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

TBI ^ | 1-23-3012 | Robert johnson

[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.

[blueyon]

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

[ZX12R]

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

It's de ja vue all over again....and again....and again...

[WhatNot]

that and WAR with Iran in a week or two.

[WayneS]

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...

[rawcatslyentist]

>"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.

[GonzoGOP]

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.

[Aevery_Freeman]

Speculation entreaty:

• Will Iran start a war before its nuclear program is complete
• Is this proof that its nuclear program is complete

[Eric in the Ozarks]

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.

[bert]

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.

[Tallguy]

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.

[GonzoGOP]

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.

[GonzoGOP]

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.

[VF-51vnv]

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.

[reed13k]

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.

[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.

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.”

[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.

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.

[GonzoGOP]

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.

[RitchieAprile]

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.

[blam]

USS Alabama (BB-60) Museum

Visible from I-10 when crossing Mobile Bay, Alabama