It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Panetta: U.S. will respond if Iran closes Strait of Hormuz

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
english.alarabiya.net...


The United States will respond if Iran tries to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz at the entrance to the Gulf, U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned Sunday, saying his country will still have the strongest army in the world despite a recent decision to slash military spending.

“We made very clear that the United States will not tolerate the blocking of the Straits of Hormuz,” Panetta told CBS television. “That’s another red line for us and that we will respond to them.”


Can you hear that? It's the sound of war drums and they are beating loudly. The U.S. government is hell bent on destroying Iran. They will not rest until they have started the "mother of all wars."

I don't get worked up about much but this situation is becoming dire and I am becoming very, very concerned about it. I fear for the future of our civilization. This may very well be the year we destroy ourselves. Let's hope cooler heads prevail.


edit on 8-1-2012 by IamAbeliever because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Iran will only hurt themselves by attempting to close straight. Over half of their GDP comes from oil exports through there... Very good overview of the situation on Fareed Zacharia GPS in CNN today.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 02:39 PM
link   
Strait of Hormuz is important for all neighboring countries for export and import. It doesn't take a conspiracy to see that if Iran closes it then it would be in everyones best interest if the U.S. tears Iran a new one. Iran would be alienating itself from its neighbors by cutting off trade routes.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by IamAbeliever
 


well if they do black the straight I'm confident oil will surge so do you suggest we not react militarily or do you suggest we apply more sanctions? What would you suggest?



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by IamAbeliever
 


Like your avatar. However, I think you should be more concerned about how China still has its military occupying Tibet. China is the true threat to world peace. Tibet is a peaceful nation that was brutally invaded by the Chinese. It is Iran that is beating loud the drums of war. They have stated that they will attempt to close the Straits; America will respond. Its Iran's choice if it closes the Straits then it will face the consequences. Just as a side note, the removal of the Mad Mullahs from power would more or less stabilize the Middle East. Radical Islam must be called-out for the cancer that it is. Iran's leaders are pure evil. Radical Islam fosters intolerance and discrimination and appeals to people that have lower than average intelligence. For example, do you remember when Mullah Omar,of Taliban fame,decided it would be a good idea to destroy two Buddhist statues in Afghanistan? If you really believe in your avatar you should be protesting against radical Islam, not America's response to it.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
reply to post by irontyrant
 


It is war that i protest. Regardless of the religion, the killing of anything, by anyone, has got to stop.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:12 PM
link   
This game the boneheads are playing is dumb.....Its all push push stuff....power tripping.....The carrot is better than a stick but the fools think its cheaper with the stick.....
IT AINT!
The Iraq war was a perfect example....
If we had say flew over Iraq, and dropped one tenth as much ready cash on them, they would have been friends forever....without a shot being fired.....
Gads what idiots the gov boys are.....



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Of course the US will respond, but what i'm interested in is how China will respond. I wonder if they would cut ties with Iranian oil or back them up if the US responds, i know China's navy isn't as big as Russia's or the US but it would be interesting to see what they do.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   
reply to post by destinedkid17
 


I think China has been showing a systematic effort over the last 10-15 years of cornering where possible but getting deep into markets everywhere for minerals, oil, gas and rare earths. I'd bet my paycheck that China will back Iran before Iran would actually see defeat. They may not show their hand until it's well underway, but out of pure self interest of dictating oil contracts after they 'save' Iran, I see them coming in on their side. It looks like we'll actually get to see.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by destinedkid17
 


American trade is far more important to the Chinese than any Iranian ties.america has the power to cripple china.they could get most of Europe to cut off trades and every other country in the west.so what we might suffer for a while too but it is probably best to make our own tvs and what ever else china trade.most eu country's could support them self food wise anyway.by trading amongst each other.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
Why wouldn't the US and the West in general not respond if they did this? Iran is playing a dangerous game of chicken with us and we won't blink, and that will be to all our detriments.

If airstrikes happen, there will be retaliation. This conflict won't be asymmetrical, to start anyway and air warfare isn't going to end it if it does go hot. It will require personal on the ground if it kicks off.

Iran. Your leaders are playing a dangerous game that no one can win.
edit on 8-1-2012 by GAOTU789 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
"America will respond"....? What with, an angry email? Why don't these people ever say what they mean.

What he really means is - if you closes the Strait we will OPEN A CAN OF WHOOP ASS ON YA.

(Stone Cold Steve Austin would be a great Secretary of Defense, IMO)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Sure. why not...We got plenty of missles and drones and we haven't killed anyone in a few days..



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 03:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by GAOTU789
Why wouldn't the US and the West in general not respond if they did this? Iran is playing a dangerous game of chicken with us and we won't blink, and that will be to all our detriments.

If airstrikes happen, there will be retaliation. This conflict won't be asymmetrical, to start anyway and air warfare isn't going to end it if it does go hot. It will require personal on the ground if it kicks off.

Iran. Your leaders are playing a dangerous game that no one can win.
edit on 8-1-2012 by GAOTU789 because: (no reason given)

You know, the scary thing is that it's both sides pushing with all their might. Iran is pushing with threats like closing the straight and building processing centers in Africa for nuke fuel but what is it when the U.S. makes a 'virutal embassy' specifically to circumvent the controls of the legitimate government and encourage their people to revolt?

I'm not saying I necessarily disagree with Embassy concept, but it's pushing and doing it pretty hard. So is a joint exercise with Israel of ALL the nations...right in the Persian Gulf. Both Bush's AND Clinton bent over backwards and almost fell over themselves keeping Israel OUT of everything because they could so easily add explosive emotion to any situation over there.

If these national leaders want to kill each other so badly, I say Obama sends his SEALs and Ahmadinejad send his Al Quds commandos while both populations sit back, ALIVE, to see which leader wins. There is no argument to justify what we may be about to do to the Iranian people.....or....despite some people thinking it can never happen, what IRAN may be about to do to US once a full war is in swing. Let these men kill each other, not thousands who never wanted their war.

edit on 8-1-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


This is where China has deceived you. You are correct about their positioning themselves in markets. Iran is ancillary to their goals, it is far from China's borders and is closer to India's sphere of power which would make it more difficult for China to exert its power. China does not have the naval power to protect shipping lanes. China is an economic superpower but that's it. Its navy is severely outmatched by any Western nation. China needs Siberia's resources,which are right along its border. China does have a sizable Army and a relatively modern Air Force, albeit one with a tactical rather than strategic basis, this makes it easier for them to reach their goals by invading Russia and not getting spanked by siding with Iran against most of the Western world. Yes, China will speak out in support of Iran, and will supply them militarily but beyond that you will not see much Chinese involvement. Besides, I do not think Iran will benefit much from Chinese military equipment..," Made in China" has a negative connotation for a reason.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by FOXMULDER147
 

Lol!

"If you want the good old US of A to smash Iran back to the stone age give me a hell yeah!!"

Seriously though, I think for now this Is all sabre rattling, sorry but did Iran say they "might" close the straight or they will If more sanctions are put on them?

As for Russia and China, people still don't seem to understand that the Elites won't allow that to happen, not yet anyway, that Is the mother of all wars which will complete their 80% population cut

Iran Is the road to that, but Its at least 5 years away.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Zakka
 


Back to the stone age? Iran's Mullahs have clearly never left it. Iran could conceivably be allowed to have nukes if the Mullahs and their neanderthal followers were driven from power and excised from the gene pool; which they are doing themselves by getting other even more unsophisticated people to strap bombs on themselves and going boom.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by irontyrant
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 

China does not have the naval power to protect shipping lanes. China is an economic superpower but that's it. Its navy is severely outmatched by any Western nation.


I really have to disagree with you on this one. It's a habit we, as the Western nations, are really getting into and it's going to be the end of us. I agree that as it sits, today, the U.S. Navy spanks China in blue water, every time. I'd also note here though, China has been exerting great effort at classes of weapons to sink our primary capital ship, the Aircraft Carriers. Now if we lost a few or had them off line (all but 3 are in off-line work/main't cycles or in port right now, actually) then we're suddenly looking at a fair even match up. They even have coastal defenses and missile batteries. When was the last time anyone even joked about that here? We're 'invincible' by memories of what we were, not what we are right now.


Unfortunately, China has not been as foolish as the Soviets. They haven't gone broke and insane in a tail chase to match us weapon system for weapon system. They just BUILD key components for much of it, so know precisely how our systems are constructed, work and what their weak points are. They invest their budgets into weapons to simply out-flank our 'maginot line' of techno-gizmos.

Imagine.....They don't even teach celestial navigation in the Navy anymore, as understand it from people in the service.
The first nation to find our techno-weakness and exploit it, wins.... and Obama is feeding into that by cutting so much hardware and men in favor of more toys and remote control gadgets.



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by CALGARIAN
 

iran will have no problem selling its oil if the straight is closed they will get some country other than america



posted on Jan, 8 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


While I agree with most of what you said, I have to disagree here...


If these national leaders want to kill each other so badly, I say Obama sends his SEALs and Ahmadinejad send his Al Quds commandos while both populations sit back, ALIVE, to see which leader wins.


I'd rather just see the leaders do it. Make it a pay per view. Lots of cash to be made by someone there. The whole thing is one huge tinder box waiting for the spark. I pray it doesn't happen because I am not sure how this one is going to go. Iraq and Afghanistan, I had a pretty good idea on how they would turn out and they both kinda ended up that way. Iran is a different beast. China and Russia are wild cards in it. Will they, won' they? And a lot of the Wests military is over extended right now and weary after ten years of fighting counter insurgencies warfare. IMO, that's harder on a person psychologically because in theatre, everyone is a potential enemy. There are no uniforms, no distinguishing between friend or foe. Every one has firearms, the civilian population as well as the bad guys.

Then there is Pakistan. What will they do if it does kick off? Stay out of it? Turn from Ally to enemy?

Then add Israel. If they become involved, the entire ME is going to go. I don't think the Arab nations would stand by while one of their own is attacked by Israel. Full out attacked. Not like the bombings in Syria or Iraq or the responses to the rocket fire in Gaza or Lebanon.

The last two wars didn't worry me in the same way this potential one does. There are so many possible contingencies this time. Many of the players on the other team have had a decade to dissect the Wests tactics and capabilities.

One thing going for us is this though. We have had ten years of full combat fighting and we have had plenty of time to improve techniques for fighting counter insurgencies. We have militaries in the US, Canada, The UK, Australia, some European nations etc.... that have fully combat tested troops. You can play all the war games ya want but nothing beats hands on experience. the only player on the other side with this would be Russia with all the stuff they have endured in the Caucuses.
edit on 8-1-2012 by GAOTU789 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join