Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Following New EU Sanctions, Iran Says Closing The Strait Of Hormuz Is Now Its Legal Right
TBI ^ | 1-23-3012 | Robert johnson

Posted on 01/23/2012 7:26:04 AM PST by blam

Following New EU Sanctions, Iran Says Closing The Strait Of Hormuz Is Now Its Legal Right

Robert Johnson
Jan. 23, 2012, 7:49 AM

Following the formal adoption of an oil embargo against Iran by the European Union, a senior Tehranian lawmaker says his country now has every right to block all traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

The Associated Press reports that Heshmatollah Falahapisheh says that closing the strait is "an increasing possibility" (via Stars and Stripes).

The new EU sanctions ban all new oil contracts with Iran, while leaving contracts made before July 1 untouched.

The BBC reports that the EU currently purchases about 20 percent of Iran's crude exports and that this move will have "substantial impact," which UK Foreign Secretary William Hague says will show "the resolve of the European Union on this issue."

The issue to which he's referring, of course, is Iran's continued breach of UN resolutions and for failing to negotiate on its nuclear program.

Iran's announcement that it now has the legal right to close the strait comes after more than a month of posturing and warnings directed toward the U.S. and Europe, threatening to shut the waterway if additional sanctions were imposed.

Last week Tehran threatened to torpedo any U.S. carriers in the Persian Gulf by setting its diesel-electric subs on the sea floor and torpedoing the carriers as they pass.

Lieutenant Commander of the Iranian Army's Self-Sufficiency Jihad, Rear Admiral Farhad Amiri told FARS that Iran has the finest electric diesel submarines

(snip)

"We are not in the habit of repeating the warning and we warn only once," Salehi said, without mentioning the Stennis.

The U.S. has two carriers in the Gulf right now while the British and French have sent frigates and warships.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: eu; iran; sanctions; war

1 posted on 01/23/2012 7:26:08 AM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: blam

Gas prices going up................


2 posted on 01/23/2012 7:31:06 AM PST by blueyon (The U. S. Constitution - read it and weep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blueyon
Gas prices going up................

It's de ja vue all over again....and again....and again...
3 posted on 01/23/2012 7:33:56 AM PST by ZX12R (FUBO GTFO 2012 !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blueyon

that and WAR with Iran in a week or two.


4 posted on 01/23/2012 7:34:29 AM PST by WhatNot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blam
The U.S. has two carriers in the Gulf right now ...

One would be enough to take care of business. Two could make things really interesting...

5 posted on 01/23/2012 7:39:14 AM PST by WayneS (Comments now include 25% MORE sarcasm for no additional charge...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
>"Iran Says Closing The Strait Of Hormuz Is Now Its Legal Right "

But only after they have bled the world dry of all it's capitol wealth.

6 posted on 01/23/2012 7:40:14 AM PST by rawcatslyentist (It is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; ~Vattel's Law of Nations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam
Last week Tehran threatened to torpedo any U.S. carriers in the Persian Gulf by setting its diesel-electric subs on the sea floor and torpedoing the carriers as they pass.

Which is of course why you don't send CV battle groups into the shallow, confined waters of the gulf. The carriers stay outside and send in waves of aircraft to blast your defenses to heck while the frigates and DDGs run into the gulf.

Too bad we don't have any of the BBs on the roster any more. I've seen the dent where a kamikaze with a 500 pound bomb hit the Missouri. And that is about the same impact as an Exocet or a C-802 missile. The BBs could soak up hits the way that the think skinned DDGs and FFGs can't. For example the Yamato was hit by at least eleven torpedoes and six bombs. Two more torpedo and bomb hits are possible, but unconfirmed. And the Iowa class had better armor and watertight subdivision than Yamato. So while you can sink a BB, it took a lot of effort.
7 posted on 01/23/2012 7:40:25 AM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WhatNot
Speculation entreaty:
8 posted on 01/23/2012 7:41:46 AM PST by Aevery_Freeman (Typed using <FONT STYLE=SARCASM> unless otherwise noted)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

I have stood on the deck of the Missouri where that kamikaze “dent” you mentioned is located.

We visited Pearl Harbor a couple years ago and the big BB had just come out of a dry docking and looked great.


9 posted on 01/23/2012 7:50:05 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

The Yamato was ineffective at doing anything but taking hits. As I recall it was engaged in battle only once and that was against a pitifully small force of escort carriers and destroyers that actually prevailed.

the Yamato was obsolete the day it slid off the ways.


10 posted on 01/23/2012 7:55:28 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 ..... Crucifixion is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP
For example the Yamato was hit by at least eleven torpedoes and six bombs.

The USS Pennsylvania suffered a bent propeller shaft late in WW2 due to a single torpedo hit. It effectively ended her career. The Bismark was famously brought to fatal combat by a single lightweight aerial torpedo that jammed its rudder.

I'm not sure that sending an Iowa-class BB would do anything more that re-create the Yamato-experience.

11 posted on 01/23/2012 8:06:09 AM PST by Tallguy (It's all 'Fun and Games' until somebody loses an eye!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bert
the Yamato was obsolete the day it slid off the ways.

The poor performance of the Japanese BBs was also helped by their refusal to use them in shore bombardment roles. The Japanese still looked on the BB as an anti-ship weapon and hence would not use them in the shore bombardment role. The Americans, having learned the hard lesson of Pearl Harbor, realized that the CV was now the primary ship killer and that the BB was basically just a heavy artillery battery and AA platform.

The Straits of Hormuz is not a ship killing role. With the exception of the three Kilos the Iranian navy is a joke and even Iran knows this. This is one of the cases where the primary mission requirement is the ability to soak up damage. In football terms we need to send the big lineman up the middle and not risk the star quarterback.

The threat in the gulf are the ranks of anti-ship missile batteries and artillery along the bottleneck of the straights. No sane admiral is going to put a CVN within range of 155mm shore based guns. As Forrestal and Enterprise proved flattops are flammable. An Iowa class could shrug off 155mm hits with little more than topside damage.
12 posted on 01/23/2012 8:18:23 AM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy
I'm not sure that sending an Iowa-class BB would do anything more that re-create the Yamato-experience.

The main difference is that unlike Bismark or Yamato the Iowas would have to CVN battle groups standing by to provide air cover. Note that in both the case of Pennsylvania and Bismark both ships survived the hits to their propulsion. And any ship, regardless of class, is mission kill if you hit the screws. It is simply the nature of the beast. But when you look at the effect of mine, torpedo and small boat hits on ships like Stark, Roberts and Cole you see not only mission kills, but high casualties. At least with an armored warship the ship and crew will survive the hit.
13 posted on 01/23/2012 8:25:15 AM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WayneS
Having been in the Navy and served on the Hancock, Coralsea, Midway & Enterprise...you don't piss off a sleeping giant. Trust me... it will ruin your day, month and year.Just depends on when we decide to stop being pissed.
14 posted on 01/23/2012 8:29:32 AM PST by VF-51vnv
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

Big difference between the 500lbrs of WWII and the shaped war-heads of today that generate a plasma torch that will melt through inches of steel like paper on impact.

As to the carriers in the Gulf - within 48 hours the sea lanes would be reopened as the P-3, S-3, and helos drop active ping sonobouys followed by torps on the subs and the fighter/attack planes, DDGs, and Cruisers set a missle into whatever decides to get underway out of Iran. The air battle may last a little longer, I’m not as familiar with iran’s repertoire there. Then we would have one carrier just outside the mouth and one on the North end of the Gulf just like in the first gulf war; and pick and chose our targets.


15 posted on 01/23/2012 8:34:34 AM PST by reed13k (For evil to triumph it is only necessary for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

What you say is true enough. But if you treat this as a chess match then pushing a BB into the strait is going to trigger a cruise missile salvo that would make the Japanese kamikaze attacks pale in comparison. The only way you could do it would be to bomb the be-jesuz out of the Iranian shore installations. In which case you’d no longer really need a BB to run the strait.

Underwater explosions caused by “near misses” would likely lead to greater damage than a hit or 2 on the superstructure. However the latter could still lead to a “mission kill.”


16 posted on 01/23/2012 8:36:48 AM PST by Tallguy (It's all 'Fun and Games' until somebody loses an eye!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy
What you say is true enough. But if you treat this as a chess match then pushing a BB into the strait is going to trigger a cruise missile salvo that would make the Japanese kamikaze attacks pale in comparison. The only way you could do it would be to bomb the be-jesuz out of the Iranian shore installations. In which case you’d no longer really need a BB to run the strait.

Yes and no. As you say "bomb the be-jesuz out of the Iranian shore installations" is a necessary first step. That prevents the overwhelming missile barrage that can saturate the ASM defenses. But you can't be sure to get every one of the mobile launchers. In Gulf I we never did get a SCUD launcher before it fired. So the first ship through after the bombardment has to be able to soak the hit from the one or two batteries that survived the initial bombardment. In effect the guys have the unenviable job of drawing fire so the second wave of air strikes and counter battery fire can finish off the defenses.

Because we don't have any armored ships in the US Navy the guys sent in to draw fire will be in FFGs that have hulls so thin a .50 cal can punch through them.
17 posted on 01/23/2012 8:55:37 AM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: reed13k
within 48 hours the sea lanes would be reopened as the P-3, S-3, and helos drop active ping sonobouys followed by torps on the subs and the fighter/attack planes,

All of the S-3s and most of the P-3s are out of service. And the newer P-8 isn't available in quantity. And even if it was you can't send in P-3s or P-8s when there are still S-300 batteries operating along the shore. The term skeet soot comes to mind.

So you first have to suppress the Iranian air force and SAM defenses before you can even think about mine sweeping and ASW. Not that it isn't doable but 48 hours is way to ambitious. In Gulf I the air war took over a month to completely suppress Iraq's SAM defenses and Air Force. And we had a lot more than two carrier air groups to work with. So think in terms of 48 days not 48 hours to knock out their air force, suppress the SAMs, sink the subs, batter the shore batteries to bits, sweep the mines, sink the suicide boats and get the straits safe enough that big slow lumbering supertankers can safely go through them.
18 posted on 01/23/2012 9:10:49 AM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

Modern warheads with shaped shage configuration on an attack missile would trash a BB and sent it to the bottom
without much trouble.

Even one hit could remove its ability to manuever and render it helpless (rudder hit). I hope our Navy doesn’t put our kids in harms way on these museum barges.


19 posted on 01/23/2012 9:24:35 AM PST by RitchieAprile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

USS Alabama (BB-60) Museum

Visible from I-10 when crossing Mobile Bay, Alabama

20 posted on 01/23/2012 9:26:09 AM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: blam

Nice pic, I followed the link to her wiki page and discovered that she has 16inch guns. Wow, she is a big girl. I thought only Iowa class had 16 inch guns. I love big guns.


21 posted on 01/23/2012 9:40:02 AM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy
My father served on the Missouri during its refurbishing, and after its recommissioning, in the 1980s, and he kept me apprised of some of the things that were being done to her. He and the 'Mighty Mo' were stationed on the west coast, and I was attending school on the east coast at the time, but on one of his visits home to the Norfolk area, he made arrangements to take me on a very thorough tour of the USS Iowa. It was, quite simply, the most impressive U.S. Navy ship I have ever been aboard, and that includes the USS Nimitz and USS Eisenhower.

To augment the seemingly impossibly thick armor and those famous mammoth 16" guns, the Navy outfitted the modernized Iowa-Class battleships with some REALLY cool 'toys' that were not available during WW-II, or even the Vietnam era: things like four Phalanx platforms to help assure that no anti-ship missiles would get even within a few miles of the ship, never mind testing its armor; Harpoon and/or Tomahawk missiles; and modern electronic tracking/monitoring/countermeasures equipment.

When the modernizations of the Missouri and her three sister ships were completed they were most definitely not "your grandfather's battleships". Even today I would doubt Iran has anything in its arsenal that could cause them significant harm.

22 posted on 01/23/2012 10:40:08 AM PST by WayneS (Comments now include 25% MORE sarcasm for no additional charge...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: WayneS

It is my understanding that the Iowas had to be decommsioned because their hulls were thinning due to electrolysis. Building a new BB with modern gunnery with be very expensive but modern 16inch guns could I am told hit targets 100 miles away. Something to think about.


23 posted on 01/23/2012 10:46:25 AM PST by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP
I suppose there will be battleship guys till the end of time.

The now banished FReeper Non Sequitur advised me to get the book Shattered Sword, The untold story of the Battle of Midway

It is perhaps the best description of the mindset and preparedness of the Japanese Navy out there. It also details the nearly by minute operations of both of the adversaries and denies much of what is thought to be gospel. The replacement is based on many many reports and sources. It refutes the tale of the Japanese officer on which most of the gospel is based.

The good part is the detailed description of the Japanese Navy

24 posted on 01/23/2012 11:00:21 AM PST by bert (K.E. N.P. +12 ..... Crucifixion is coming)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: jpsb
I had not heard the “hulls thinning due to electrolysis” story. I heard they were decommissioned to save money in the post-Cold War atmosphere.

In any event, I would not think it would be too difficult, or expensive, to design and implement some form of cathodic protection system to slow/halt the electrolytic deterioration of ships’ hulls.

25 posted on 01/23/2012 11:02:55 AM PST by WayneS (Comments now include 25% MORE sarcasm for no additional charge...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: WayneS
Our tour of the Missouri included the control systems. Positively ancient equipment from WW 2 was side by side to modern missile delivery electronics.

They can still fire the 16 inch guns, good for 20-22 miles but the real whoopass could be launched from > 100 miles out.

26 posted on 01/23/2012 11:29:31 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

You are of course correct, and I dated myself terribly with my remarks - I stand ashamed and properly castigated.

We’d still mop the floor in a few days and establish air superiority (pout) :’-(


27 posted on 01/23/2012 11:37:01 AM PST by reed13k (Knight Rampant Bibliophile, Protector of Knowledge, Purveyor of Inquiry, Defender of Aged Wisdom, an)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]




Click the red pepper!

Don’t Veg Out
Become a Hero, Donate Monthly


Sponsors will contribute $10
For each new monthly sign-up

28 posted on 01/23/2012 1:26:04 PM PST by TheOldLady (FReepmail me to get ON or OFF the ZOT LIGHTNING ping list)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson