Iran says could deploy navy near U.S. coast

[jagman]

http://patdollard.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Kharg.jpg
TEHRAN (Reuters) – Iran raised the prospect on Tuesday of sending military ships close to the United States’ Atlantic coast, in what would be a major escalation of tensions between the long-standing adversaries.

“Like the arrogant powers that are present near our marine borders, we will also have a powerful presence close to American marine borders,” the head of the Navy, Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said, according to the official IRNA news agency.

Speaking at a ceremony marking the 31st anniversary of the start of the 1980-1988 war with Iraq, Sayyari gave no details of when such a deployment could happen or the number or type of vessels to be used.

The declaration comes just weeks after Turkey said it would host a NATO early warning radar system which will help spot missile threats from outside Europe, including potentially from Iran. The decision has angered Tehran which had enjoyed close relations with Ankara.

And it comes a few months after Iran sent warships through the Suez canal, after the fall of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the first time the Islamic Republic had deployed navy vessels in the Mediterranean.

The United States and Israel have not ruled out military action against Iran if diplomacy fails to stop it getting nuclear weapons. Tehran denies it is developing nuclear arms saying its atomic program is for purely peaceful purposes.

Iran has dismissed the threats, warning that it will respond by hitting U.S. interests in the Gulf and Israel if any such attack happened.

Analysts say Tehran could retaliate by launching hit-and-run strikes in the Gulf and by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway where about 40 percent of all traded oil passes.

The Islamic state often launches military drills in the country to display its military capabilities amid persistent speculation about a possible U.S. or Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

[mod-edit: link to source - http://ca.news.yahoo.com/iran-says-could-deploy-navy-near-u-coast-152914655.html -Paul.]

[KiwiElf]

Has just been announced here on NZ News/Sky/Fox "they are on the way"??. News Media playing it down and laughing it off. NZ TIME 12:00

[jagman]

Has just been announced here on NZ News/Sky/Fox "they are on the way"??. News Media playing it down and laughing it off. NZ TIME 12:00

In my humble Opinion, The world is really starting to come unhinged

[Solstice]

This can't be real! There are so many ways for them to start a confrontation. Why sacrifice the sailors on the ship?

[KiwiElf]

Urmmm we are getting a slightly different version of this: Newsmedia are saying Iran is claiming it's doing this because "US sold bunker busting weapons to Israel????" WTH is going on? :)

[DeDukshyn]

Doesn't sound that major to me. Whats happening on the west coast? ;)

[KiwiElf]

Well I'd be more worried about WHO Israel is planning on using "bunker bombs" against?

Iranian ships thought to be heading for your East Coast & Gulf of Mexico entrance. No mention of anything happening on West Coast. Let's see how fast the story gets dropped? ;)

[Terra]

The questions have to be:
a) Is Sean Connery aboard?
b) Does he want to hand the vessle over?

Sorry, it's not a red sub, but it is nearly October.

...ok, I'll grab my coat, nn. :bolt:

[DeDukshyn]

Well I'd be more worried about WHO Israel is planning on using "bunker bombs" against?

Iranian ships thought to be heading for your East Coast & Gulf of Mexico entrance. No mention of anything happening on West Coast. Let's see how fast the story gets dropped? ;)

Sounds like somethin's up though ... that's for sure ;) I guess we'll see eventually.

[modwiz]

This has to be pure MSM twisting of the light. It sounds like a complete tangential BS riff on something someone in the Iranian command structure said. The US offered a red phone connection to Tehran. They declined and said something like. " We will install a red phone when our warships are in the Gulf of Mexico". This is obviously a statement that records Persian displeasure with US warships being in or around the Persian Gulf. SO, somebody took this as an actual threat rather than the rhetorical sarcasm I am sure it is.

Just like the Persian bomb, BS scare tactics to get support for a war against Iran. I support them (Iran) in having a spine and talking back to the biggest threat to world peace. They do have a domestic audience to consider.

BTW, American Marine Borders could be any American Naval port in the world. Including the one on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Ocean the Persian Gulf empties into.

Timothy Geithner is more of a problem than the Persians. IMHO.

[GCS1103]

This has to be pure MSM twisting of the light. It sounds like a complete tangential BS riff on something someone in the Iranian command structure said. The US offered a red phone connection to Tehran. They declined and said something like. " We will install a red phone when our warships are in the Gulf of Mexico". This is obviously a statement that records Persian displeasure with US warships being in or around the Persian Gulf. SO, somebody took this as an actual threat rather than the rhetorical sarcasm I am sure it is.

Just like the Persian bomb, BS scare tactics to get support for a war against Iran. I support them in having a spine and talking back to the biggest threat to world peace. They do have a domestic audience to consider.

BTW, American Marine Borders could be any American Naval port in the world. Including the one on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Ocean the Persian Gulf empties into.

Timothy Geithner is more of a problem than the Persians. IMHO.

You're so right, Modwiz. Timothy Geithner is a bigger problem, because he has, and still does, cause misery to so many people. Unlike the MSM stories that are out there to stir up trouble with their sensationalism, "tax cheat" Geithner has helped destroy the economy in the U.S. Can you tell that I can't stand him?

[Koyaanisqatsi]

They'd be doing us a favor. They don't want to #%* wit the U.S…….. nobody does. Pakistan is probably crapping their pants right now because "we" are being rapidly conditioned to viewing them as the next "terrorist nation", and that's make a lot of money for the American War machine…. iits like a streetfight and America's like, "come at me homie!" All they need is a nudge now, the masses are growing uneasy and less fearful.

[Rocky1]

We also had warships off the American coast before we were involved in WWII. Those were German u-boats. We are know what happened with the Germans - WWII. The Iranians have already shown little respect for the US and their actions further perpetuate this impression. The difference is that Hitler wanted to take over the whole world and control it. The Iranians want to eliminate America and Israel. At least Hitler had a certain respect for the lives olf his own people. His losses were the sacrifice of war. I do not believe the Iranian leaders care about their people. I have little doubt they would sacrifice their entire population if it meant the elimination of America and Israel.

The Israelis took out their nuclear plant many years ago, and the world quietly cheered in private while they outwardly condemned Israel. I suspect that if the Israels do not do it again the Iranis will not stop until Israel is gone from the map. I will live in fear for my life if the Iranianbs place battleships off the Jersey coast. I do not have the confidence the American leaders will take the threat seriously enough until a US city is bonbed. However I will not change my lifestyle. If I do, then "the enemy" has already won. I would like to have seen the Iranians place ships off New Jersey during the Nixon or Reagan eras. We were much sttronger then, and I feel the outcome would be different. Frankly I do not believe the Iranians would have brought battlrships anywhere near our shores if either of them were President today.

[WhiteFeather]

Sounds like some deep **** is going down peeps. The US Government Is On Its Way Out. And The **** is about to hit the fan. Its The Endgame of The Ponzi Schemes, Manipulations and all the Bull **** Lies within our corrupted government here in the Corporations of The United States. Hang On, My spidey senses are starting to tingle.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Kek3GqbsTk

[KiwiElf]

I'd say Ben Fulford's latest news is taking on more significant meaning - join the dots. Karma's a biartch. I ask again... WHO's bunkers is Israel planning to attack?

[DawnOfANewEra]

This has to be pure MSM twisting of the light. It sounds like a complete tangential BS riff on something someone in the Iranian command structure said. The US offered a red phone connection to Tehran. They declined and said something like. " We will install a red phone when our warships are in the Gulf of Mexico". This is obviously a statement that records Persian displeasure with US warships being in or around the Persian Gulf. SO, somebody took this as an actual threat rather than the rhetorical sarcasm I am sure it is.

Just like the Persian bomb, BS scare tactics to get support for a war against Iran. I support them in having a spine and talking back to the biggest threat to world peace. They do have a domestic audience to consider.

BTW, American Marine Borders could be any American Naval port in the world. Including the one on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Ocean the Persian Gulf empties into.

Timothy Geithner is more of a problem than the Persians. IMHO.

You're so right, Modwiz. Timothy Geithner is a bigger problem, because he has, and still does, cause misery to so many people. Unlike the MSM stories that are out there to stir up trouble with their sensationalism, "tax cheat" Geithner has helped destroy the economy in the U.S. Can you tell that I can't stand him?

I agree that this sounds like war propaganda and I had read prophecies from a pretty well-known psychic (who shall remain nameless, for the time being) a few months ago saying that something like this was on the horizon. However, it also said that the American people would not support another false war (not to say I believe any war is ever just). I believe this to be true. I believe the young adult population in America, like me, who were just coming of age during 9/11 have become enlightened and not disheartened because of the experience. We are just now being passed the torch and we are a bit savvier now than we once were; we know what it's like to be lied to, we know what it's like to see our brothers and sisters go to war, never to return the same. We will turn the other cheek. Give us a chance, and we will wage the greatest time of peace this world has ever seen!

[modwiz]

This has to be pure MSM twisting of the light. It sounds like a complete tangential BS riff on something someone in the Iranian command structure said. The US offered a red phone connection to Tehran. They declined and said something like. " We will install a red phone when our warships are in the Gulf of Mexico". This is obviously a statement that records Persian displeasure with US warships being in or around the Persian Gulf. SO, somebody took this as an actual threat rather than the rhetorical sarcasm I am sure it is.

Just like the Persian bomb, BS scare tactics to get support for a war against Iran. I support them in having a spine and talking back to the biggest threat to world peace. They do have a domestic audience to consider.

BTW, American Marine Borders could be any American Naval port in the world. Including the one on Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean. The Ocean the Persian Gulf empties into.

Timothy Geithner is more of a problem than the Persians. IMHO.

You're so right, Modwiz. Timothy Geithner is a bigger problem, because he has, and still does, cause misery to so many people. Unlike the MSM stories that are out there to stir up trouble with their sensationalism, "tax cheat" Geithner has helped destroy the economy in the U.S. Can you tell that I can't stand him?

I see you're keeping pretty esteemed company these days, Goldie. Looking good!

[Calz]

I see you're keeping pretty esteemed company these days, Goldie. Looking good!

Lol :lol:

I don't see anyone at the tent in the woods ...

no doubt searching out Bob Dean with a bit of "avatar envy" :haha:

[modwiz]

We also had warships off the American coast before we were involved in WWII. Those were German u-boats. We are know what happened with the Germans - WWII. The Iranians have already shown little respect for the US and their actions further perpetuate this impression. The difference is that Hitler wanted to take over the whole world and control it. The Iranians want to eliminate America and Israel. At least Hitler had a certain respect for the lives olf his own people. His losses were the sacrifice of war. I do not believe the Iranian leaders care about their people. I have little doubt they would sacrifice their entire population if it meant the elimination of America and Israel.

The Israelis took out their nuclear plant many years ago, and the world quietly cheered in private while they outwardly condemned Israel. I suspect that if the Israels do not do it again the Iranis will not stop until Israel is gone from the map. I will live in fear for my life if the Iranianbs place battleships off the Jersey coast. I do not have the confidence the American leaders will take the threat seriously enough until a US city is bonbed. However I will not change my lifestyle. If I do, then "the enemy" has already won. I would like to have seen the Iranians place ships off New Jersey during the Nixon or Reagan eras. We were much sttronger then, and I feel the outcome would be different. Frankly I do not believe the Iranians would have brought battlrships anywhere near our shores if either of them were President today.
I can tell nothing I say will alter your view, so I will not attempt to enlighten you and any sharing your view. Unfortunately, such views make the drums of war an easy tune to play and have a favorable response to. I do not perceive this as a positive, or helpful trend.

BTW. It was the Persians who freed the Judahites from their Babylonian captivity and provided soldiers for the returning holy men to help bring order to the backsliding inhabitants of Judah. On their dime!

They have been a people for thousands of years in their own country and they remember their history.

I do not believe there will be any Iranian warships near our American coasts. That would be provocative and really stupid. That kind of stupid would deserve what it gets and you don't get to have thousands of years of a continuous identity being stupid.

¤=[Post Update]=¤




I see you're keeping pretty esteemed company these days, Goldie. Looking good!

Lol :lol:

I don't see anyone at the tent in the woods ...

no doubt searching out Bob Dean with a bit of "avatar envy" :haha:

I need to have my wife take a picture with me standing in front of my tent..........naked. lol

[modwiz]

With all due respect Jagman. I have gone to MSNBC, Drudge report, Jeff Rense, Yahoo news and even looked at AP reports on the World. No headline resembling your thread title could be found. Titles of dubious integrity start to draw flies. Perhaps Paul could help you phrase this more responsibly.

Just a thought from somebody sitting in a tent in the woods.

[Calz]

With all due respect Jagman. I have gone to MSNBC, Drudge report, Jeff Rense, Yahoo news and even looked a AP reports on the World. No headline resembling your thread title could be found. Titles of dubious integrity start to draw flies. Perhaps Paul could help you phrase this more responsibly.

Just a thought from somebody sitting in a tent in the woods.

No link in OP but appears to be a Reuters feed ...

[Davidallany]

“Like the arrogant powers that are present near our marine borders, we will also have a powerful presence close to American marine borders,” the head of the Navy, Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said, according to the official IRNA news agency.

Iran has no real navy, even Canada has more navy than Iran. In one scenario, a USA ship painted like Iranian ship fires a missile on an American ship and damages it. Causing the NATO to unleash hell on Iran. Another scenario is firing an ICBM and blaming it on Iran. Its inconceivable that Iran's leadership is not working for the shadow empire, a big war with Iran means a big loss of life on the Iranian side.

[modwiz]

With all due respect Jagman. I have gone to MSNBC, Drudge report, Jeff Rense, Yahoo news and even looked a AP reports on the World. No headline resembling your thread title could be found. Titles of dubious integrity start to draw flies. Perhaps Paul could help you phrase this more responsibly.

Just a thought from somebody sitting in a tent in the woods.



No link in OP but appears to be a Reuters feed ...

Feeds like to do that. Put out a few lines and let the well meaning but paranoid among us do their dirty work for them. When will we start to see how this game is played? Especially when the desired results are so obvious.

[onawah]

Jagman did not provide a link for the article, which is requested.
May we have a link please?
Thank you.

[Calz]

All I can find are implications of *plans* to do so ... no actual event.

[ThePythonicCow]

With all due respect Jagman. I have gone to MSNBC, Drudge report, Jeff Rense, Yahoo news and even looked a AP reports on the World. No headline resembling your thread title could be found. Titles of dubious integrity start to draw flies. Perhaps Paul could help you phrase this more responsibly.

Just a thought from somebody sitting in a tent in the woods.
Good points - thanks.

I added a link to a source for the opening post, and changed the thread title from "Iran sending Warships close to American Coast!" to what the source article had, which is "Iran says could deploy navy near U.S. coast", as it seems more accurate.

[Davidallany]

I added a link to a source for the opening post, and changed the thread title from :Iran sending Warships close to American Coast!" to what the source article had, which is "Iran says could deploy navy near U.S. coast", as it seems more accurate.

Thank you modwiz and Paul.

[christian]

The Iranians want to eliminate America and Israel.

Do you really think the majority of the Iranians want to engage in an open war with Israel and the USA? The Iranians, just as the vast majority of humanity worldwide, want to live in peace and want to live in a world, where TPTW have no say.

If you refer to the alleged "wipe Israel off the map" quote, this article might settle things. http://www.infowars.com/articles/ww3/iran_wipe_israel_off_map_hoax.htm
This was deliberately translated inaccurately to stir tension, it seems. It has been corrected soon after it was published, but this correction went pretty much unnoticed (just as planned, I guess), so that even recently, when Netanyahu spoke before the Congress, he cited this again. :yell:

[Calz]

Man ... all sorts of frenzied decible levels regarding Iran from many quarters.

PTB/W have their media zombies working overtime.


France threatens military action against Iran

10148

A French Rafale jet flanked by three Mirage 2000-N (AFP Photo / Anne-Christine Poujoulat)
TAGS: Conflict, Military, Nuclear, UN, Politics, Iran


The French envoy to the UN has warned Iran that it risks a military strike if it continues pursuing its nuclear program.

"If we don't succeed today to reach a negotiation with the Iranians, there is a strong risk of military action," Ambassador Gerard Araud said on Tuesday during a panel discussion at the UN’s New York headquarters, AFP reported.

The strike, he said, "would be a very complicated operation. It would have disastrous consequences in the region… all the Arab countries are extremely worried about what is happening."

Last Sunday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called on Iran to "freeze the production of centrifuges," saying that such a step would prevent fresh sanctions against it.

“In response we will abstain from imposing more sanctions, both at the UN Security Council and unilaterally,” the diplomat said in a CNN interview.

On Tuesday, Mr. Lavrov stressed the need to find a diplomatic solution to the issue.

“We don’t see any alternative to a political and diplomatic solution and taking concrete steps towards renewing of talks,” he said in an address to the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

Earlier this month, the UN nuclear watchdog published a report on developments after Teheran allowed an inspector to enter some of its nuclear facilities which had previously been closed. Moscow believes that Iran’s latest moves show positive changes in its attitude to the UN’s control of its nuclear program, which the international community should encourage.

On Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Salehi called on the European Union to resume nuclear talks with Tehran.

"There have been new developments with regard to Iran's nuclear issue and also other issues," Salehi said in a meeting with EU Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.

Earlier this month, former US Vice President Dick Cheney said he believed Israel would attack Iran to prevent it from achieving nuclear weapons capacity.

Cheney told Newsmax TV that "Iran represents an existential threat and [the Israelis] will do whatever they have to do to guarantee their survival and their security.”

http://rt.com/news/military-strike-iran-france-567/


Iran says it delivers new cruise missiles to navy

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press – 21 hours ago

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran said Wednesday it has begun large-scale production of a domestically-developed cruise missile designed for sea-based targets and capable of destroying warships.

Defense Minister Gen. Ahmad Vahidi said an unspecified number of the missiles, called "Ghader," or "Capable" in Farsi, were delivered to the Iranian military and the powerful Revolutionary Guard's naval division, which is assigned to protect Iran's sea borders.

Vahidi said the missile, which has a range of 124 miles (200 kilometers), can travel at low altitudes and "can sink giant warships." The comments appeared to suggest that the new missile could potentially counter the U.S. naval presence in the Persian Gulf.

The West is already concerned about Iran's military capabilities, especially the implications of the country's disputed nuclear program. The U.S. and some of its allies, and as the U.N. nuclear agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, fear that Iran is trying to produce a nuclear weapon. Tehran denies the charges.

Iran's growing arsenal includes short and medium range ballistic missiles that are capable of hitting targets in the region such as Israel and U.S. military bases in the Gulf.

Iran frequently makes announcements about new advances in military technology that cannot be independently verified.

Iran began a military self-sufficiency program in 1992, under which it produces a large range of weapons, including tanks, missiles, jet fighters, unmanned drone aircraft and torpedoes.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-sv0fPmfNhzcZ7YDsyI35u3IQDw

[modwiz]

Man ... all sorts of frenzied decible levels regarding Iran from many quarters.

PTB/W have their media zombies working overtime.


France threatens military action against Iran

10148

A French Rafale jet flanked by three Mirage 2000-N (AFP Photo / Anne-Christine Poujoulat)
TAGS: Conflict, Military, Nuclear, UN, Politics, Iran


The French envoy to the UN has warned Iran that it risks a military strike if it continues pursuing its nuclear program.

"If we don't succeed today to reach a negotiation with the Iranians, there is a strong risk of military action," Ambassador Gerard Araud said on Tuesday during a panel discussion at the UN’s New York headquarters, AFP reported.

The strike, he said, "would be a very complicated operation. It would have disastrous consequences in the region… all the Arab countries are extremely worried about what is happening."

Last Sunday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called on Iran to "freeze the production of centrifuges," saying that such a step would prevent fresh sanctions against it.

“In response we will abstain from imposing more sanctions, both at the UN Security Council and unilaterally,” the diplomat said in a CNN interview.

On Tuesday, Mr. Lavrov stressed the need to find a diplomatic solution to the issue.

“We don’t see any alternative to a political and diplomatic solution and taking concrete steps towards renewing of talks,” he said in an address to the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

Earlier this month, the UN nuclear watchdog published a report on developments after Teheran allowed an inspector to enter some of its nuclear facilities which had previously been closed. Moscow believes that Iran’s latest moves show positive changes in its attitude to the UN’s control of its nuclear program, which the international community should encourage.

On Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Salehi called on the European Union to resume nuclear talks with Tehran.

"There have been new developments with regard to Iran's nuclear issue and also other issues," Salehi said in a meeting with EU Foreign Policy Chief Catherine Ashton on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.

Earlier this month, former US Vice President Dick Cheney said he believed Israel would attack Iran to prevent it from achieving nuclear weapons capacity.

Cheney told Newsmax TV that "Iran represents an existential threat and [the Israelis] will do whatever they have to do to guarantee their survival and their security.”

http://rt.com/news/military-strike-iran-france-567/


Iran says it delivers new cruise missiles to navy

By ALI AKBAR DAREINI, Associated Press – 21 hours ago

TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran said Wednesday it has begun large-scale production of a domestically-developed cruise missile designed for sea-based targets and capable of destroying warships.

Defense Minister Gen. Ahmad Vahidi said an unspecified number of the missiles, called "Ghader," or "Capable" in Farsi, were delivered to the Iranian military and the powerful Revolutionary Guard's naval division, which is assigned to protect Iran's sea borders.

Vahidi said the missile, which has a range of 124 miles (200 kilometers), can travel at low altitudes and "can sink giant warships." The comments appeared to suggest that the new missile could potentially counter the U.S. naval presence in the Persian Gulf.

The West is already concerned about Iran's military capabilities, especially the implications of the country's disputed nuclear program. The U.S. and some of its allies, and as the U.N. nuclear agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, fear that Iran is trying to produce a nuclear weapon. Tehran denies the charges.

Iran's growing arsenal includes short and medium range ballistic missiles that are capable of hitting targets in the region such as Israel and U.S. military bases in the Gulf.

Iran frequently makes announcements about new advances in military technology that cannot be independently verified.

Iran began a military self-sufficiency program in 1992, under which it produces a large range of weapons, including tanks, missiles, jet fighters, unmanned drone aircraft and torpedoes.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j-sv0fPmfNhzcZ7YDsyI35u3IQDw

There are some serious woodies for war going on here. Frankly, it is sickening. Nothing but a bunch of paranoid, satanic war pigs.

[buckminster fuller]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the man ..:)

[Lord Sidious]

They'd be doing us a favor. They don't want to #%* wit the U.S…….. nobody does. Pakistan is probably crapping their pants right now because "we" are being rapidly conditioned to viewing them as the next "terrorist nation", and that's make a lot of money for the American War machine…. iits like a streetfight and America's like, "come at me homie!" All they need is a nudge now, the masses are growing uneasy and less fearful.

Well, America is a giant with feet of clay and if they push their luck, everyone will see that soon.
They are so far overstretched, all they need is one messup and the whole thing will unravel.


We also had warships off the American coast before we were involved in WWII. Those were German u-boats. We are know what happened with the Germans - WWII. The Iranians have already shown little respect for the US and their actions further perpetuate this impression. The difference is that Hitler wanted to take over the whole world and control it. The Iranians want to eliminate America and Israel. At least Hitler had a certain respect for the lives olf his own people. His losses were the sacrifice of war. I do not believe the Iranian leaders care about their people. I have little doubt they would sacrifice their entire population if it meant the elimination of America and Israel.

The Israelis took out their nuclear plant many years ago, and the world quietly cheered in private while they outwardly condemned Israel. I suspect that if the Israels do not do it again the Iranis will not stop until Israel is gone from the map. I will live in fear for my life if the Iranianbs place battleships off the Jersey coast. I do not have the confidence the American leaders will take the threat seriously enough until a US city is bonbed. However I will not change my lifestyle. If I do, then "the enemy" has already won. I would like to have seen the Iranians place ships off New Jersey during the Nixon or Reagan eras. We were much sttronger then, and I feel the outcome would be different. Frankly I do not believe the Iranians would have brought battlrships anywhere near our shores if either of them were President today.

Let me ask you this; How could Germany have ruled the world with 80 million Germans in the whole world?
That is history channel propaganda, with no basis in reality and just so that you know, being off the coast of America in international waters is legal.
What isn't, is that the US Navy was attacking U Boats when they were not at war with Germany.
Your comments on Iran show little comprehension of a very complex situation.
Why should they care any less for their people than obamanugget does?
That is a purely racial/religious based claim.
Iran wants and so do I, to see Israel gone from history. They meant and so do I, a more equitable nation in it's place.
I want to see a nation that is ALL of the Palestinian land where all are equal and have a share in the future of the nation. I am prepared to move there and help build it, I put my money where my mouth is on this topic.



There are some serious woodies for war going on here. Frankly, it is sickening. Nothing but a bunch of paranoid, satanic war pigs.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGPD0ZBiMs0

Got ya, brother from a different mother.


Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is the man ..:)

I like Muammar Qaddafi too.

[jagman]

Modwiz .With all due respect sir I pulled this story straight fromTerran Reuters sir
Im reporting it, Not making it up sir!

[percival tyro]

"Near the US coast" is sailing in international waters. C'mon America why not stay in international waters too.

[jagman]

With all due respect Jagman. I have gone to MSNBC, Drudge report, Jeff Rense, Yahoo news and even looked a AP reports on the World. No headline resembling your thread title could be found. Titles of dubious integrity start to draw flies. Perhaps Paul could help you phrase this more responsibly.

Just a thought from somebody sitting in a tent in the woods.
Good points - thanks.

I added a link to a source for the opening post, and changed the thread title from "Iran sending Warships close to American Coast!" to what the source article had, which is "Iran says could deploy navy near U.S. coast", as it seems more accurate.

Paul, That article did have the word Warships in its title I did not make that up. but if you feel the need to change it, go ahead. Im just reporting on what i find.

[Maia Gabrial]

Could this be the threat to California at the end of September?

[jagman]

Yeah I just checked the story came straight from Terran Reuters And it did have the word WARSHIP in the title but
Navy deployed near US coast is fine with me.
This is probably nothing, Just Iran flexing its muscle but if you feel like you want to attack the messenger go ahead it still wont change
what is happening

[ThePythonicCow]

I ... changed the thread title from "Iran sending Warships close to American Coast!" to what the source article had, which is "Iran says could deploy navy near U.S. coast", as it seems more accurate.

Paul, That article did have the word Warships in its title I did not make that up. but if you feel the need to change it, go ahead. Im just reporting on what i find.

Sorry - I couldn't tell what title your source used (no link :).) The source I found and linked had what seemed like a more accurate title, so I used it. The article itself seems to have only one relevant quote on this detail, saying a "powerful presence." Whether that mean navy, warships, or something else seems left up to the reader.

The more important difference in the titles, from what I could see, was from "sending" to "could deploy." However, looking now, even that might be incorrect. The Iranian Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said (in the translated quote) "will have", and the article says he gave no details.

In order to best assist other readers in deciding what articles to read further, it is sometimes a good idea not to simply copy the title from the source, but rather to modify the title, or append some clarifying comment, so that the title more accurately reflects the article. When members of other sites copy around articles, they often change the title to make them sound more dramatic and to attract more attention, at the expense of accuracy. We do our members little good service by simply copying such derived titles, without qualification.

In such cases, I recommend (1) providing an accurate title, (2) providing a source link, and (3) providing a summary explanation in your own words of the content and its significance, rather than just a copy of the entire original text. There is much information out there, some of it conflicting; let's do what we can to help each other navigate all this stuff. Thanks.

[RMorgan]

With all due respect, the USA is bully, and, you know that things can turn bad for a bully sometimes.

eyVilspkzBg

Please, USA, leave Iran alone.

[GCS1103]

U. N. forces in Libya...maybe next U.N. forces in Iran...then Israel, etc. I see a pattern here and it's not looking good for our fellow humans who are pawns of the "elites". They have almost all of the wealth on this planet and still it's not enough. I find their greed staggering.

[Calz]

With all due respect, the USA is bully, and, you know that things can turn bad for a bully sometimes.

...

Please, USA, leave Iran alone.


One step further down the rabbit hole (which is *not* the bottom I may add):

... and with more all due respect ... the elite use the USA military to serve their own ends and don't consider the opinions of it's (or any other) citizenry.

Please, elite scum, leave the USA alone (and by extension the rest of the world).

¤=[Post Update]=¤


U. N. forces in Libya...maybe next U.N. forces in Iran...then Israel, etc. I see a pattern here and it's not looking good for our fellow humans who are pawns of the "elites". They have almost all of the wealth on this planet and still it's not enough. I find their greed staggering.

All about control at this point ... wealth has become a near meaningless byproduct.

[jagman]

Paul I will take your advice I will add a link next time, Paul i did not make that up! The word warship was in the original Terran Reuters article!
But I am fine with your change of the title!

[math330]

The Iranians have already shown little respect for the US and their actions further perpetuate this impression. The difference is that Hitler wanted to take over the whole world and control it. The Iranians want to eliminate America and Israel.

And can anyone blame them? I don't, at all.
After decades of waging illegal wars and f**king over countries left, right and centre with 'economic policies' - I'm only surprised that it's not happened already.

[Calz]

Paul I will take your advice I will add a link next time, Paul i did not make that up! The word warship was in the original Terran Reuters article!
But I am fine with your change of the title!

Hey jagman ... thanks for the thread.

If I may ...

Don't think "warship" was the issue .... rather the implication they were "on the way" (set sail etc).

Nobody here is out to shoot the messenger that I can tell :)

Cal

[Terra]

There does seem to be much positioning going on and chesting beating in the press. Picked this up from Rense.com:


France: Iran faces high risk of military strike. Russia practices Iranian reprisal (http://www.debka.com/article/21346/)

Ambassador Gerard Araud warned Wednesday, Sept. 28 that Iran runs a high risk of a military strike if it continues on the path to nuclear proliferation. "Some countries won't accept the prospect of Tehran reaching the threshold of nuclear armament," he said. "Personally I am convinced that it would be a very complicated operation …with disastrous consequences in the region."
Ambassador Araud's comment confirmed reports from debkafile's military sources in recent months that US and European sanctions against Iran had been ineffectual and the ayatollahs had no intention of slowing down on their drive for a nuclear weapon.
The French diplomat was not the only one to raise the alarm this week about regional war clouds circling over Iran.
Sept. 9-26, the Russian army, joined by Kazakhstan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan, deployed 12,000 troops in a huge combined military exercise code-named Center-2011 which simulated an Iranian attack on Caspian oil fields operated by American firms in reprisal for a US strike against Iranian nuclear sites.

Russian intelligence postulated an instantaneous Iranian reprisal for this strike and based the war game staged by Russian-led Collective Rapid Force and the Collective Rapid Deployment Forces of the Central Asian Region –CSTO – on this assumption.
Our military sources disclose that the forces taking part in the exercise were briefed for a two-stage scenario:
Stage One: An naval attack on the Caspian Sea coast coming from the south (Iran).
Stage Two: A large-scale air and ground attack from the south by 70 F-4 and F-5 fighter-bombers, namely, the bulk of Iran's air force, along with armored divisions, marine battalions and infantry brigades landing on the northern and eastern shores of the Caspian Sea.
The Russian briefing conjectured that the Iranian offensive would single out the Kazakh oil field at Mangustan on the Caspian coast, a field which debkafile reports Exxon Mobile is operating.

Moscow clearly attached the highest importance to the exercise and extreme credibility to the hypothetical scenario. Russian chief of staff Gen. Nikolai Makarov personally commanded the drills and on Monday, Sept. 26, President Dmitry Medvedev toured the field commands and units.

Tehran was not idle: Tuesday, the day before the war game ended, Adm. Habibollah Sayyari, commander of the Iranian Navy, stated that Iranian warships would be deployed "close to US territorial waters," since the Islamic Republic of Iran considers the US presence in the Persian Gulf "illegitimate and makes no sense."

After Tehran rejected a recent US request to establish a "red phone" link between the countries to avoid unwanted confrontation between their armed forces in the Gulf region, Ali Fadavi, Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) Navy chief, commented enigmatically: "When we are in the Gulf of Mexico, we will establish direct contact with the United States."

A significant remark on the intentions of another nuclear rogue government came from Peter Hughes, the British Ambassador to North Korea, when he stopped over in Seoul on his way home from a three-year tenure in Pyongyang.
"I have had discussions with high-level officials, who have made clear to me their view that if Colonel Qaddafi had not given up his nuclear weapons, then NATO would not have attacked his country," he said.

The ambassador therefore held out little hope of the long-stalled US-South Korea talks with the North resumed lately getting anywhere on Pyongyang's denuclearization.

All these ominous events – pointed comments by French and British diplomats and the large-scale Russian-Central Asian war game – add up to widespread skepticism about any chance of halting Iran's race for a nuclear weapon or disarming North Korea.

[jagman]

Unfortunately I do not have to embellish a single word, Some of you have took this post has myself being anti Iran!!! (I am not anti IRAN )!!!
I was just reporting a news story I found! I have no agenda here except to show how close the world is moving to war!

[Seikou-Kishi]

It's true what Iran says, though; the US military has a presence near Iran so why shouldn't the Iranian military have a presence near the US? Still, when two guys square off against each other, it's not a prelude to making friends and buying rounds down at the pub. If the US and Iranian military forces and governments are squaring off against each other, it can only presage something worse for the rest of the world (that is, the people of all countries).

It's as you say though, Jagman, this post isn't about people being anti-Iranian or anti-American (since the military forces and goverments aren't really Iranian or American, they just use those names) but about being anti-conflict. I would say most of us here are against any conflict whether it is on our shores or on the shores of other people.

[ThePythonicCow]

Paul I will take your advice I will add a link next time, Paul i did not make that up! The word warship was in the original Terran Reuters article!
But I am fine with your change of the title!

I'm sure you did not make it up. I don't recall thinking you did make it up, and if I said otherwise above - I blew it.

I simply copied in a title that I had a source for, and was pleased that the title didn't claim that this "powerful presence" was on its way right now.

[jagman]

Paul I will take your advice I will add a link next time, Paul i did not make that up! The word warship was in the original Terran Reuters article!
But I am fine with your change of the title!

I'm sure you did not make it up. I don't recall thinking you did make it up, and if I said otherwise above - I blew it.

I simply copied in a title that I had a source for, and was pleased that the title didn't claim that this "powerful presence" was on its way right now.

sorry Paul im just jumpy today lol

[ThePythonicCow]

sorry Paul im just jumpy today lol
:) :cow: :)

(yeah - I suspect you're not alone ... ;))

[Solstice]

Thanks for the spot on post Modwiz! During the "Cold War" I was a Nuclear Artillery officer on the border of West Germany. The other side was always engaged in playing chicken with us. especially when Regan was in office. This whole thing smells a little like those games. We always were on alert but used the incidents as training exercises.

Think you are right .... they are probably going to poke their nose in around Diego Garcia and high tail it out when our fighters buzz them.

[jagman]

Thanks for the spot on post Modwiz! During the "Cold War" I was a Nuclear Artillery officer on the border of West Germany. The other side was always engaged in playing chicken with us. especially when Regan was in office. This whole thing smells a little like those games. We always were on alert but used the incidents as training exercises.

Think you are right .... they are probably going to poke their nose in around Diego Garcia and high tail it out when our fighters buzz them.

North Korea also plays this game from time to time! I feel so sorry for the North
Korean people they are starving to death! Terran is just flexing its military might
The ships will have to refuel in Venezuela! I pray that there is no conflict

[RMorgan]

If we analyze history, the USA could easily paint their ships with Iran flags and patterns and send them to the US coast, just to start a new war... I bet the mainstream media will do the rest of the job.

We all know that for the USA, the best way to restore their economy is war. It´s always been that way.

You know, for a country like Iran, where they speak and write a language that´s completely unintelligible for most of us, if the mainstream media start saying that Iran did this or that, said this or that, 90% of the western population would buy it.

[THIRDEYE]

i read an articule on david ickes website.....seems to me the french is threating iran with an air srike..this rattled my chain abit.....perhaps its be the cabal flexing its muscles....im more positive the tenacles of the nwo have there hand at this..if this goes down the after affects would be dangerous.....im buy no means are a fear mongerer....nato wants this war .....and if it happens the outcome could become disasterous......just some food for thought...thirdeye...light..love and abundance.....

[jagman]

i read an articule on david ickes website.....seems to me the french is threating iran with an air srike..this rattled my chain abit.....perhaps its be the cabal flexing its muscles....im more positive the tenacles of the nwo have there hand at this..if this goes down the after affects would be dangerous.....im buy no means are a fear mongerer....nato wants this war .....and if it happens the outcome could become disasterous......just some food for thought...thirdeye...light..love and abundance.....

I could be wrong but I really do not think the powers that be, Want to start
a nuclear war! They just want to keep the threat alive and well ( its profitable)

[Calz]

i read an articule on david ickes website.....seems to me the french is threating iran with an air srike..this rattled my chain abit.....perhaps its be the cabal flexing its muscles....im more positive the tenacles of the nwo have there hand at this..if this goes down the after affects would be dangerous.....im buy no means are a fear mongerer....nato wants this war .....and if it happens the outcome could become disasterous......just some food for thought...thirdeye...light..love and abundance.....

I could be wrong but I really do not think the powers that be, Want to start
a nuclear war! They just want to keep the threat alive and well ( its profitable)

Some would suggest that actually is part and parcel of the zionist endgame ... sacrificing israel population with a false flag nuke attack of their own.

Perhaps Sid can elaborate.

[KiwiElf]

Unfortunately I do not have to embellish a single word, Some of you have took this post has myself being anti Iran!!! (I am not anti IRAN )!!!
I was just reporting a news story I found! I have no agenda here except to show how close the world is moving to war!


I'm sorry, but I feel obliged to support Jagman here. It is a very dangerous habit to read posts out of context and in "bits". I can concur that is EXACTLY what was reported here in New Zealand as per my earlier post. The NZ media tho, gave the reasons why [Iran is on its way]. Throws a somewhat different light on the story. And for your interest, it was reported on FOX News in addition to NZ News stations - no ifs, buts or maybe's. It was stated exactly as per my earlier post :)

[Maia Gabrial]

If we analyze history, the USA could easily paint their ships with Iran flags and patterns and send them to the US coast, just to start a new war... I bet the mainstream media will do the rest of the job.

We all know that for the USA, the best way to restore their economy is war. It´s always been that way.

You know, for a country like Iran, where they speak and write a language that´s completely unintelligible for most of us, if the mainstream media start saying that Iran did this or that, said this or that, 90% of the western population would buy it.

I'm thinking with US' past history of lying to get a war started, this may be in that category....
These days, I don't approve of much of what the US does in the world....

[Lord Sidious]

i read an articule on david ickes website.....seems to me the french is threating iran with an air srike..this rattled my chain abit.....perhaps its be the cabal flexing its muscles....im more positive the tenacles of the nwo have there hand at this..if this goes down the after affects would be dangerous.....im buy no means are a fear mongerer....nato wants this war .....and if it happens the outcome could become disasterous......just some food for thought...thirdeye...light..love and abundance.....

I could be wrong but I really do not think the powers that be, Want to start
a nuclear war! They just want to keep the threat alive and well ( its profitable)

Some would suggest that actually is part and parcel of the zionist endgame ... sacrificing israel population with a false flag nuke attack of their own.

Perhaps Sid can elaborate.

As some of you know, I had a vision.
I saw tel aviv go up with a flash, then a mushroom cloud.
I had the idea come to me that this was done by the government, or those that own israel, to sacrifice the 6 million that they speak of.
They have this thing called the samson option, where they will take out their enemies and themselves, IF they are about to be defeated by an invading army.
So, it seemed to me that they had detonated their own nuke to pull this off.
Then, Iran would probably be blamed.
This was the scariest vision I ever had.

[Vitalux]

Iran says could deploy navy near U.S. coast

So the United States deploys its warships around the world in front of all other countries.

I wonder if it bothers other countries when USA does that?

I wonder if USA is viewed by other nations as another run away NAZI dictatorship trying to take over the whole damn world
http://www.msia.org.br/thumbnail.php?file=USS_Harry_Truman__DoD__928548690.jpg&size=article_mediumhttp://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/195748_124316244317619_941455_n.jpg



I am worried more about the USA starting world war III
I feel sorry for Iran, they are not bothering the rest of the world but the rest of the planet appears hell bent on invading and attacking them.

[jagman]

Lets all pray that cooler heads will prevail ! Lord Sid I hope your vision is wrong my friend!

[Lord Sidious]

Lets all pray that cooler heads will prevail ! Lord Sid I hope your vision is wrong my friend!

The future is always in motion, this could be a future that can be averted.
That is what I have to work on.

[Calz]

Lets all pray that cooler heads will prevail ! Lord Sid I hope your vision is wrong my friend!

The future is always in motion, this could be a future that can be averted.
That is what I have to work on.

Nothing is static ... there are "currents" that flow with the momentum we give them ...

The stronger the flow ... the harder to overcome ...

but all is possible.

[modwiz]

Modwiz .With all due respect sir I pulled this story straight fromTerran Reuters sir
Im reporting it, Not making it up sir!

I can see that. I was worried about the flies, that's all. I do not doubt your integrity for a second.

Besides, this has become an important thread. It all turned out very well.

[Solstice]

You are so right to mention North Korea. I have forgotten those poor souls who were born and live there. I can,t think of a more isolated people. keep them in your prayers.

[Solstice]

Third eye... You have to follow the money. Why would the French be involved militarily if it didn,t threaten their economy. Probably all bluster anyway.

Peace...love ..jai Guru Dev

[DNA]

I have got to say,,,if Iran wants to put ships into international waters off of the US's coast they have every right in the world to do so.
International waters is international waters.
The USA puts their warships into international waters where ever the hell they want,,well,,,so too does any other country.

For that matter,,,if they strike a deal with Mexico to put a millitary base on the Mexican side of the USA boarder, I suppose they can do that as well.
I mean, what other country besides the USA has millitary bases all over the freaking world, regardless of boundries?

It puts perspective on how Benjamin Fullford talks about the US deficiet being created out of the US's need to police the world with it's millitary.

And how the US uses that millitary to extort countries into buying the debt created in the form of bonds and US Treasury notes.

[Laura Elina]

Well, I read this piece of news yesterday and I haven't been able to find more updates on it (and as a matter of fact, the national newspaper that I read in Finland seems to have buried the article to a place, where it's hard to find it... I would provide the link, if I only found it, lol... No further speculation there), but in the article I happened to see, they were talking about how Iran has entertained the idea of sending their ships to the close approximates of us waters before as well, but never did so, and how they really are not that much of a naval threat, not known for their artistry in the sea waters that is. The reporters/people who deal with international relations here don't seem to be taking this seriously, the general atmosphere of the article was that oh boy, here Iran goes again.

The idea I got while going through this thread is that their ship is already on its way? Or maybe I've become illiterate, lol.

[Terra]

Third eye... You have to follow the money. Why would the French be involved militarily if it didn,t threaten their economy. Probably all bluster anyway.

Peace...love ..jai Guru Dev

Maybe it's just more of a positioning thing, the French took a lot of flack for being ant-war when it kicked off in Iraq, maybe they are trying to redeem themselves in the eyes of the US population? Maybe it's because the snowball in the middle east is getting bigger and gain momentum now and they don't want to be on the outside looking in? Just my guess.

[Lord Sidious]

Third eye... You have to follow the money. Why would the French be involved militarily if it didn,t threaten their economy. Probably all bluster anyway.

Peace...love ..jai Guru Dev

Maybe it's just more of a positioning thing, the French took a lot of flack for being ant-war when it kicked off in Iraq, maybe they are trying to redeem themselves in the eyes of the US population? Maybe it's because the snowball in the middle east is getting bigger and gain momentum now and they don't want to be on the outside looking in? Just my guess.

I doubt that very much, they have their own very active arms industry.

[Seikou-Kishi]

Third eye... You have to follow the money. Why would the French be involved militarily if it didn,t threaten their economy. Probably all bluster anyway.

Peace...love ..jai Guru Dev

Maybe it's just more of a positioning thing, the French took a lot of flack for being ant-war when it kicked off in Iraq, maybe they are trying to redeem themselves in the eyes of the US population? Maybe it's because the snowball in the middle east is getting bigger and gain momentum now and they don't want to be on the outside looking in? Just my guess.

The French should be applauded for their staunch opposition to the atrocity in Iraq. It is the UK and the US who ought to be trying to redeem themselves in the eyes of people who were less war-mongering than they were. I'm sure the French government is as corrupt as the rest of them, but they were well-behaved on that account. I could quite happily live with corrupt governments if they were so ineffectual they could never let loose their greedy hearts.