 units in the years 2030-2035), Venezuela (24-36 units in the years 2027-2032), Vietnam (12-24 units in the years 2030-2035), Egypt (12-24 units in the years 2040-2045). Also, Indonesia (6-12 units in the years 2028-2032), Iran (36-48 units in the years 2035-2040), Kazakhstan (12-24 units in the years 2025-2035), China (up to 100 units in the years 2025-2035), Libya (12-24 units in the years 2025-2030), Malaysia (12-24 units in the years 2035-2040), and Syria (12-24 units in the years 2025-2030)." Pravda.ru is the source.

2040!

Who would want a 25 year old design in 2040? There will be an Su-99 Flanker Z by then!

Iran’s majles will have final say on nuclear deal


'I think the drama will be bigger in my country than in yours,' Iran's speaker of majles (parliament) says.

Lawmakers’ approval of the deal, which would remove economic sanctions on Iran in return for restrictions on its nuclear program, isn’t assured in either country, though President Obama is expected to win Senate backing after securing the necessary votes on Wednesday. In Iran, some parliamentarians have also demanded a vote, a position apparently supported by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei earlier Thursday.

“It’s the representatives of the people who should decide,” Khamenei told Iran’s Assembly of Experts in Tehran, according to comments posted on his website. “I have no advice for parliament as to how they should assess it or whether they should approve or reject it.”

Khamenei has told President Hassan Rouhani that excluding parliament from the legal approval process “was not expedient,” according to his website. So far, Iranian government officials have said they plan to leave the decision to the Supreme National Security Council, which would then require Khamenei’s final approval.

Iran’s lawmakers will vote on the deal after its special committee completes its review in a few weeks, Larijani said. The likely outcome is unclear, he said, though he personally supports the agreement because it lifts sanctions while still allowing Iran to conduct limited uranium enrichment.

The provision for sanctions to be reimposed in the future is one of the “major and serious faults” that some Iranians have found with the agreement, Larijani said.

“That’s why I said the U.S. continued to play the role of bully even when we were negotiating,” he said. “But as I said, overall it was a good deal because Iran also achieved some of its goals.”

Khamenei said earlier there would be “no deal” if the agreement does not result in the complete lifting of sanctions. If sanctions are only temporarily lifted, Iran will in turn only suspend its nuclear activities rather than carry out the “fundamental measures” outlined in the deal, Khamenei said.

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940704000917

Well, I think I was right about Iran. I think that they used Russia. Now they are trying to really bolster ties with Russia's well known enemy, Poland.

Sad and pathetic. I think the Russians and Chinese should have known better. They both defended Iran to the upmost in the negotiations and this is how Iran pays Russia back?

You wish that was the case. And these Pollock's and the French, Spaniards, Austrians.......you name it are all queuing up steadily in a bee line to do business with Iran.  Poland is a new comer to this frenzy. They have sweet fuck all to offer compared to the others.

From all angles, Iran/ Russia/ China are the core of the axis of resistance. This won't change, no matter what. And FYI, both Russia and China struggled to get Iran off the shit list. It is these two who will benefit the most after sanctions are lifted.

sepheronx wrote:http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940704000917

Well, I think I was right about Iran.  I think that they used Russia.  Now they are trying to really bolster ties with Russia's well known enemy, Poland.

Sad and pathetic.  I think the Russians and Chinese should have known better.  They both defended Iran to the upmost in the negotiations and this is how Iran pays Russia back?

http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151007/1028168569/iran-khamenei-negotiations-us.html

Waves of Change: Iran Expects Flood of Tourists After Lifting of Sanctions

The moderate policy of the country’s president as well as the easing of visa restrictions will facilitate the return of tourists to Iran.

Iran is a country full of historical and cultural sites and has a lot to offer in terms of tourism. The country has 19 registered UNESCO cultural heritage sites.

Its historic heritage has long attracted people worldwide and the lifting of the sanctions imposed by the US and the EU will definitely make Iran a favorite tourist destination once again, Iranian Vice President Masoud Soltanifar said.

"In the post-sanctions era, tourism is an industry that will get a boost more than any other sector," Soltanifar said in an interview with the AP, adding that his country is preparing for a "tsunami" of foreign tourists.

The politician argued that the influx of tourists would help country out of economic decline and would make it more attractive for foreign investors.

Over the past two years, even before the abolition of the sanctions, the number of foreign tourists increased by 12%. Half of the foreigners visiting the country are Shiite Muslims, the other half are tourists from Europe, North America and East Asia.

Iranian officials are currently trying to simplify the procedure for obtaining a visa to the country. For citizens of 190 countries, tourist visas can be issued at the airport upon arrival in Tehran. The document gives tourists the right to stay in Iran for 30 days, and can later be extended for another 15 days. The authorities plan to introduce electronic visas in early 201

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20151019/1028770377/waves-change-iran-tourists-sanctions.html#ixzz3p33GseeJ

Iran Closing Technology Gap With Israel, Military Intelligence Chief Warns


Haaretz Israeli News Source
The Military Intelligence chief said Israel and Iran are engaged in a technology war in which the Islamic Republic is rapidly narrowing the quality gap.

Maj. Gen. Herzl Halevi, speaking at a closed lecture Thursday, added that if the anxiety generated by the videos of Palestinians stabbing Israelis on social media had existed in 1948, Israel would not have won the War of Independence.
He also revealed that recently, MI abandoned an operation at the last minute because of a letter the corps received from a low-ranking officer in its 8200 signals intelligence unit.
Halevi was speaking to a few dozen donors and faculty members of the College of Management at the Rothchild Bank in Tel Aviv. It was an uncharacteristic appearance for Halevi, who in the year since he succeeded Aviv Kochavi has maintained a low profile.
The general did not give a detailed intelligence assessment but delivered remarks that had never been made in public by a top officer in the Israel Defense Forces.
“If you ask me whether we’ll have a war with Iran over the next 10 years, I’ll give you a surprising answer: We are already at war with Iran,” Halevi said. “We’re having a technological war with Iran. Our engineers are fighting Iranian engineers, today, and it’s becoming increasingly significant.”

The war, he said, was over intelligence, weapons and military capabilities, and Halevi was pessimistic. “Today we have the advantage. Iran is closing in on it. Since the 1979 revolution, the number of universities and university students in Iran has increased twentyfold, compared with three and a half times for Israel,” Halevi said, adding that enrollment in science, technology, engineering and math in Iran was skyrocketing.
Halevi touched on the current wave of terror attacks and the difference between the country’s past wars, conducted mainly in border areas, and today’s wars, in which the home front suffers many casualties.
“The next war will be much worse for the home front,” Halevi said. “In the Yom Kippur War there was one home-front casualty; a FROG missile struck the pilots’ quarters of the Ramat David air base. It was the only casualty on the home front. All the rest were military.”
He said a main issue in today’s wars was awareness. “It’s not about how many you killed and how many the other side killed, and it’s not about how far you got and where you planted your flag. It’s about the story that the war tells,” he said.
“All of us, including me and each of you, have for the past month been brainwashing ourselves when we watch those stabbing videos over and over, creating a level of anxiety that, had everyone in the War of Independence been watching the videos of Latrun, San Simon or Nitzanim, it’s not sure we would have been able to keep going.”
Halevi said it was much harder for MI to develop and retain intelligence sources today than a decade or two ago due to rapid technological change. “The same kilogram of intelligence costs much more than it did 10 years ago. Not only does it cost more, its expiration date is significantly sooner,” he said.
“Twenty years ago you had an intelligence accomplishment and you were set for the next five to seven years. Today you might have worked really hard, risking people’s lives, carrying out all sorts of maneuvers. You got something, but with the speed at which our world operates and the speed at which technology changes,” the expiry time declines.
To illustrate this point, the MI chief described efforts to collect intelligence about the Islamic State. He encouraged his audience to not be fooled by the dreadlocks and traditional robes of ISIS operatives. “They use the most cutting-edge technology,” he said. “It’s not carrier pigeons, it’s the most advanced communication systems, with the best encryption on top of that. It changes every couple of days.”
He said MI’s organizational culture was such that even soldiers and junior officers could have great influence. “We faced a dilemma over whether to carry out a particular operation in a particular place. It was about to go up to the chief of staff for a decision, and we needed to decide whether to do it or not,” he said.
“An officer enters my office and says, ‘Listen, I want you to read this, it’s a letter from a first lieutenant, a network intelligence officer at a Unit 8200 base.’ He’s a first lieutenant. He writes a letter to the Unit 8200 commander and to the head of MI: ‘Listen, I think you’re making a mistake,’” Halevi said.
“It's just five minutes before decision time. I might not have read the letter if it arrived one minute later, before the talk with the chief of staff. That’s the ability of people to make an impact at the most critical second of decision-making.”
Halevi defended the standing army against recent criticism about the size of the defense budget. “There’s a bit of an atmosphere in the country today — maybe you don’t think so — but the officers feel that’s it not so positive toward the army,” he said.
“I think this is dangerous. I think it comes a bit from the place of the budget. Officers tell me strangers sometimes stop them on the street saying we’re the problem of the Israeli economy. I’d be cautious. It’s better that the best people are involved — in security in general and intelligence in particular.”
Halevi said he even feared the elimination of mandatory military service in Israel. “The quiet depends on our being strong, and my fear is that we will end the model of a people’s army, and then the IDF won’t accept all of Israeli youth into its ranks and won’t take advantage of the best people,” he said.
“If we change the model of the people’s army, then in the first two or three years inertia will keep us going, but after that the entire defense establishment will be damaged to the point of damage to the state’s security.”

Iran Closing Technology Gap With Israel, Military Intelligence Chief Warns - Israel News - Israel News - Haaretz Israeli News Source

Iran Dismisses Allegations on Assisting Taliban



TEHRAN (FNA)- An expert at the Iranian foreign ministry rejected allegations about the country on assisting the Taliban extremist group.
"Such claims are unreal," the expert on West Asia affairs said on Wednesday in reaction to allegations raised by a security official in Afghanistan's Farah province on Iran's assistance to the Taliban.

Stressing Tehran's constructive role in Afghanistan, he said, "The Islamic Republic of Iran has always pursued the approach of supporting peace and stability in Afghanistan and this well shows the country's strategy of fighting against extremism and violence."

Iranian officials have always underlined full support for the establishment of sustainable peace and security in Afghanistan.

In relevant remarks in September, Iran's Ambassador to the United Nations in New York Gholam Ali Khoshrou underlined Tehran's determination to do its best to promote peace and tranquility in neighboring Afghanistan.

"Iran continues its full support for the promotion of security, stability and comprehensive and sustainable development in Afghanistan since we consider the security in Afghanistan to be the security of our borders and the Region," Khoshrou said in a statement presented to the UN Security Council (UNSC) on the situation in Afghanistan.

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940827000472

ShahryarHedayatiSHBA wrote:Iran Dismisses Allegations on Assisting Taliban



TEHRAN (FNA)- An expert at the Iranian foreign ministry rejected allegations about the country on assisting the Taliban extremist group.
"Such claims are unreal," the expert on West Asia affairs said on Wednesday in reaction to allegations raised by a security official in Afghanistan's Farah province on Iran's assistance to the Taliban.

Stressing Tehran's constructive role in Afghanistan, he said, "The Islamic Republic of Iran has always pursued the approach of supporting peace and stability in Afghanistan and this well shows the country's strategy of fighting against extremism and violence."

Iranian officials have always underlined full support for the establishment of sustainable peace and security in Afghanistan.

In relevant remarks in September, Iran's Ambassador to the United Nations in New York Gholam Ali Khoshrou underlined Tehran's determination to do its best to promote peace and tranquility in neighboring Afghanistan.

"Iran continues its full support for the promotion of security, stability and comprehensive and sustainable development in Afghanistan since we consider the security in Afghanistan to be the security of our borders and the Region," Khoshrou said in a statement presented to the UN Security Council (UNSC) on the situation in Afghanistan.

http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940827000472

Actually Iran might be arming the Hazaras since they're being killed left and right by both sides.

Russia may produce Sukhoi Superjets in Iran




Russia says it is negotiating with Iran over the local production of its Sukhoi Superjets.
Russian officials say the country is negotiating with Iran over the local production of the Sukhoi Superjet 100 (SSJ 100) airliner to replace the ageing Iranian fleet on regional routes.

Russia’s Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin says Moscow may deliver a large batch of SSJ 100 planes – described as the country’s most modern commercial jets – to Iran before 2020.

Rogozin told the Russian media that the batch could comprise about 100 planes.

The planes can be in part be localized by Iranian producers if Tehran makes the political decision to purchase ready-made aircraft, he told Rossiya 24 TV during a two-day trip to Iran.

"Last night, one of the largest Iranian airlines held negotiations with UAC on the possible delivery of ready planes within five years. Different digits have been mentioned and I can mention them too - approximately 100 planes," Rogozin added.

Iran has a shortage of modern aircraft due to the long running sanctions imposed by the West. Local airlines are looking for reliable regional jets to fly domestic routes. The SSJ 100 might be a match for Iran’s needs, with additional options to come along with the prospective deal, RT reported on its website.

"If Tehran agrees to purchase the Superjet, we will discuss partial localization of production in Iran," RT has quoted Rogozin as telling Russia’s TASS news agency.

Sukhoi Superjet 100 is Russia’s newest twin-engine regional passenger aircraft which began operating commercially in 2011. More than 60 aircraft are in service with airlines in Laos, Mexico, and Russia.

Last month, France-KLM's CityJet signed a deal with Sukhoi to purchase 15 SSJ 100 planes worth over $1 billion. Sukhoi has also sold three SSJ 100s to Thailand and one to Kazakhstan.

According to Minister of Roads and Urban Development Abbas Akhundi, Iran will need to buy 400 long- and medium-haul jets and at least 100 planes for use in local airports at a cost of $50 billion.

PressTV-Russia may produce Sukhoi Superjets in Iran

This would be good news for both Russian and Iran.

Russia could use solid sales of commercial aircraft and Iran could use good reliable cheap airliners that are sanction proof...

Russian President Vladimir Putin has signed a decree lifting the ban on supplying Iran with uranium enrichment equipment. It is linked to Russia importing enriched uranium from Iran, according to the official government website. The Russian President is visiting Tehran to take part in Gas Exporting Countries Forum summit, and is holding talks on Monday with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and the country's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

The decision to export low-enriched uranium from Iran to Russia was reached in the framework of the agreement between Iran and the six international mediators in July. According to the deal, Tehran must get rid of 98 percent of its enriched uranium. Iran also agreed not to enrich uranium by more than 3.67 percent for 15 years and to possess no more than 300 kilograms of the material."

Copy of the document: http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001201511230027?index=0&rangeSize=1

Source: https://www.rt.com/business/323072-putin-iran-uranium-import/

Iranian Rocket Splashes Down Near US Aircraft Carrier In Straits Of Hormuz

An Iranian rocket landed just 1,500 yards off the starboard side of the the Nimitz Class super carrier USS Harry S. Truman during its recent transit through the Straits of Hormuz, serving as another reminder of how easily things in the Persian Gulf could go from a tense calm to a shooting war with Iran.

The carrier, along with the cruiser USS Buckley and a French frigate, were nearing the end of their transit through the straits when suddenly the Iranian Revolutionary Guards came on the radio saying they were executing a small boat rocket firing exercise. The aircraft carrier and escorts had no time to deviate from their course. Even if they had, there is little room in the narrow and crowded Strait for evasive action.

If that rocket were to have struck the carrier, it could have set off a chain reaction of explosions on its deck. Even if it were to have impacted the ship’s island or areas of its hull it could have resulted in the loss of life and would have almost certainly resulted in retaliation.

NBC News reports that officials were quick to downplay the event, saying that the rocket was not fired at the carrier, only near it, and then goes on to say that the move was an unnecessary provocation and unsafe.

It is unclear exactly what the rules of engagement are under these types of circumstances, although being fired upon should clearly be grounds for return fire. It is likely that the commander made the call not to react at the time, although this call may have not been a clear one to make. It all depends on where the fast-boat was when it launched the rocket in relation to the carrier and the path rocket traveled before landing in the water.

Another unanswered question is what were the state of the ship’s close-in defenses at the time of the launch. 1500 meters is well within their reach, it just depends on what mode they were in (if they were activated at all) and what the trajectory of the missile was.

In the end it is a good thing we are not currently at war with Iran over a rocket that fell into the sea—but the question remains: what was the Revolutionary Guard’s aim with executing such a provocative act? Sure it was a reminder of how vulnerable America’s ships can be while passing through the “fatal funnel” that is the Straits of Hormuz, but is sending a reminder worth the possibility of a shooting war?

The Straits of Hormuz has long been one of the world’s most notorious hot spots. Just last May, U.S. Navy ships had to escort American flagged vessels through the Straits of Hormuz after Iranian gunboats seized the Maersk Tigris. Since then the area has been relatively quiet.

It is no secret that the Iranian military detests American aircraft carriers operating in the Gulf, and has built an extensive battle doctrine around attacking one. Maybe the Iranian leadership has now decided that the Obama Administration has too much at stake in the region, especially in regards to the Iranian nuclear deal, and will be unwilling to risk a confrontation due to harassment by IRGC forces.

These types of incidents are known to work as something of a pressure-valve for keeping hardliners in the Iranian government and military satisfied, even while Iran has openly engaged in dialogue with the U.S. at the same time. It could also be a sign of something much more sinister. Either way, this single rocket may be the beginning of increased harassment by Iranian vessels operating in and around the straits.

The USS Harry S. Truman has since made its way safely to its station in the Persian Gulf alongside the French carrier Charles De Gaulle and has begun executing airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

Solncepek wrote:Iranian Rocket Splashes Down Near US Aircraft Carrier In Straits Of Hormuz

An Iranian rocket landed just 1,500 yards off the starboard side of the the Nimitz Class super carrier USS Harry S. Truman during its recent transit through the Straits of Hormuz, serving as another reminder of how easily things in the Persian Gulf could go from a tense calm to a shooting war with Iran.

The carrier, along with the cruiser USS Buckley and a French frigate, were nearing the end of their transit through the straits when suddenly the Iranian Revolutionary Guards came on the radio saying they were executing a small boat rocket firing exercise. The aircraft carrier and escorts had no time to deviate from their course. Even if they had, there is little room in the narrow and crowded Strait for evasive action.

If that rocket were to have struck the carrier, it could have set off a chain reaction of explosions on its deck. Even if it were to have impacted the ship’s island or areas of its hull it could have resulted in the loss of life and would have almost certainly resulted in retaliation.

NBC News reports that officials were quick to downplay the event, saying that the rocket was not fired at the carrier, only near it, and then goes on to say that the move was an unnecessary provocation and unsafe.

It is unclear exactly what the rules of engagement are under these types of circumstances, although being fired upon should clearly be grounds for return fire. It is likely that the commander made the call not to react at the time, although this call may have not been a clear one to make. It all depends on where the fast-boat was when it launched the rocket in relation to the carrier and the path rocket traveled before landing in the water.

Another unanswered question is what were the state of the ship’s close-in defenses at the time of the launch. 1500 meters is well within their reach, it just depends on what mode they were in (if they were activated at all) and what the trajectory of the missile was.

In the end it is a good thing we are not currently at war with Iran over a rocket that fell into the sea—but the question remains: what was the Revolutionary Guard’s aim with executing such a provocative act? Sure it was a reminder of how vulnerable America’s ships can be while passing through the “fatal funnel” that is the Straits of Hormuz, but is sending a reminder worth the possibility of a shooting war?

The Straits of Hormuz has long been one of the world’s most notorious hot spots. Just last May, U.S. Navy ships had to escort American flagged vessels through the Straits of Hormuz after Iranian gunboats seized the Maersk Tigris. Since then the area has been relatively quiet.

It is no secret that the Iranian military detests American aircraft carriers operating in the Gulf, and has built an extensive battle doctrine around attacking one. Maybe the Iranian leadership has now decided that the Obama Administration has too much at stake in the region, especially in regards to the Iranian nuclear deal, and will be unwilling to risk a confrontation due to harassment by IRGC forces.

These types of incidents are known to work as something of a pressure-valve for keeping hardliners in the Iranian government and military satisfied, even while Iran has openly engaged in dialogue with the U.S. at the same time. It could also be a sign of something much more sinister. Either way, this single rocket may be the beginning of increased harassment by Iranian vessels operating in and around the straits.

The USS Harry S. Truman has since made its way safely to its station in the Persian Gulf alongside the French carrier Charles De Gaulle and has begun executing airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

What a bunch of morons. What if the rocket had deviated from its course and smashed into a US Navy ship in international waters? What then?

Here’s an update on the “Iran Fires Rockets 1,500 Yards Away From A US Aircraft Carrier” article.


“Iran’s IRGC categorically denies conducting any military exercises, including a launch of any rockets in the Strait of Hormuz, on or around the date claimed by the American propaganda machine.”


Someone is definitely lying here, but who?


An aircraft carrier and its large number of escorts are all equipped with cameras recording their surroundings 24/7 and none of them captured the rocket launch?


Is it possible that the “unnamed U.S. military official” mistook a flare, a single firework, or his own fart for the “firing off several unguided rockets”?

What a bunch of morons. What if the rocket had deviated from its course and smashed into a US Navy ship in international waters? What then?

I believe based on the results of the last incident in the region if an Iranian missile hit a US warship that standard procedure should be for the captain of the Iranian ship responsible to get a medal along with his weapons officer... for the Iranian government to claim it was all Americas fault and claim to be the victim in all this.

10 U.S. sailors in Iranian custody

Washington (CNN)Ten American sailors were being held in Iranian custody after two small U.S. naval craft apparently briefly entered Iranian territorial waters, a U.S. senior defense official said Tuesday.

The official, however, expects the situation to be resolved quickly. A senior administration official said there is nothing to indicate this was anything hostile on the part of any entity in Iran, adding that the U.S. has received high-level assurances that the sailors will be released promptly.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/01/12/politics/10-u-s-sailors-in-iranian-custody/