Julian2 Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 Iran warships enter Mediterranean IRANIAN warships have entered the Mediterranean Sea after crossing the Suez Canal in a move aimed at showing Iran's "might" to regional countries, navy commander Admiral Habibollah Sayari says. "The strategic navy of the Islamic Republic of Iran has passed through the Suez Canal for the second time since the (1979) Islamic Revolution," the official IRNA news agency quoted Sayari as saying. He did not say how many vessels had crossed the canal or what missions they were planning to carry out, but said the flotilla had previously docked in the Saudi port city of Jeddah. Two Iranian ships, the destroyer Shahid Qandi and supply vessel Kharg, had docked in the Red Sea port on February 4, according to Iranian media. Sayari said the naval deployment to the Mediterranean would show "the might" of the Islamic republic to regional countries, and also convey Tehran's "message of peace and friendship". The announcement comes amid heightened tensions over Iran's nuclear program and rising speculation that Israel might launch pre-emptive strikes against Iranian facilities. Israel put its navy on alert following the deployment. Iran's navy has been boosting its presence in international waters since last year, deploying vessels to the Indian Ocean and Gulf of Aden on missions to protect Iranian ships from Somali pirates. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/breaking-news/iran-warships-enter-mediterranean-navy/story-e6frea73-1226274701731 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian2 Posted February 18, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 So the Saudis let them use their port, Egypt lets them use the Suez Canal... Is there some sort of message I'm missing here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khunsanuk Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 Hi, Aren't these - 'show "the might"' and 'convey Tehran's "message of peace and friendship".' - contradictory? Sanuk! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 A frigate and a supply ship are hardly a show of might. Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pasathai1 Posted February 18, 2012 Report Share Posted February 18, 2012 Get out the fly swatter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 As far as I can see, soverign nations have the right to sail their ships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horneytorney Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 As far as I can see, soverign nations have the right to sail their ships. Iran a sovereign nation? after all the sanctions and embargos... so should their sovereignity also include the right to possess nukes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian2 Posted February 19, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Tehran's bark may be worse than its bite IRAN watchers have had their work cut out making sense of attacks on Israeli diplomats in Asia, confusion over a ban on oil sales to European Union countries, a vaunted advance in the country's nuclear program and a cleverly formulated offer of a new round of talks on that contentious issue. It made for a slew of mixed messages that underlined how hard it is to understand the opaque reality of Iran and, some observers warn, to overcome Western preconceptions about its behaviour. Tehran last week denied any part in the incidents in Thailand and India. But despite the Keystone Cops storyline of inept bombers, the attacks did look like retaliation for alleged Israeli killings of Iran's nuclear scientists - and provided a glimpse of a covert dirty war that risks spiralling out of hand. Publicly, there was one unambiguous signal when President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad unveiled new centrifuges he claimed were able to enrich uranium more quickly. Experts agreed that this did not constitute a significant advance towards a nuclear capability. Iran's intention, argued Mark Fitzpatrick of the International Institute of Strategic Studies in London, was to show it would not be impeded by sanctions, sabotage or assassinations. ''But even in the highly unlikely event that everything Iran has announced is true, it would still take Iran a couple of years to produce a handful of weapons.'' But with confirmation that Iran is producing enriched uranium, stored in a bombproof mountain, US aircraft carriers sailing through the Strait of Hormuz and the imposition of new Western sanctions, this issue is not going away. Israel's warnings that it faces an ''existential threat'' from a nuclear-armed Iran have created an ominous sense that a decision is imminent. Israel, an undeclared nuclear power, is said to be recalculating its options every day. But bluff, rhetoric and misinformation are likely to be part of this story, too. So are divisions in Israel, where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insists sanctions are not working, while his Defence Minister, Ehud Barak, thinks they are starting to be effective. Complicating it all is uncertainty over who calls the shots in Tehran, where Mr Ahmadinejad is in a power struggle with the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Fears of a low turnout in next month's parliamentary election (being boycotted by an opposition that never accepted the legitimacy of Mr Ahmadinejad's ''stolen'' second term in 2009) is a factor. Another is the deteriorating economic situation, with sanctions biting hard. Hardliners are said to find sanctions a useful way of reinforcing their view of unremitting hostility from the West and Israel. ''Israel is a convenient bogyman,'' argues political scientist Arshin Adib-Moghaddam. ''Cyclical, confined confrontation with Israel is politically useful.'' ''Iran's internal problems are far greater than they seem and beyond the region its external power is marginal,'' argues analyst Baqer Moin. Emile Hokayem, of the Institute of Strategic Studies, sees only bombast, risk-taking and incompetence in recent moves: ''The Iranians may win something in terms of perception, but all in all they are on the losing side.'' Iran's military capabilities are no match for its enemies. ''Iran's friends and enemies both overestimate its power,'' says Mr Hokayem. ''But if you look at the substance, Iran doesn't come across as a particularly powerful country. It's trying to find its place in the international system and it's failing. We need to right-size the Iranian challenge.'' GUARDIAN Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/world/tehrans-bark-may-be-worse-than-its-bite-20120218-1tg1w.html#ixzz1mnukaPI0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lazyphil Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Iran a sovereign nation? after all the sanctions and embargos... so should their sovereignity also include the right to possess nukes? israel will fry em soon!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robaus Posted February 19, 2012 Report Share Posted February 19, 2012 Here we go again... Israel dragging the west into another useless war, just like in Iraq, which will cost the world economy dearly..that's another recession for you and me. And you can bet your bottom dollar that it won't be Israeli ground troops in Iran. They never sent even a medic to help us fight their proxy war for them in Iraq and Afghanistan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.