Iran

[Lonewolf_50]

Originally Posted by jolihokistix

Just saw a report on the cluster munitions that Iran is allegedly dropping on Israel, with 50%+ of their missiles bursting mid-air to release explosive winged bomblets of around 8 kg each over a 10-kilometer area.

If the intent is to do harm, cluster munitions are an effective way to do that. That is why they were developed. Message is clear: "If we bleed, you bleed."

Originally Posted by ORAC

NYP: https://nypost.com/2026/03/11/us-new...th-drone-army/

Taking an idea that Ukraine did last year and trying it in California? Interesting.

Originally Posted by Less Hair

Iran does not hate the US. The Mullahs might.

Wrong.
It is dishonest to artificially separate the nation from its leadership. You will also find a bountiful percentage of the IRGC who are quite anti American, and others.
Iran, collectively, is guided and led by the Mullah's, has been for nearly half of a century, and their continued position as regards the Great Satan and Death to America has not changed.
A characterization of Iran Hates America is accurate.

(It is one of the great tragedy's of the 20th and 21st centurie that a path towards better relations has not been found. There have been many opportunities).

If, on the other hand, you suggest or assert that "many Iranians do not hate the US" you'd probably be right. (I'd at least guess that you are right).

[ORAC]

Oops….

Video

https://x.com/IsraelMFA/status/2032092851593445682?s=20

​​​​​​​The Iranian regime is firing missiles at Jerusalem, Israel's capital.

One of them struck a few hundred meters from the Old City, the Western Wall, Al-Aqsa Mosque and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

Protecting lives & worshippers' safety comes first. That is why prayer at all holy sites has been temporarily suspended.

[[email protected]]

The US DOD (DOW?) interprets the rule rather more broadly....

The US DOD Law of War Manual allows attacks on object that: sustain the enemy's ability to fight economically; generate revenue that funds the war effort; being war-sustaining targets. US doctrine cites: Oil production and export facilities; commodity production funding military operations; financial assets used to pay armed forces. Under the US DOD logic, oil infrastructure funding a state's military budget can be lawful targets.

Which presumably doesn't include girls schools - a war crime then? The blame for the hit has been acknowledged by the US military - shame their leader can't be as honest.

[ORAC]

Which presumably doesn't include girls schools - a war crime then? The blame for the hit has been acknowledged by the US military - shame their leader can't be as honest.

Only if it was deliberate, but it wasn’t.

Blame hasn’t yet been acknowledged, just a preliminary report which says the evidence points to it have been a deliberately aimed Tomahawk rather than faulty navigation or damage to the missile. Evidence suggests that old intelligence showed the building as being part of the targeted military compound, the target list not having been updated since it became a school.

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/o...ool-rcna262967

Presumably a formal apology will follow the final report. What action will follow the final report remains to be seen. I would assume it would judged to be one of the things that occur in the fog of war unless someone was remiss in assessing intelligence and updating the target database.

[Hangarless]

The Matt Whitaker clip I spoke of yesterday.

https://www.foxnews.com/video/6390752234112

[Ronald Reagan]

What wonderful news. If Israel can keep killing the IRGC and Basij in this way at their checkpoints and while on patrol it would make it far easier for the people to rise up.

On Wednesday, around 100 Basij soldiers were killed across Tehran by dozens to hundreds of suicide drones in a covert operation some are comparing to Israel’s previous pager operation against Hezbollah in Lebanon. The drones hit Basij bases, motorcycles, and vehicles, targeting IRGC, Basij, and special forces checkpoints.

Suicide drones hit Tehran as instability mounts inside Iran

[fdr]

Originally Posted by ORAC

Video

Lockheed's P3 is/was a strong aircraft.

[Canary Boy]

In response to a warning from the FBI that they had received a credible threat to California from Iranian drones launched from vessels off of the west coast of the US, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said “To be clear, no such threat exists and it never did”. Could there be any better reason for taking cover 🥴

[tdracer]

Originally Posted by Canary Boy

In response to a warning from the FBI that they had received a credible threat to California from Iranian drones launched from vessels off of the west coast of the US, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said “To be clear, no such threat exists and it never did”. Could there be any better reason for taking cover 🥴

Right, since other Iranian 'Bagdad Bob' claims and threats have had so much factual basis (e.g. sinking an American carrier).
They've also claimed they're going to assassinate Trump (they'll need to get in line - people have been trying to assassinate Trump for years....).

[ORAC]

So, Scott Bessent has said the WH is discussing using the USN and “an international coalition” to escort tankers through the Gulf.

Well Macron has e pressed an interest in such an arrangement - all I can say is thank god President Trump has dismissed the requirement for a UK aircraft carrier saying they are “not needed”…..

You Tube

[Peter_K]

Originally Posted by ORAC

Only if it was deliberate, but it wasn’t.

Blame hasn’t yet been acknowledged, just a preliminary report which says the evidence points to it have been a deliberately aimed Tomahawk rather than faulty navigation or damage to the missile. Evidence suggests that old intelligence showed the building as being part of the targeted military compound, the target list not having been updated since it became a school.

https://www.nbcnews.com/world/iran/o...ool-rcna262967

Presumably a formal apology will follow the final report. What action will follow the final report remains to be seen. I would assume it would judged to be one of the things that occur in the fog of war unless someone was remiss in assessing intelligence and updating the target database.

That is a very dangerous interpretation possibly justifying future atrocities. If I was to run over a school girl on a pedestrian crossing because I was distracted by looking for something in a glove compartment, would that make me innocent? Of course not. We are taking responsibility for our actions regardless if they were deliberate, or accidental.

[langleybaston]

Originally Posted by ORAC

So, Scott Bessent has said the WH is discussing using the USN and “an international coalition” to escort tankers through the Gulf.

Well Macron has e pressed an interest in such an arrangement - all I can say is thank god President Trump has dismissed the requirement for a UK aircraft carrier saying they are “not needed”…..

https://youtu.be/k26Uw6f5mTE?si=76xI9SQrTqXIshUL

The problem is that Great Britain does need the USA. To be virtually friendless in a dangerous world is not desirable. It takes years to make friends, moments to lose them.

[El Grifo]

Originally Posted by langleybaston

The problem is that Great Britain does need the USA. To be virtually friendless in a dangerous world is not desirable. It takes years to make friends, moments to lose them.

Something in what you say LB.
Since england wrote the suicide note to Europe, they appear to be cast adrift on a sea of misfortune !

[EDLB]

My take, the complete carrier group ships are needed to protect the CVN from different threats. They can despatch flying material for convoy protection but have not enough excess ships available for a convoy protection. Even with several additional navy ships from other nations this will be a risky passage.
And who pays out the damage claims from the insurers?

[dead_pan]

Originally Posted by langleybaston

The problem is that Great Britain does need the USA. To be virtually friendless in a dangerous world is not desirable. It takes years to make friends, moments to lose them.

Meh. They'll change their mind again in a week or two.

As for being an unreliable ally, well they certainly know something about that of late.

[dead_pan]

Originally Posted by EDLB

My take, the complete carrier group ships are needed to protect the CVN from different threats. They can despatch flying material for convoy protection but have not enough excess ships available for a convoy protection. Even with several additional navy ships from other nations this will be a risky passage.
And who pays out the damage claims from the insurers?

My take, the US is attempting to diversify the risk to resolve a mess they instigated.

I wouldn’t envy any sailor whose ordered into that shooting gallery.

[ORAC]

The problem is that Great Britain does need the USA. To be virtually friendless in a dangerous world is not desirable. It takes years to make friends, moments to lose them.

I’m sorry, are talking about the USA or the UK? 🤔

Any way, I’m deeply hurt that you think that I am suggesting the UK would not send a carrier if asked.

It shouldn’t be a problem once we have arranged with European partner states to provide a screen of AD and ASW frigates (our sole available already heading for Cyprus), together with logistic ships to provide fuel and solid stores - and of course the USN to provide a couple of SSN escorts, the Anson being somewhere in the southern hemisphere.

I think we might even have a handful of F-35Bs and CR crews left over from our small operational fleet after having reinforced Cyprus…..

[langleybaston]

Originally Posted by dead_pan

Meh. They'll change their mind again in a week or two.

As for being an unreliable ally, well they certainly know something about that of late.

For so many aviation aspects we have hitherto relied in part cooperation with USA. Likewise Int. We need America more than America needs us. Time for starmer to take a course of Realpolitik. Or too late.

[langleybaston]

[QUOTE=ORAC;12051207]I’m sorry, are talking about the USA or the UK? 🤔 Quote.


For the avoidance of doubt I believe that Great Britain does need the USA.

[Mr Mac]

Langley Bastion
It may have in the past, but time to find a new school friend as our old one seems to have found new friend's but has forgot the old adage re old friend's being like Gold etc.

Cheers
Mr Mac