U.S. blames Iran for tanker attacks in Gulf of Oman, oil prices rise

Lisa Barrington, Phil Stewart



DUBAI/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Two oil tankers were attacked on Thursday and left adrift in the Gulf of Oman, driving up oil prices and stoking fears of a new confrontation between Iran and the United States, which blamed Tehran for the incident.

“It is the assessment of the United States government that the Islamic Republic of Iran is responsible for the attacks that occurred in the Gulf of Oman today,” U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told reporters in a brief appearance without providing hard evidence to back up the U.S. stance.

“This assessment is based on intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the resources and proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication,” Pompeo said.

Washington accused Tehran of being behind a similar attack on May 12 on four tankers in the same area, a vital shipping route through which much of the world’s oil passes.

Tensions between Iran and the United States, along with its allies including Saudi Arabia, have risen since U.S. President Donald Trump pulled out of a deal last year between Iran and global powers that aimed to curb Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

Iran has repeatedly warned it would block the Strait of Hormuz, near where the attacks happened, if it cannot sell its oil due to U.S. sanctions.

No one has claimed Thursday’s attacks and no one has specifically blamed them on any party.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif described the incidents as “suspicious” on Twitter and called for regional dialogue. Tehran has denied responsibility for the May 12 attacks.


The Saudi-led military coalition, which is battling the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen, described Thursday’s events as a “major escalation”.

Russia, one of Iran’s main allies, was quick to urge caution, saying no one should rush to conclusions about the incident or use it to put pressure on Tehran.

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told a meeting of the U.N. Security Council on cooperation between the United Nations and the League of Arab States: “Facts must be established and responsibilities clarified.”

He warned that the world cannot afford “a major confrontation in the Gulf region”.

Crude prices climbed as much as 4% after the attacks near the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial shipping artery for Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest oil exporter, and other Gulf energy producers.


“We need to remember that some 30% of the world’s (seaborne) crude oil passes through the straits. If the waters are becoming unsafe, the supply to the entire Western world could be at risk,” said Paolo d’Amico, chairman of INTERTANKO tanker association.

The crew of the Norwegian-owned Front Altair abandoned ship in waters between Gulf Arab states and Iran after a blast that a source said might have been from a magnetic mine. The ship was ablaze, sending a huge plume of smoke into the air.

The crew were picked up by a passing ship and handed to an Iranian rescue boat.

The crew of the second ship, a Japanese-owned tanker, were also picked up safely.

Iran also has three Russian-built diesel subs, and some mini subs as well. My nephew assures me these are no threat to the U.S. Navy, but they could play hell with commercial shipping. I hope our Navy is keeping track of them.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Well from what I watched this morning Iran and the rest of the world now knows we have LONG range night vision surveillance capabilities. Nothing like watching the Iranian Guards taking one of their limpet mines OFF a tanker in the middle of the night. Would not do for a mine to go off on a Japanese tanker while its Prime Minister is visiting.

airforce, I guarantee you we know where ALL the subs are! We got a carrier in the Gulf so that means at LEAST three hunter killer subs of ours at a minimum. That is not counting at least one British one and one French one. We know where they are also. Same for the actual Russian subs there. When I was an enlisted in the Navy I had a couple good friends that were on the boats. Even that long ago our capability to track anything that was a possible underwater threat was amazing. Granted we lost some of our edge when the Klintons 'let' the Chinese and others have capabilities to make their subs quieter, they are still noisy!

The sum total of my Navy experience consists of two and a half days aboard the old Forrestal. It was amusing, in that Capt. Hugli managed to get seasick. What was not amusing, was they put us in a berth where the ceiling was 12 inches below the flight deck.

I keep telling my nephew the oceans will be okay, once they finally pave them over.

Onward and upward,
airforce

And now this.


Saudis Release Dramatic Video Of “Iran-Ordered” Houthi Missile Attack On Airport Terminal

Just with Thursday's tanker incident, Saudi defense leaders are pointing the finger at Iran for ordering its on-the-ground Shia proxy rebel forces in Yemen to conduct the prior attack as well

By Zero Hedge Friday, June 14, 2019

Amid fast escalating tensions in the Persian Gulf surrounding Thursday morning’s mysterious “attacks” on two tankers which US officials are already blaming on Iran, Saudi Arabia has released CCTV footage of this week’s previously reported Yemeni Houthi missile attack on a civilian airport terminal in the southern part of the kingdom.

Just with Thursday’s tanker incident, Saudi defense leaders are pointing the finger at Iran for ordering its on-the-ground Shia proxy rebel forces in Yemen to conduct the prior attack as well.

The Houthi airport attack now takes on even bigger significance given Thursday morning’s dramatic tanker incident. Likely it will be used by Saudi and US officials to build a case against Iran, ultimately to pin responsibility for the tanker incident on Tehran’s leadership as well.

The shocking CCTV footage from Abha International Airport was published by the Saudi/UAE outlet Al-Arabiya.

Houthi missile attack on Saudi civilian airport yesterday. Watch to the end. pic.twitter.com/bC3XL84uo1

— Ali Shihabi (@aliShihabi) June 13, 2019

As we reported previously via South Front, the Houthi “cruise missile” launch scored a direct hit on the Abha International Airport in Saudi Arabia’s south, reportedly injuring dozens.

The Yemeni rebel group said that its missile force had launched a “cruise missile” at the strategic airport, which has a large military part.

A spokesman for the group said that “advanced U.S. air-defense systems” deployed inside the airport were not able to intercept the missile.

“A cruise missile targeted the control tower directly, which resulted in its destruction,” Brig. Gen. Yahya Sari, a spokesman for the Houthis, said in a short press release.

Contrary to the Houthis’ claims, the Saudi-led coalition said that the missile hit the arrival hall in the airport injuring 26 civilians, including three women and two children.

Most of the injured civilians were treated on spot. However, 8 were transported to nearby hospitals.

“The Iran-backed Houthi terrorist militia, through its media, claimed full responsibility for this terrorist act using a cruise missile – as they claim- which constitutes a clear recognition and full responsibility for the targeting of civilians and civilian places that are subject to special protection under international humanitarian law, this may amount to a war crime,” a spokesman for the Saudi-led coalition, Col. Turki al-Malki, said in an official statement.

Col. al-Malki said that the coalition’s experts are investigating the type of missile used in the attack on Abha International Airport.

Prior footage of Houthi ballistic missile launches on Saudi Arabia:

#BREAKING: It is now confirmed that the #IRGC‘s #Houthi rebels have used Soumar cruise missile (Iranian copy of #Russian Kh-55 missile) to target the #Abha Intl airport in S. #SaudiArabia today. Back on 3rd Dec. 2017, they unsuccessfully launched a Soumar at #AbuDhabi, #UAE. 👇👇 pic.twitter.com/HdKyCUjcBu

— Babak Taghvaee (@BabakTaghvaee) June 12, 2019

The Houthis have a track record of using precision-guided weapons. In 2017, the Iranian-backed group launched what is suspected to be an Iranian Soumar cruise missile at the Barakah nuclear power plant in the UAE.

US Releases “Smoking Gun” Video Of Iran’s Navy Handling Mine On Tanker Hull

It's anything but clear just what is going on in the newly released CENTCOM footage

By Zero Hedge Friday, June 14, 2019

In a perhaps positive sign that could slow the attempts of hawks within the administration to push for war over Thursday’s mysterious attacks on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman, US Central Command issued a statement just hours after Pompeo officially blamed Tehran, saying in a CENTCOM press release that “a war with Iran is not in our strategic interest, nor in the best interest of the international community.”

Screenshot of newly released CENTCOM footage which US officials say shows Iran caught in the act of removing an unexploded mine from one of the tankers attacked on Thursday.

The statement further called for a formal UN investigation into the incident, something for which there’s already international momentum. Iran has “categorically” denied having anything to do with the attack, saying through FM Zarif “Suspicious doesn’t begin to describe what likely transpired”.

The entire bizarre event had immediately evoked unusual levels of public skepticism from media pundits to social media users to even CNN.

Iran’s permanent mission to the UN said on Thursday evening that it “categorically rejects the U.S. unfounded claim with regard to 13 June oil tanker incidents and condemns it in the strongest possible terms,” according to Bloomberg.

Former Navy Seal Matt Bracken delivers expert analysis about the latest attack on the oil tanker in the Gulf of Oman. Matt joins Alex to break down why Iran is most likely behind the attack designed to ignite a global conflict.

US Central Command spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Earl Brown said in the CENTCOM statement: “The U.S. and our regional partners are assisting in the response to attacks in the Gulf of Oman. The U.S. and the international community stand ready to defend our interests, including freedom of navigation.”

Crucially, the statement continued: “We have no interest in engaging in a new conflict in the Middle East,” and added, “We will defend our interests, but a war with Iran is not in our strategic interest, nor in the best interest of the international community.”

And further interesting is that the administration is claiming possession of photographic and video evidence that the massive fires aboard the tankers, which resulted in the USS Bainbridge initiating an emergency rescue of at least 21 mariners from one of the tankers, were the result of mines placed on the vessels. According to Bloomberg:

Senior administration officials said that at least one of the ships was attacked by mines. In a briefing with reporters, they showed a photo of a tanker, the Courageous, with a hole in its side caused by a mine that exploded, they said, and an undetonated mine lodged inside.

The officials said they didn’t know for sure whether the mines were Iranian. The U.S. concluded that Iran was responsible for the attacks based on intelligence sources and the absence of any better explanation, the officials said. They declined to elaborate on the intelligence sources.

Images and video now being released by @CENTCOM showing what it says is a likely unexploded limpet mine attached to the hull of the Japanese-owned chemical tanker Kokura Courageous. pic.twitter.com/Mzpdm7k0Mc

— Steve Herman (@W7VOA) June 14, 2019

Ironically, though it was the US side that pulled out of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), US officials further said Iran’s motive was “to escalate the conflict” with Washington because “it’s not interested in discussions with the U.S.,” according to the Bloomberg report.

CBS has the following detail concerning video evidence pointing to an attack operation involving mines:

A U.S. defense official told CBS News that the U.S. has video of a small boat coming alongside one of the tankers that was attacked and removing an unexploded “limpet” mine — a type of explosive that can be stuck manually to the side of a vessel. It is the same type of weapon U.S. officials say Iran used to attack four oil tankers off the nearby Emirati port of Fujairah last month.

But is this what the grainy footage actually shows? It’s anything but clear just what is going on in the newly released CENTCOM footage:

Just in: Pentagon video of what it says is an Iranian boat removing an unexploded mine from one of the attacked oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman. pic.twitter.com/XSxIPcyV6Q

— Philip Crowther (@PhilipinDC) June 14, 2019

US officials also told CNN that the video of the mine involved Japanese-owned chemical tanker Kokura Courageous, and that the “small boat” belonged to the Iranian navy.

The CNN report claims Iran’s navy was observed removing an unexploded mine, suggesting early statements that Iran was actually involved in rescue efforts could be true, though the exact nature of just what the purported video proves remains unclear:

The United States has video and photos that show an Iranian navy boat removing an unexploded mine attached to the hull of the Japanese-owned chemical tanker Kokura Courageous, four US officials tell CNN.

The anonymous US sources which spoke to CNN suggested the Iranians were actually “removing evidence” and not engaged in a rescue attempt, as the Iranians previously stated:

The official said the imagery shows a person on board that small boat grabbing the unexploded mine.

The boat made the move even after the USS Bainbridge, as well as a US drone and P-8 aircraft, had been on the scene for four hours. US defense officials believe that the Iranians were seeking to recover evidence of their involvement in the attack.

Meanwhile, the question of custody over evidence so near Iran’s territorial waters in the Strait of Hormuz will likely quickly prove contentious.

Remember the Maine, Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, Kuwaiti incubator babies, Saddam’s WMD’s, Qaddafi soldiers’ Viagra spree, Last Messages From Aleppo, Douma, burning aid on Colombia-Venezuela bridge, and now today’s attacks in the Gulf of Oman. https://t.co/jnoIcXxUAS

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) June 13, 2019

The latest reports suggest the tanker Front Altair is in danger of sinking, while the Japanese owned Panama-flagged Kokuka Courageous is said to be drifting into Iranian territorial waters, which could create a conflict over the vessel’s recovery with the US, which will no doubt want to have control over all available evidence.

Watch: US Accuses Iran Of Bombing Oil Tanker, Tensions Skyrocket

Is this a false flag or genuine attack?

https://youtu.be/N4Rc2Rzv02s

Weeks after President Trump told the Pentagon that he didn’t want war with Iran, an oil tanker came under attack and the intelligence community claims that Iran is to blame.

The evidence against Iran seems pretty strong, but I'm old enough to remember the Gulf of Tonkin incident, so I'm not entirely sold. And I can't figure out what Iran would hope to gain by doing this.

The big question, which no one seems to be asking is, why would Iran use limpet mines that could be traced back to them? That seems like an awfully stupid thing to do. Suspiciously stupid.

I'll grant you, the Islamic regime in Iran doesn't seem very capable of logical thought. But this has enough red flags to leave me fairly skeptical.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Biggest question I have is 'WHO' is actively giving orders to the Iranian Navy. Were these regular Navy or 'Islamic Guards'?

Pentagon Readies “Contingency Plans” For Potential Escalation Against Iran

The Pentagon indicated it's further implementing plans to coordinate with America's international allies in the event of military confrontation with Iran

By Zero Hedge Sunday, June 16, 2019

Amid fears that the US is running headlong into yet another sure to be disastrous war in the Middle East, acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan told reporters Friday that the Pentagon is prepping “contingency plans” should things quickly escalate militarily.

“When you look at the situation… 15 percent of the world’s oil flows through the Strait of Hormuz,” Shanahan said as quoted in The Washington Times. “So we obviously need to make contingency plans should the situation deteriorate. We also need to broaden our support for this international situation.”

The Pentagon indicated it’s further implementing plans to coordinate with America’s international allies in the event of military confrontation with Iran — something which could prove difficult given the European Union has urged “maximum restraint” following Thursday’s tanker attacks incident Washington quickly blamed on Iran. The UK has been the only exception, which immediately stood behind Pompeo and Trump’s assessment.

Notably, as The Washington Times reports further of Friday’s press briefing, “the Pentagon is planning for the possible deployment of additional U.S. forces to the Persian Gulf region in the event the threat from Iran worsens.”

Weeks ago as tensions began soaring in the region following John Bolton’s claimed intelligence of a “heightened threat” of Iran or its allies attacking nearby US troops, the Pentagon deployed the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group, at least 1500 extra troops, as well as B-52 bombers, drones, and patriot missile batteries.

Likely the Pentagon will use the tanker incident to keep up the pressure on Tehran: “The more information that we can declassify, the more information we can share, we will. And that’s our intent. And I think as you saw yesterday — doing it quickly,” Shanahan continued in his statement.

However, as to the origin of what CENTCOM said were Limpet mines attached to the side of one of the tankers, which the US Navy produced a video of what it said were IRGC forces removing, the Pentagon gave no indication that it would provide proof of just who it was that placed them there or the mines’ manufacturer.

I would love to know how far Iraq is willing to go to stay either neutral or hinder the US if we want to stage in Iraq. Same for Kuwait. Afcrapastan is NOT a place to stage. Too hard to get heavy equipment in there.

Also does anyone know how we are tied to Oman by treaty as it pertains to mutual defense. How about the other tankers hit. What countries are they out of? Panama registry?

Hawk, this article answers some of those questions. It's from Newsweek, so take it with a grain of salt, but the ships attacked were from Japan and Norway - two of Iran's biggest customers. And something that has bothered me from the start: Aren't limpet mines normally attached to the hulls of ships below the waterline?

Here's a part of the article:



Onward and upward,
airforce

The crew of the Japanese tanker said they were hit by a "small missile".

Sen. Cotton: Iran’s ‘Unprovoked Attack on Commercial Shipping Warrants Retaliatory Military Strikes’

By Patrick Goodenough | June 16, 2019 |

(CNSNews.com) – As the Trump administration works to convince allies that Iran was responsible for last week’s attack on two tankers near the Persian Gulf, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said Sunday that “this unprovoked attack on commercial shipping warrants retaliatory military strikes.”

“The fastest way to get the fire and fury of the U.S. military unleashed on you is to interfere with the freedom of navigation on the open seas and in the air,” Cotton told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

“That’s exactly what Iran is doing in one of the world’s most important strategic chokepoints.”

On the same program, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the U.S. was “considering a full range of options” in response to recent events, adding that the administration was confident that it could “take a set of actions that can restore deterrence – which is our mission set.”

Asked whether that full range of options includes a military response, Pompeo replied, “Of course.”

Last Thursday morning two tankers about ten nautical miles apart caught fire after explosions in the Gulf of Oman, south of the Strait of Hormuz.

The 23 sailors onboard the Norwegian-owned Front Altair were rescued by a passing cargo ship, but after Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) patrol boats surrounded that ship it handed the crew over to the Iranians, who took the mostly Filipino and Russian sailors to the nearby Iranian port of Bandar Abbas. They were allowed to leave at the weekend.

The 21-person crew of the Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous were evacuated by a Dutch tug, and then transferred to the USS Bainbridge, a U.S. Navy guided missile destroyer. According to U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), an IRGC patrol boat had evidently been trying to reach the Dutch tug ahead of the U.S. warship in order to get that crew as well, but failed to do so.

About five hours later, a U.S. surveillance drone filmed personnel in an IRGC patrol boast appearing to remove an unexploded limpet mine from the hull of Kokuka Courageous, CENTCOM reported.

On Sunday, CENTCOM spokesman Lt. Col. Earl Brown said that as that drone was filming the burning ship earlier that day, a missile was fired in an unsuccessful attempt to shoot it down or disrupt its surveillance. Brown said the military assessed that the projectile fired was a modified Iranian SA-7 surface-to-air missile.

The U.S. military and Trump administration are now accusing Iran and its surrogates of responsibility for a series of provocative recent actions.

They include Thursday’s tanker attacks, and an attempt the same day to shoot down a U.S. surveillance drone; the sabotage of four other tankers in the same region on May 12; a drone attack on Saudi oil pipelines on May 14; a rocket that landed near the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad on May 19; a roadside bomb in Afghanistan on May 31; the shooting down over Yemen of a U.S. surveillance drone on June 6; and a missile attack on a Saudi airport on June 12.

‘The president has the authorization to act, to defend American interests’

On Sunday’s CBS show, host Margaret Brennan asked Cotton what kind of response was warranted.

Cotton, a U.S. Army veteran with combat service in Iraq and Afghanistan, recalled how President Reagan had responded to Iranian actions in the Persian Gulf in the late 1980s, at a time when U.S. warships escorted reflagged Kuwaiti tankers through the waterway after some were damaged by Iranian mines.

(After a U.S. frigate was damaged by an Iranian mine, Reagan in April 1988 ordered the destruction of two Iranian oil platforms, and in an ensuing confrontation the U.S. Navy damaged or destroyed six Iranian ships.)

“These unprovoked attacks on commercial shipping warrant a retaliatory military strike,” Cotton said.

Brennan asked whether he was comparing the situation now to the “Tanker War” in the 1980s.

“We can make a military reac— response in a time and in a manner of our choosing. But, yes,” Cotton repeated, “unprovoked attacks on commercial shipping warrant a retaliatory military strike against the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Asked whether he believed the administration could act without seeking congressional approval first, Cotton replied, “yes.”

From the days of George Washington all the way to President Trump, he said, “the fastest way to get the fire and fury of the U.S. military unleashed on you is to interfere with the freedom of navigation on the open seas and in the air.”

“That’s exactly what Iran is doing in one of the world’s most important strategic chokepoints,” Cotton added. “The president has the authorization to act, to defend American interests.”

Cotton made clear he was not talking about actions like the drawn-out Iraq or Afghanistan wars, “but retaliatory military strikes against Iran that make it clear we will not tolerate any kind of attacks on commercial shipping on the open seas.”

About one-third of the world’s crude oil flows through the Persian Gulf and its Strait of Hormuz.

“If the waters are becoming unsafe, the supply to the entire Western world could be at risk,” International Association of Independent Tanker Owners chairman Paolo d’Amico said in a statement reacting to the attacks on the tankers.

The trade association condemned the incidents “in the strongest possible way.”

“We call on the nations of the world to calm tensions in the region and do everything possible to protect the lives of the seafarers who navigate this vital sea route for the benefit of all.”

Placement of limpet mines depends on the capability of those placing them. Ideally they are placed as near to the keel as possible for maximum effect. If all you have is a speed boat with no dive capability on board you place them where the water line is at or below as conditions permit. If the tanker is empty the water line is much higher than normally loaded.

A 'good' rifleman with a scoped rifle would solve a bunch of these kinds of problems. Oil companies are too cheap to hire them though. Would rather depend on the US to handle it one way or another. Also the UN frowns of folks defending themselves. Some countries are stupid enough to agree with them.

An 'accurate' 50 caliber scoped rifle could hold off speed boats at distance. Could take out both men and motors. The Barrett is NOT accurate enough. I would use a bolt action McMillan or a SERBU semi auto. If you want to go cheap 50 cal, then I would use a magazine fed Safety Harbor top end unit on an AR 15 lower. It IS accurate enough out to 2,000 yards. Each ship would need at least 2 qualified riflemen to handle 12 hour watches while in the danger zone. Other times just be on call.

This would also require a world wide ban on speed boats being allowed within 2,500 yards of either tankers or freighters unless for legitimate reasons like the putting on or off of Pilots or the coming and going of crew in port. Anything inside that would get ONE warning shot, then you start killing with no crap or penalty from anyone. Would be able to enforce it by declaring ports or even whole countries CLOSED to all commercial traffic until the country does agree. Thusly nothing IN or OUT trade wise by sea. Sort of what is in effect with airports today world wide.

Japan demands more proof from U.S. that Iran attacked tankers

June 16 TOKYO

The Japanese government has been requesting the United States for concrete evidence to back its assertion that Iran is to blame for the attacks on two tankers near the Strait of Hormuz on Thursday, government sources said Sunday.

The request came after U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo gave a statement hours after the attacks blaming Iran but without offering proof. The Department of Defense later released a video allegedly showing an Iranian patrol boat removing an unexploded mine attached to the side of the Japanese-operated tanker Kokuka Courageous.

But Japanese government officials remain unconvinced, the sources said. "The U.S. explanation has not helped us go beyond speculation," said one senior government official.

Japan has been seeking more concrete evidence through various channels, including Foreign Minister Taro Kono who is likely to have made the request during a call with his counterpart on Friday, the sources said.

Pompeo said in a press conference Thursday that the United States' assessment was based on their "intelligence, the weapons used, the level of expertise needed to execute the operation, recent similar Iranian attacks on shipping, and the fact that no proxy group operating in the area has the resources and proficiency to act with such a high degree of sophistication."

A source close to Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said, "These are not definite proof that it's Iran."

"Even if it's the United States that makes the assertion, we cannot simply say we believe it," he said.

If having expertise sophisticated enough to conduct the attack could be a reason to conclude that the attacker was Iran, "That would apply to the United States and Israel as well," said a source at the Foreign Ministry.

The attacks occurred around the time Abe was meeting with Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran.

"The attacks have severely affected the prime minister's reputation as he was trying to be a mediator between the United States and Iran," said the source close to the premier. "It is a serious concern, and making mistakes when determining facts is impermissible."

The Japanese government has refrained so far from commenting on who is responsible for the attacks.

Iran to pull out of nuclear treaty if EU fails to save deal, Iranian MP warns
The threat come after Iran's nuclear agency said it would break the terms of the JCPOA and increase the purity of its uranium.

Monday 17 June 2019 16:34, UK

Iran will pull out of the world's nuclear non-proliferation treaty if the EU fails to save another deal struck in 2015 on its nuclear programme, a senior Iranian MP has said.

Mojtaba Zolnour, a hardline member of the Iranian parliament who has often opposed President Hassan Rouhani, reminded Europe Iran had in May set a 60-day deadline "to act".

"There is not much time left until the end of the 60 days ultimatum given by Iran to the Europeans to save the (2015) deal," he said.

"After that Iran will suspend implementation of the non-proliferation treaty."

Mr Zolnour is the chairman of the nuclear subcommittee of the national security and foreign policy committee, according to the Times of Israel, and was formerly Ayatollah Khamenei's deputy representative to the Revolutionary Guards, Fars news agency has reported, suggesting he has the ear to the Supreme Leader.

Behrouz Kamalvandi, a spokesman for Iran's nuclear agency, told reporters in a live TV news conference on Monday morning that Iran's stockpile of low-enriched uranium will exceed internationally agreed limits within 10 days.

Mr Kamalvandi said the amount of uranium it stockpiles would now be "based on the country's needs".

"We have quadrupled the rate of enrichment and even increased it more recently, so that in 10 days it will bypass the 300kg limit," he added.

Tensions in the Middle East have increased in recent months after the US and Saudi Arabia accused Tehran of orchestrating attacks on oil tankers.

The 2015 nuclear deal between Iran, the US, the UK, France, China, Russia and Germany, called the JCPOA, reduced Iran's stockpile of uranium by 98% to 300kg (660lbs), and said that quantity must not be exceeded until 2031.

However, the US unilaterally pulled out of the agreement last year and reimposed sanctions.

Downing Street has warned that "all options" will be examined if Iran fails to meet its obligations under the deal.

Mr Kamalvandi also said Iran needs to increase enrichment until some of the uranium it uses has a 20% concentration of uranium-235 - an isotope of the radioactive material that can sustain a fission reaction.

The JCPOA deal, which was designed to restrict Tehran's nuclear ambitions, also said that concentrations of U-235 should be restricted to 3.67%.

It is possible to make a nuclear bomb from uranium with a concentration of 20% U-235, but so much is needed it is not generally considered practical. Usually, much higher concentrations are required.

Nonetheless, Western governments will be concerned that the Iranian authorities appear willing to break the terms of the agreement that took years to negotiate, especially as experts say increasing concentrations to 90% is something Iran is potentially capable of.

Mr Kamalvandi appealed for help from European countries to help protect them from US sanctions, telling them there was "still time".

He said the Chinese were working with Iran on a redesign of the Arak reactor but European countries would have to help supply parts.

At a meeting in Luxembourg on Monday morning, European foreign ministers said they were still looking for more information on who might be behind the tanker attacks on Thursday.

Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt said on Friday that the UK's own assessment was that Iran was behind the planting of limpet mines on the tankers.

Despite British and US intelligence findings, Germany and others insisted on Monday it needed a clearer picture before wading into a row which could have serious implications in the Middle East.

Meanwhile, a senior Iranian security official said on Monday that Tehran had recently exposed and dismantled a "large US cyber espionage network".

The secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, Ali Shamkhani, told the state broadcaster several CIA agents were arrested after Tehran shared intelligence with its allies.

Iran says the US has no hard evidence about its alleged involvement in the oil tanker attacks and it has consistently denied having a nuclear weapons programme.

Wouldn't it be great if we could end at least one war, before we start another one? Rand Paul is right, if we're going to be over there until the last idiot with a suicide vest is gone, we'll be over there forever.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Remember Bush said the war would last a hundred years if necessary.

Thanks for reminding me of that.

Onward and upward,
airforce

U.N. Officials Say U.S. Planning ‘Tactical Assault’ on Iran As Trump Sends More Troops to Middle East

Despite public sentiment being overwhelming negative, I guess we need to go to war to defeat "Haman."

By Chris Menahan | Information Liberation Tuesday, June 18, 2019

President Donald Trump is sending 1,000 additional US troops to the Middle East as several UN officials told the Hebrew-language only Israeli newspaper Maariv that the US “plans to carry out a tactical assault on Iran in response to the tanker attack in the Persian Gulf on Thursday.”

From ABC News:

The United States is sending 1,000 additional troops to the Middle East, amid rising tensions between the U.S. and Iran. The decision follows last week’s attack on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman that the U.S. blamed on Tehran, with the Pentagon releasing new images on Monday that officials said show Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) members removing an unexploded mine from one of the ship’s hulls.

“In response to a request from the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) for additional forces, and with the advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and in consultation with the White House, I have authorized approximately 1,000 additional troops for defensive purposes to address air, naval, and ground-based threats in the Middle East,” acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan said in a statement on Monday.

The additional personnel are mostly part of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and force protection units, a U.S. official told ABC News.

From the Jerusalem Post, “U.N. officials: U.S. planning a ‘tactical assault’ in Iran”:



Is the US going to attack Iran soon?

Diplomatic sources at the UN headquarters in New York revealed to Maariv that they are assessing the United States’ plans to carry out a tactical assault on Iran in response to the tanker attack in the Persian Gulf on Thursday.

According to the officials, since Friday, the White House has been holding incessant discussions involving senior military commanders, Pentagon representatives and advisers to President Donald Trump.

The military action under consideration would be an aerial bombardment of an Iranian facility linked to its nuclear program, the officials further claimed.

“The bombing will be massive but will be limited to a specific target,” said a Western diplomat.

Pompeo lied his ass off Sunday on Fox News claiming it’s “unmistakable” that Iran was behind the oil tanker attacks last week despite the notion the tankers were hit by “limpet mines” being contradicted by the Japanese.

Of note, Pompeo did not say our intelligence agencies signed off on the White House assessment that Iran was behind the attack. He would only say the intelligence community “has lots of data, lots of evidence,” and “the world will come to see much of it.”

As a reminder, Mike Pompeo told CBN News in May that “as a Christian” he believes Trump may have been sent by god to be a savior of the Jews and fulfill an ancient Jewish prophecy by defeating “Haman” from the Hebrew “Book of Esther” — which CBN said is now Iran.

In related news, President Trump just got a settlement named after him in the Golan Heights:

A great day on the Golan. PM Netanyahu and I had the honor to dedicate “Trump Heights” — first time Israel has dedicated a village in honor of a sitting president since Harry Truman (1949). Happy Birthday Mr. President!! @POTUS pic.twitter.com/fdYWzokFLK

— David M. Friedman (@USAmbIsrael) June 16, 2019

The unveiling of ‘Trump Heights’ town in Golan Heights with Prime Minister Benjamin #Netanyahu and US Ambassador David Friedman (@USAmbIsrael).

Join us LIVE here: https://t.co/ST924trmOl pic.twitter.com/u1f5Ii1yFW

— i24NEWS English (@i24NEWS_EN) June 16, 2019

Thank you Mr. Prime Minister, a great honor! https://t.co/ozLz84g3i0

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 17, 2019

Late last year, President Trump told the Washington Post in a buried interviews that he’d like to pull out of the Middle East entirely but Israel is “one reason” to stay.

President Trump suggested Tuesday that he’d like to leave the Middle East entirely but Israel is “one reason” for remaining.

He also said he’s standing by the Saudis because “without them, Israel would be in a lot more trouble.” https://t.co/8N7f5qkA2s

— Chris Menahan 🇺🇸 (@infolibnews) November 28, 2018

Last month, Haaretz reported that Netanyahu’s “Iran dilemma” is “how to get Trump to act without putting Israel on the front line.”

The Israeli newspaper Haaretz ran a piece on Monday saying that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s “Iran dilemma” is “how to get Trump to act without putting Israel on the front line.” https://t.co/V7ZGQMTG15

— Chris Menahan 🇺🇸 (@infolibnews) May 21, 2019

Haaretz also said that Netanyahu will be the “prime suspect” if the US attacks Iran because he “is the only world leader to openly express support for the escalating U.S. campaign against Iran.”

So far, it’s looking like all it’s taken is a few attacks on a couple ships which the White House and Israeli intelligence blamed on Iran for the stage to be set for a US attack.

Last month, Netanyahu told his own defense chiefs that Israel is not going to risk any of their blood and treasure to participate in a US-led war with Iran (Israel similarly had no involvement in Iraq despite Netanyahu agitating forcefully in favor of it).

Netanyahu said to tell his defense chiefs to keep Israel out of Iran-US tensions https://t.co/AiqwINF5ax

— The Times of Israel (@TimesofIsrael) May 15, 2019

If we were to have a large-scale war with Iran, due to the demographics of the US military it would be mostly Trump-voting Middle Americans who were sent to fight and die.

Other than fake-right neocons, no one appears to be buying into the White House’s narrative on Iran.

Both the satirical right-wing site The Babylon Bee and the left-wing site The Onion mocked the US’s claims Iran was behind the attack in viral posts last week:

John Bolton: ‘When Has The Government Ever Lied About Attacks On Ships In A Gulf Somewhere Just To Provoke War?’https://t.co/wHFFiYIhOC

— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) June 14, 2019

Bleeding John Bolton Stumbles Into Capitol Building Claiming That Iran Shot Him https://t.co/FodHlv7aZN pic.twitter.com/pTscfruFZH

— The Onion (@TheOnion) June 13, 2019

Despite public sentiment being overwhelming negative, I guess we need to go to war to defeat “Haman.”

Jerusalem Post: U.S. Bombing Of Iran “Will Be Massive But Will Be Limited To A Specific Target”
The clock is ticking, and one wrong move could spark World War 3


By Michael Snyder End Of The American Dream Tuesday, June 18, 2019

I write this article with a heavy heart.

In recent weeks I had come to the conclusion that there probably would not be a war with Iran in 2019, but now I have to admit that I was wrong. U.S. officials were very quick to blame Iran for the attack on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman, and President Trump’s advisers have reportedly been pushing him very hard to strike Iran. President Trump had been hesitant to engage Iran militarily, but now it appears that he is going to give the war hawks in his administration exactly what they want. According to the Jerusalem Post, a bombing campaign is being planned that “will be massive but will be limited to a specific target”…

According to the officials, since Friday, the White House has been holding incessant discussions involving senior military commanders, Pentagon representatives and advisers to President Donald Trump.

The military action under consideration would be an aerial bombardment of an Iranian facility linked to its nuclear program, the officials further claimed.

“The bombing will be massive but will be limited to a specific target,” said a Western diplomat.

If this happens, it will start a war.

Iran is home to more than 81 million people, it is armed to the teeth, and it is the global central hub for Shia Islam.

It would be the biggest war that the United States has fought since World War II, and the Iranians would fight to the death and they would throw everything that they have at us. That would include unleashing all Iranian and Hezbollah operatives in North America to conduct widespread terror operations. Blood would be spilled on a massive scale, and there would be great chaos inside our own nation.

Are we sure that we really want that?

Unfortunately, events are beginning to spin out of control very rapidly now. On Monday, Iran announced that it will surpass the uranium stockpile limit that was established by Obama’s nuclear deal in just 10 days…

“Today the countdown to pass the 300 kilograms reserve of enriched uranium has started and in 10 days time we will pass this limit,” said Iran’s atomic energy organisation spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi.

“This is based on the Articles 26 and 36 of the (nuclear deal), and will be reversed once other parties live up to their commitments.”

Kamalvandi acknowledged the country has already QUADRUPLED its production of low-enriched uranium.

Needless to say, that is likely to accelerate U.S. military planning.

And very shortly after Iran announced this, U.S. Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan released a statement announcing that 1,000 more U.S. troops are being sent to the Middle East…

The United States is sending 1,000 additional troops to the Middle East, amid rising tensions between the U.S. and Iran. The decision follows last week’s attack on two tankers in the Gulf of Oman that the U.S. blamed on Tehran, with the Pentagon releasing new images on Monday that officials said show Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) members removing an unexploded mine from one of the ship’s hulls.

“In response to a request from the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) for additional forces, and with the advice of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and in consultation with the White House, I have authorized approximately 1,000 additional troops for defensive purposes to address air, naval, and ground-based threats in the Middle East,” acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan said in a statement on Monday.

Sending troops to the Middle East will raise tensions, but it won’t start a war.

However, bombing Iran will start a war, and there seems to be a growing consensus in Washington that it needs to be done. For example, just consider the words of Senator Tom Cotton…

As the Trump administration works to convince allies that Iran was responsible for last week’s attack on two tankers near the Persian Gulf, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) said Sunday that “this unprovoked attack on commercial shipping warrants retaliatory military strikes.”

“The fastest way to get the fire and fury of the U.S. military unleashed on you is to interfere with the freedom of navigation on the open seas and in the air,” Cotton told CBS’ “Face the Nation.”

Unfortunately, most Americans don’t seem to understand that this would not be anything like our wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Iran has been preparing for a military confrontation with the west for decades, and many are convinced that their weapons programs are much more advanced than we have been led to believe.

As our friends at ANP have pointed out, back in 2016 a former director of the CIA and four other formerly high ranking U.S. officials co-authored an editorial in which they made the claim that Iran already has nuclear weapons…

We assess, from U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency reports and other sources, that Iran probably already has nuclear weapons. Over 13 years ago, prior to 2003, Iran was manufacturing nuclear-weapon components, like bridge-wire detonators and neutron initiators, performing non-fissile explosive experiments of an implosion nuclear device, and working on the design of a nuclear warhead for the Shahab-III missile.

Thirteen years ago Iran was already a threshold nuclear-missile state. It is implausible that Iran suspended its program for over a decade for a nuclear deal with President Obama.

Iran probably has nuclear warheads for the Shahab-III medium-range missile, which they tested for making EMP attacks. Two recent tests violate UN agreements, demonstrating that Iran is brazenly developing its nuclear-capable missiles. Iran already has the largest medium-range ballistic-missile force in the Middle East.

The individuals that co-authored those paragraphs have some extremely impressive credentials…

Ambassador R. James Woolsey, former director of central intelligence, is the chancellor of the Institute of World Politics and the chairman of the Leadership Council of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; William R. Graham was President Reagan’s science adviser, and acting administrator of NASA, and is the chairman of the Congressional EMP Commission; Ambassador Henry Cooper was the director of the Strategic Defense Initiative and chief negotiator at the Defense and Space Talks with the USSR; Fritz Ermarth was chairman of the National Intelligence Council; Peter Vincent Pry is executive director of the EMP Task Force on National and Homeland Security and served in the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA.

Yes, it is possible that they could be wrong.

But what if they are right?

Could we be walking into a war against a bunch of apocalyptic nutjobs that already have nuclear weapons and wouldn’t be afraid to use them against us and our allies?

There is no way that we should be rushing into a war with Iran, because the consequences of such a war could be unthinkable.

We have an extremely limited amount of time to stop this conflict from happening, because once the missiles start flying there will be no turning back.

The clock is ticking, and one wrong move could spark World War 3. Let us pray that President Trump makes the right decisions, because the fate of countless lives is now in his hands.

The U.S. is saying we don't want war. And Iran is saying they don't want war. And yet, here we are.

Will cooler heads prevail? I hope so, but I'm not very confident.

Onward and upward,
airforce

I don't know how it will begin but I do know how it will end. Once it starts Iran will be destroyed.

Downing of US drone a ‘clear message’ to Washington — Iran’s IRGC commander

"Iran is not seeking war with any country, but we are fully prepared to defend Iran."

By RT Thursday, June 20, 2019

The head of Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards says the downing of a US drone over its territory was a “clear message” to Washington, proving Tehran will react strongly to any military aggression.

Just hours earlier, Iran claimed to have shot down a US RQ-4 spy drone over Hormozgan Province. Images of the suspected hit were later posted online, showing a burning device falling from the sky.

“The downing of the American drone was a clear message to America,” the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commander-in-chief, Hossein Salami, told local media. He added that any intrusion across Iran’s borders would be seen as a “red line” and would be met with strong resistance.

Iran is not seeking war with any country, but we are fully prepared to defend Iran.

Salami’s comments were reiterated by Iran’s Foreign Ministry which said that any “violations of Iran’s borders” would be responded to.

We warn of the consequences of such illegal and provocative measures.

Tehran said later that the drone had taken off from a US airbase in the region and had its tracking equipment turned off during the flight, contravening aviation laws.

Washington has yet to officially respond to the incident. However, unnamed US Navy sources told Reuters that the maritime version of the Global Hawk – the MQ-4C Triton – had been shot down over international waters.

It is the latest incident adding to heightening tensions between the US and Iran in recent months. Earlier, Washington blamed Iran for attacking two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman.

However, these claims somehow contradict a statement by the company operating one of the ill-fated tankers. The ‘Kokuka Courageous’ owner – one of the vessels hit in the assault – said its sailors had seen “flying objects” in the sky before they were attacked.



Iran Shoots Down US Drone, Says “Ready For War”

Tyler Durden
June 20th, 2019
ZeroHedge


Tensions between the US and Iran flared on Thursday when the Iranian Revolutionary Guard shot down an American drone that was said to have flown into Iranian airspace (the US claims the drone flew over international territory). The drone was reportedly flying over the Strait of Hormuz – that critical chokepoint for the global oil trade – not far from where two oil tankers were recently attacked.

“We will defend Iran’s airspace and maritime boundaries with all our might,” Ali Shamkhani, secretary-general for the Supreme National Security Council was quoted as saying by state-run Islamic Students’ News Agency. “It doesn’t matter which country’s aircraft cross our airspace.

IRGC Commander Hossein Salami said shooting down the drone had sent a clear and strong message for the US: Iran’s borders are ‘red lines’ and though Iran doesn’t seek war, Iran is ready for war. The US, meanwhile, denies that the drone crossed into Iran’s airspace, and says it was in international airspace the whole time.

The news sent oil prices surging, with Brent up as much as 3%. President Trump has been briefed on the incident and the White House is “monitoring the situation.” The US military has branded the shooting “an unprovoked attack.”

The shooting follows attacks on six tankers in the region, which Iran has denied responsibility for (including the two from last week). On Wednesday, a news agency operated by Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen said that the rebels had hit a power station in Jazan, Saudi Arabia, with a cruise missile, though these reports weren’t independently verified.

Numerous geopolitical experts warned that Thursday’s incident “significantly raises” the prospects for international conflict.

Particularly after the US dispatched more troops to the region last week, tensions between the US and Iran just won’t subside, with Tehran still furious over US sanctions on oil sales. With Tehran poised to violate its agreements under the JCPOA on enriched uranium stockpiles, many are fearful that a ‘hot war’ between the US and Iran might erupt. If it did, some of Washington’s biggest geopolitical adversaries (Russia and China) could get involved, triggering WWIII.

Iran apparently fired at another surveillance drone over the Gulf of Oman last week, the same day the two tankers were hit. I'm pretty sure if it was show down over Iran, the Iranians would be proudly showing off the wreckage to everyone.



Onward and upward,
airforce

President Trump believes the downing of the U.S. drone by Iran was an unintentional mistake and the situation is “going to work out.”

BREAKING: Pres. Trump says he finds it “hard to believe” Iran’s downing of U.S. drone was intentional: “I have a feeling that it was a mistake.”

“It’s all going to work out,” the president says. https://t.co/VpLpDTcdeq https://t.co/aRGgYKXhrv

— ABC News (@ABC) June 20, 2019

Well, let's hope so. War with iran will definitely be bad for Iran, but I don't think Iran is going to be the pushover that Iraq was. They have plenty of people with combat experience in Yemen, Syria, and Palestine. They already know what we can do, and I'm sure they've been plenty busy working out how they're going to fight us.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Been listening to Matt Bracken.

He is convinced that Iran is deliberately trying to provoke us and makes a compelling argument as to why they think they can win with the help of their allies.

The neocons are chomping at the bit, just itching to start bombing. Putin is warning that a war with Iran will be a catastrophe for the entire region and that the conflict could spread globally. Thankfully, Trump has taken the bait yet.

Trump is giving Iran a way out, saying he thinks it was a mistake and not intentional. It's possible, we once accidentally shot down an Iranian airliner about thirty years ago. Maybe Trump has some intelligence that it was a mistake, maybe not, but it sure looks like he's trying to avoid war.

Onward and upward,
airforce

I think this guy has it figured out.

I agree, Trump is looking for a diplomatic solution. I can't remember where I heard it, but a war with Iran would be "Trump's War," and that's not something he wants to have going into 2020. Remember, he campaigned in 2016 as the peace candidate, and he would really like to do that in 2020 as well.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Trump Ordered Military Strike On Iran, Then Backed Off Hours Later
The New York Times and WSJ report, citing a handful of senior officials, that the president was prepared to attack a number of Iranian targets, including radar and missile batteries


By Zero Hedge Friday, June 21, 2019

President Trump reportedly gave the order to attack Iran Thursday night in response to its downing of a US drone that Washington claims was in international waters at the time. The US went so far as to maneuver planes and ships into position before the strike was called off.

The New York Times and WSJ report, citing a handful of senior officials, that the president was prepared to attack a number of Iranian targets, including radar and missile batteries. However, he eventually gave the word to stand down, with the NYT reporting that Trump chose to pull US military forces back, though it isn’t clear why. Earlier in the day, Trump said during a press conference with Canada’s Justin Trudeau that it was possible that a ‘rogue’ general had authorized the drone take-down, and that the whole incident might be some kind of mistake. The strike was still in motion as late as 7 pm ET (just before dawn Iran time), and officials were surprised when it didn’t happen, given the intense discussions between top national security personnel.

Iran has shot down an American drone and now the U.S. is accusing Iran of having done so in international airspace. Alex breaks down how this event may play into the hands of the Deep State and lead to a hot war.

According to Reuters, a senior administration said US warplanes took to the air and ships were put in position for a retaliatory attack only for an order to come to stand down, without any weapons being fired. Strikes had been set for early in the day to minimize harm to civilians and the military, and it was unclear if the administration would move ahead with attacks at a later date. Trump made clear that the situation would have been much more tense if the unmanned $130 million surveillance drone had been flown by a pilot. Washington had warned Tehran of the attack via Oman.

The attack would have been the third strike ordered in the Middle East by Trump, following two missile strikes in Syria in 2017 and 2018. It wasn’t clear whether Trump simply changed his mind on the attacks, or whether the military was embracing a different strategy.

Trump’s national security advisers split about whether to respond militarily. Senior administration officials said Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, National Security Advisor John Bolton and CIA Director Gina Haspel had favored a military response. But top Pentagon officials cautioned that such an action could set off a spiraling escalation that could draw in American forces in the region.

For what it’s worth, Trump’s decision to cancel the strike will please international officials who had urged the US to exercise restraint. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Kang on Friday urged the US and Iran to resolve issues through dialogue in response to a question Friday about reports of an aborted American military strike.

Still, with Iran set to breach its limits on enriched uranium set out in the Iran deal within the next few days, the prospect of military escalation is hardly off the table.

If The U.S. And Iran Go To War, Tens Of Thousands Of Missiles Will Rain Down On Israel
Once a military conflict with Iran starts, it will be nearly impossible to stop


By Michael Snyder | End Of The American Dream Friday, June 21, 2019

We could be on the verge of the most cataclysmic war that the Middle East has ever seen.

As you will see below, we are being told that there will be a “measured” U.S. response to the downing of a U.S. Navy drone by Iranian forces. In other words, we should expect some sort of U.S. military action against Iran to happen soon. If the Iranians choose not to respond to that attack, that will hopefully be the end of it for a while. But if the Iranians respond by firing their highly advanced anti-ship missiles at U.S. warships in the Persian Gulf, the Trump administration would feel forced to use overwhelming force in return, and that would likely spark an all-out war in the region.

And in the event of an all-out war, Iran would almost certainly hit Israel with a massive barrage of missiles. In fact, last month the Iranian Parliament’s vice-speaker Ali Motahhari specifically threatened this sort of an attack…

Mr Motahhari told FARS news agency: ‘The US military forces’ deployment in the Persian Gulf is more of the nature of psychological warfare. They are not ready for a war, specially when Israel is within our range.’

Today, Iran possesses a highly sophisticated missile arsenal, and some of those missiles are capable of hitting targets up to 2,500 kilometers away. For an in-depth examination of Iranian missile capabilities, I would commend a National Interest article entitled “Iran Has Amassed the Largest Ballistic Missile Force in the Middle East”.

Matt Bracken breaks down the military and political drama playing out in the Gulf of Oman near the strategic Straight of Hormuz.

Of course if Iran starts firing missiles at Israel, it is inevitable that Israel will start firing missiles back at Iran. And in such a scenario it is unthinkable that Iran’s proxy Hezbollah would sit quietly on the sidelines.

At this point Hezbollah has accumulated an absolutely massive rocket arsenal in southern Lebanon. According to the Jerusalem Post, they now possess “more than 150,000 rockets”…

Hezbollah’s massive rocket arsenal of more than 150,000 rockets pose a major threat. These include long-range rockets such as the Zelzal, Fateh 110 and the Fajr, as well as shorter range such as Katyushas. The Fateh 110 has a range of several hundred kilometers.

There is no place in Israel that is out of the range of those rockets. Without a doubt, Israel’s anti-missile systems are extremely advanced, but if thousands of missiles are fired in a very short period of time Israel won’t be able to intercept them all.

In order to stop the rocket fire completely, Israel would have to invade southern Lebanon on very short notice, and it is quite interesting that the IDF actually just wrapped up a major exercise which simulated a future war with Hezbollah. The following comes from ABC News…

Israel wrapped up its largest military drill in years on Wednesday, with thousands of troops from the army, navy and air force simulating a future war with the militant Lebanese Hezbollah group amid fears that Iran would draw its Shiite proxy into the recent growing tensions in the Persian Gulf.

This absolutely enormous military drill made headlines all over the world, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was even on hand for the conclusion of the exercise…

The exercise, which was focused on the country’s north—not far from contested borders with Lebanon and Syria, two countries which Israel has accused Iran’s allies of firing rockets from—was attended by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The leader, who also serves as defense minister, spoke with participating troops of the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) and issued a warning to those threatening his country.

“I am concluding a major, multi-corps IDF exercise in several areas. I am very impressed by the improvement in readiness, by the fighting spirit of the soldiers and commanders, and mainly by the destructive power of the IDF,” Netanyahu said.

It appears to be inevitable that an all-out war between Israel and Hezbollah will happen at some point, and Israel will most definitely win that war.

But the death and destruction caused by tens of thousands of missiles fired by Iran and Hezbollah will be immense, and so we should hope that such a conflict is put off for as long as possible.

Unfortunately, it appears that a full-blown war could begin in the Middle East at any time. Top congressional leaders were summoned to the White House Situation Room on Thursday, and following that briefing the press was told to soon expect a “measured” U.S. response…

Top administration officials and lawmakers have left the White House after a classified briefing lasting over an hour, about Iran’s sudden downing of an American surveillance drone in the Middle East — and a “measured” U.S. response, they suggested, is likely coming soon.

Amid mounting tension between the U.S. and Iran, the White House earlier Thursday invited House and Senate leaders and Democrats and Republicans on the House and Senate Intelligence and Armed Services Committees to meet with President Trump in the White House’s secure Situation Room.

And we almost got that “measured” response on Thursday night. According to multiple media reports, President Trump approved military strikes against Iran but then pulled back at the last moment…

President Donald Trump approved military strikes against Iran in retaliation for downing a U.S. surveillance drone, but pulled back from launching them Thursday night after a day of escalating tensions.

As late as 7 p.m. Thursday, military and diplomatic officials were expecting a strike, after intense discussions and debate at the White House among the president’s top national security officials and congressional leaders, according to multiple senior administration officials involved in or briefed on the deliberations.

Officials said the president had initially approved attacks on a handful of Iranian targets, like radar and missile batteries.

We should be very thankful for President Trump’s restraint, and hopefully it will continue, because at this moment we are literally on the verge of World War 3 erupting in the Middle East.

Right now, a “perfect storm” is developing all over the globe. Events are starting to move at a pace that is breathtaking, and it isn’t going to take much to push the planet into a state of absolute chaos.

Once a military conflict with Iran starts, it will be nearly impossible to stop.

The time to stop it is now, and let us hope that President Trump makes the right choices in the days ahead.

10 MINS FROM WAR: Trump Stopped Iran Strike After Asking How Many Would Die
President says strike would not have been 'proportional' action


By Steve Watson | Infowars.com Friday, June 21, 2019

President Trump took to Twitter this morning to explain the reports that he stopped a military strike on Iran at the last minute Thursday, declaring that the strike would not have been ‘proportional’ to the country shooting down a drone.

Both the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, citing a handful of senior officials, reported that the president was prepared to attack a number of Iranian targets, including radar and missile batteries, but that he pulled the plug at the last moment.

The President explained his actions Friday morning, noting that “We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights.”

“When I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it.” Trump added.

….On Monday they shot down an unmanned drone flying in International Waters. We were cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different sights when I asked, how many will die. 150 people, sir, was the answer from a General. 10 minutes before the strike I stopped it, not….

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2019

….proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone. I am in no hurry, our Military is rebuilt, new, and ready to go, by far the best in the world. Sanctions are biting & more added last night. Iran can NEVER have Nuclear Weapons, not against the USA, and not against the WORLD!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2019

The President also took a swipe at his predecessor, noting that “President Obama made a desperate and terrible deal with Iran.”

President Obama made a desperate and terrible deal with Iran – Gave them 150 Billion Dollars plus I.8 Billion Dollars in CASH! Iran was in big trouble and he bailed them out. Gave them a free path to Nuclear Weapons, and SOON. Instead of saying thank you, Iran yelled…..

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2019

….Death to America. I terminated deal, which was not even ratified by Congress, and imposed strong sanctions. They are a much weakened nation today than at the beginning of my Presidency, when they were causing major problems throughout the Middle East. Now they are Bust!….

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 21, 2019

Earlier in the day on Thursday, Trump pondered over whether the downing of the drone was carried out by a ‘rogue’ actor in the Iranian military, and noted that the entire thing could have been a mistake.

Conservatives within the media, including most notably Tucker Carlson, urged Trump not to go ahead with military action, advising that it would be used against him by the deep state.

It seems Trump has staved off another potential military interventionist disaster for now.

<div class=’ifw-player’ data-video-id=’5d0bff095437930017f4f0d8′></div><script src=’https://www.infowarsmedia.com/js/player.js’ async></script>

The Deep State is actively trying to get America involved in a hot war with Iran. Joel Skousen joins Alex via Skype to break down why President Trump must act wisely to avoid global catastrophe.

Well, that was close. he says he cancelled the strike after a general told him about 150 people would be killed in the attack. he reasoned that killing innocent people would not be a "proportionate response" to shooting down an unmanned drone.



Onward and upward,
airforce

Now he's called off the ICE raids he's been talking about for a couple weeks.

I think I'm seeing a pattern here. I've been wondering why he announced he had called off the airstrikes against Iran, and even telegraphing what their targets would have been. Why would he do that? I don't think he ever had any intention of bombing Iran, but is using this as a ploy to bring Iran to the diplomatic table. And now I think he did the same thing with the supposed ICE raids. he never had any intention of actually doing them, but is using it as a way to bring the Democrats to the bargaining table.

Pretty clever, when you stop and think about it.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Iran Says Middle East Will Be ‘Set On Fire’ If US Attacks
Warning comes after President Trump pulled back on military strike


By Audrey Conklin | Daily Caller News Foundation Saturday, June 22, 2019

Tehran warned President Donald Trump Saturday that if the U.S. attacks Iran, the entire Middle East will be “set on fire.”

The warning comes after a U.S. Navy drone was shot down Thursday by the Islamic Republic and a week after two oil tankers were attacked near the Strait of Hormuz. Reports surfaced Friday that Trump was considering an attack on Iran, which he ultimately decided against “10 minutes” before strikes were set to be launched.

“Firing one bullet towards Iran will set fire to the interests of America and its allies” in the Middle East, armed forces general staff spokesman Brigadier General Abolfazl Shekarchi told Tasnim News Agency, according to AFP.

“If the enemy — especially America and its allies in the region — make the military mistake of shooting the powder keg on which America’s interests lie, the region will be set on fire,” Shekarchi said.

Foreign ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi gave a similar warning to the U.S., Reuters reported.

“Regardless of any decision [U.S. officials] make … we will not allow any of Iran’s borders to be violated. Iran will firmly confront any aggression or threat by America,” Mousavi said.

Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh told news agency IRNA on Saturday that the U.S. drone could have entered Iran’s airspace over a mistake by “a general or some operators” but was nonetheless “an act of trampling international aviation laws by a spy aircraft, which met our natural response.”

Does he commit plagiarism much?

I don't know if diplomacy is going to work or not, but at least they're talking. Neither side wants to back down, but it looks like neither side wants war either.

Onward and upward,
airforce

Trump Ordered Secret Cyber Attacks On Iran As An “Alternative” To War Thursday Night
Cyber operation involved disabling computer systems which control Iran's rocket and missile launchers


By Zero Hedge Sunday, June 23, 2019

It’s been revealed that President Trump did order an attack on Iran – but not a military assault – instead, the US initiated a major cyber attack against an Iranian intelligence outfit the Pentagon believes was part of last week’s limpet mine incident involving two tankers in the Gulf of Oman.

According to Yahoo News, which first broke the story – which was later confirmed Saturday evening by CNN and The Washington Post – the “retaliatory digital strike” was launched on Thursday evening just as the world was bracing itself for possible US airstrikes on Iran:

On Thursday evening, U.S. Cyber Command launched a retaliatory digital strike against an Iranian spy group that supported last week’s limpet mine attacks on commercial ships, according to two former intelligence officials.

The report relies on unnamed defense sources, which further added more details in a CNN follow-up, including that the group is tied to Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and that the spy group had used unique software to track tankers that had been targeted in last week’s June 13 incident.

CNN reported as follows:

USCC [U.S. Cyber Command] attacked the spy group, which has ties to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, after Iran attacked ships in the region, the officials said.

The US official added the strike targeted an Iranian spy group’s computer software that was used to track the tankers that were targeted in the Gulf of Oman on June 13.

And the AP also noted that Thursday night’s cyber operation involved disabling computer systems which control Iran’s rocket and missile launchers, according to anonymous US officials. Trump was said to have ordered the cyber operations against IRGC computer systems as an alternative to starting an overt war.

“Two officials told The Associated Press that the strikes were conducted with approval from Trump. A third official confirmed the broad outlines of the strike,” according to the AP’s reporting.

The Pentagon has neither confirmed or denied the report; however, the Department of Homeland Security over the weekend said that cyber attacks from Iranian state-linked sources have increased dramatically in the past weeks as tensions have soared.

The DHS’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency said in a statement Saturday that it “is aware of a recent rise in malicious cyber activity directed at United States industries and government agencies by Iranian regime actors and proxies.”

“We will continue to work with our intelligence community and cybersecurity partners to monitor Iranian cyber activity, share information, and take steps to keep America and our allies safe,” the DHS statement added.

The effectiveness of this latest alleged American cyber-attack is completely unknown at this point, and has not been confirmed by either the US or Iranian side.

Assuming it is indeed accurate, there’s little doubt this is a well-timed controlled and purposeful “leak” out of the Pentagon or White House designed to underscore the “tough” response to the Iranians out of Washington.