Iranian boats attempted to seize British tanker

U.S. Navy completes Army’s Hellfire missile tests on Littoral Combat Ship
https://defence-blog.com/news/u-s-n...issile-tests-on-littoral-combat-ship.html/amp

That'll take out the Iranian navy.

 

Holy Carp Dobbs - You have the capability for rational thought - I have seen it it ! The above however is not rational - unless one is a Totalitarian despot or a terrorist.

Where did this begin ? - that is a tough question to answer but a long long time ago- proportionate response is one of the distinctions between civilized society and anarchy - it is the idea behind the Rule of Law principle "Punishment should fit the crime".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportionality_(law)

This "silly notion" is why the "ends justify the means" ideology is universally condemned.

Proportionality is one of the main principles that governs civility between nations on the international stage.

I realize that some folks wish to throw out the rule book - and that is a position that one could debate. The idea what you term as a "silly notion" with respect to proportionate response among nations does not exist - lacks anything resembling coherent understanding of the topic.

 

If an Iranian vessel fires at at a foreigners tankers, or takes any action to do it harm, they should be blown out of the water. That should prevent any escalation or greater conflicts.

 

What a bunch of baloney! You must be having hallucinations... Are you Iranian?

 

The whole point of the rule of proportionality was to prevent escalation and greater conflicts. I get that you want to throw the rule book out the window - and you are welcome to that opinion. What I don't see is any rational or coherent argument on your part as to why we should throw out that rule book and adopt "ends justify the means" ideology - nor do I see any indication that you even understand that this rule book exists - never mind understand it.

When you start out with a question like - "Since when did the Sun ever shine on the earth" - it is difficult to have a coherent conversation about the effect of the Sun on crop growth.

 

Now what are you blubbering about ? Talk about moving the goal posts to a completely different topic . What does the above have to do with you wanting to throw out the rule book by disregarding the principle of proportionality and being hypocritical about it ?

What is laughable hypocrisy is you thinking it is OK for the merchant ships of one nation to fire anti ship missiles against ships from another nation but not for another nation.

 

The Iranian ship was destined to sell the oil to Syria to sell the cargo to Assad. There is an international prohibition due to the war in Syria.

 

Prove your claim that these so called "international sanctions" 1) exist 2) authorize the seizing of vessels in international waters 3) allow for the use of anti ship missiles should the the other side engage in tit for tat seizing of vessels.

 

I don't have to prove anything are you denying the sanctions against oil shipments to Syria? They have been in place since 2011.

I thought that sanctions is what we are to use instead of military force, now we aren't even supposed to enforce the sanctions we use instead of military force?

Are you saying we should just lift the sanctions on Assad and Iran? What's the other option?

 

I did not deny that there are sanctions on Syria - I asked you to prove the claims you made. What I deny is that these sanctions authorize the use of anti ship missiles.

 

A missile impact is not like your holding a lighter close to it.

 

The genocide in Yemen, and the genocide in Irak. That oil of food program the US imposed took the lives of half a million children. Albright called that genocide worth it.

 

You go source it was a communist dictatorship, champ. And the coup wasn't against the Ayatollah. You're making it all up.

 

I mean Israel.

 

Five Arab countries once attacked Israel and were defeated. Don't be too optimistic.

 

Can we stop with all the saber-rattling? Looks like the Iranian tanker will be released.

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt has said the Iranian tanker detained by Royal Marines near Gibraltar could be released, if the UK is guaranteed the oil is not bound for Syria.

The tanker, seized on 4 July, was suspected of breaking EU sanctions.

Iran claimed the seizure was "piracy". Iranian ships later tried to impede a British tanker, the UK claimed .

After "constructive" talks with Tehran, Mr Hunt said he was encouraged Iran has no desire to escalate the situation.

He said he reassured Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif that "our concern has always been destination, not origin of the oil" and that the UK would facilitate release "if we received sufficient guarantees that it would not be going to Syria".

He added that Mr Zarif wants to resolve the issue and was "not seeking to escalate".

However, the Iranian foreign minister insisted his country would continue its oil exports under any conditions.

In a statement issued after the phone conversation with Mr Hunt, Mr Zarif said the destination of the oil tanker was a legal one in the eastern Mediterranean, adding that Britain should quickly release the vessel.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/48977093

 

Israel is really scared that Iran develops nukes. It's a tiny country and one bomb will be the end of it. Doesn't mean Iran can not do it the conventional way. Only 3 cities are bigger than 250K.

 

In any war between the US/Israel and Iran, while Iran will help out on the Israeli front, the main task for taking care of Israel will necessarily fall on Hezbollah. And Hezbollah is more than up to the task.

 

You can rest assured and not bother yourself arguing this point with anyone: Iran has the ability to blow up not just an oil supertanker but even any US aircraft carrier within a 150 mile radius of Iran's territorial waters. Which is also why the surest sign the US is actually ready to fight Iran is when its major surface vessels are all out of the area and not within Iran's range. Thar said, the newest generation of Iranian "carrier killer" missiles have a range of 400+ miles, so I suppose the US would have to move really out of the way to be safe. What's more, the regular Iranian navy and its major surface ships are no longer the sitting ducks they used to be not too long ago. The past couple of years Iran has developed and unveiled an advanced stealth frigate and other warships that can certainly do their part in any fight. The stealth frigate/destroyer which joined the Iranian navy last year can hit targets 200 miles away and it isn't a warship the US can easily find on the high seas.


https://sputniknews.com/military/201812011070304761-iran-brand-new-destroyer-class/
Iran Launches New Stealth Destroyer, Radically Increasing Naval Power (VIDEO)
This headline is a tad sensationalist- I admit,
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1091293/iran-news-warship-military-drill-gulf-of-oman-was-us
Iran unveils TERRIFYING new warship as it vows to 'CONFRONT threats' in warning to US

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/iran-has-stealth-destroyer-should-we-be-worried-57692
Iran Has a 'Stealth' Destroyer: Should We Be Worried?

 

Zarif has responded that Iran should be entitled to sell oil to anyone it wants and I think this is true. If the EU choose to have sanctions against Syria, I don't know why they still have them as they were I think about Regime Change. However even if they do have them, that is their choice for them to do not to force others to do. I do not know what the UK was doing taking that oil tanker. It seems it was a US demand probably to get the UK to go against what it had said and go to war with Iran. We have apparently sent another warship to the region.

Hunt though is apparently wanting to get the Iran deal back.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-deal-could-pose-existential-threat-says-hunt

I am not sure what Hunt is up to. If he wants the deal kept it is first of all the US he should be speaking to and as to reporting Iran for not keeping its side of the bargain, how about Iran being the only entity which did for a year as the EU did not live up to its position except in words.

 

The JCPOA was a huge fraud against Iran, But the treachery behind it continues as America's sidekicks try to figure out ways to double down on the fraud with Iran's so-called reformers (despite being thoroughly discredited by now) either too compromised or too desperate to show some sense and stop this charade.

 

There were even fewer people when the five Arab nations attacked them. Intelligence is obviously more important than size. Friends are also play an important role.

 

Only if, under cover, they attack women and children.

 

Why would anyone search for the definition of the principle of proportionality IN WAR in the national criminal code?

https://casebook.icrc.org/glossary/proportionality

The principle of proportionality in war is not a function of the enemy's actions. It has nothing to do with retaliation, or delivering justice by punishment. It's defined by expected military advantage vs civilian casualties, irrespective of what the other side does.

 

The principle of proportionality is a principles that extends into meany realms - including international law. Kind of like the Golden rule - it is a bar that distinguishes between good and evil.