Iran

[langleybaston]

North Korea?

[Bell_ringer]

Originally Posted by GlobalNav

The lack of planning seems to be at the political level. Looks to me like there is no lack of military planning and it has been superb.

No doubt, but you can't separate the two. The success of a conflict isn't measured by who had the best logistics.
The services will always execute their task to the best of their ability and no question, they have done well here, but most of us grasp that history has clearly shown the military is often put into situations they should never be in by cowboy politicians who have no clue and no skin in the game.

If the Europeans take time to really consider what they will be asking of their men and women, then they are welcome to some coffee and cakes.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Bell_ringer

He also intends preventing any ships leaving that paid the toll. At least the US will be able to claim that they have closed the Strait, not Iran, so another victory.
While it is intended to put additional pressure on Iran, it does seem to be a case of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Another unintended consequence of surrounding yourself with yes-men that are not the sharpest pencils in the pack.

At least we have more cost increases and inflation to look forward to. That will go down well with the domestic and global public.

It will be interesting to see if the Iranians will try target the ships enforcing the blockade and those allegedly being sent to sweep for mines. If they manage to sink or damage one it would be very embarrassing for the administration.

The US isn’t closing the SoH. It’s blockading Iranian ports.

[El Grifo]

Originally Posted by BonnieLass

It appears that USS New Orleans is heading to the Strait, last spotted on AIS just under 8.5 hours ago

Very odd Bonnie Lass !
My marine traffic shows it off the California Coast ??

[Sam Asama]

Originally Posted by Freefly170

" how likely is it that US or even the allies plus US can continue to resource this conflict ? and even if they did and prevail (which inevitably they will)

The bracketed phrase in your post doesn't align with history (Afghanistan, Vietnam) nor the reality of asymmetric warfare.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by tartare

Exactly. Despite their pretty incredible capabilities, even the US Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps would struggle to hit every potential threat, and then keep them suppressed.
All that's needed is one drone hitting a tanker.
And if Iran really wanted to hurt the US, a ballistic missile or two fired from inland and pointed at a carrier or similarly significant capital ship.

The IRGC themselves say they attacked the USS Abraham Lincoln using drones and missiles. Again, that’s from the Iranians. The US military has said they’ve intercepted numerous missiles headed towards USN ships since the start of the war.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by NutLoose

But to enforce a blockade they are going have to move closer to Iranian territorial waters and possibly in range of a strike.

The Iranians have been taking pot shots at the USS Abe Lincoln in the Gulf of Oman which is offshore of Iran itself.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Eutychus

My uninformed view is that current evidence suggests they are not implementing a "use it or lose it" strategy and I can imagine there might be reasons not to inflict such a blow (or not to have done so "already", as per your original comment) at a given point in time, reasons other than a lack of capability.

The Iranians have already attempted to hit USN assets.

[Lonewolf_50]

That's a part of the deception plan, Grif.

[ORAC]

Originally Posted by NutLoose
But to enforce a blockade they are going have to move closer to Iranian territorial waters and possibly in range of a strike.

It’s a blockade. If the ships want to stay in harbour or Iranian waters that’s fine. It’s when they leave and try and head south in the Arabian Sea or up the Red Sea towards the canal the USN will take an interest. At which stage the Iranians can’t help them.


You may recall that last year they trailed the Suezmax tanker Aquila II, which had fled from them in Venezuelan waters, and boarded it a month later in the Indian Ocean.

[Bell_ringer]

Originally Posted by West Coast

The US isn’t closing the SoH. It’s blockading Iranian ports.

Depends when you want to quote the administration. They are making it up as they go along. Recent updates have become more clear.

Guess that is a consequence of shooting from the hip.

[dead_pan]

Really tricky this tasking for the USN, given that we're currently sort of halfway between war and peace. The moment it kicks off again they're going to immediately be in the firing line with no chance of getting the hell out of Dodge like they did the last time. I hope the Donald knows what he's letting them in for.

Also, as others have noted, how will the likes of China or India (or France) react if one of their tankers is boarded and impounded? (Yes yes, I know - France will immediately surrender)

[RichardJones]

Hello Wolf. Good to see you are back. I thought you had a permanent fall from grace.

[NutLoose]

Originally Posted by GlobalNav

The lack of planning seems to be at the political level. Looks to me like there is no lack of military planning and it has been superb.

Yup, went into a one legged ass* kicking contest with their arms tied behind their backs by a gun ho, uninformed and simply outclassed political leadership, reminds me of Vietnam where the USAF were hampered by political directives to visual identify the oppositions jets before engaging, thus throwing away their BVR missile advantage.

[MAINJAFAD]

Originally Posted by NutLoose

Yup, went into a one legged ass* kicking contest with their arms tied behind their backs by a gun ho, uninformed and simply outclassed political leadership, reminds me of Vietnam where the USAF were hampered by political directives to visual identify the oppositions jets before engaging, thus throwing away their BVR missile advantage.

The ROE was more to do with stopping USAF and USN pilots from shooting at their own sides aircraft as there were normally more US aircraft in the sky than NVAF ones. It was a military decision not a political one! .

[DogTailRed2]

How do you sweep modern mines?
WW2 examples were either cut with a Paravane or blown up with an anti-magnetic device.
These modern mines are passive and intelligent.

[West Coast]

Originally Posted by Bell_ringer

Depends when you want to quote the administration. They are making it up as they go along. Recent updates have become more clear.

Guess that is a consequence of shooting from the hip.

Ok, sounds like you’re onboard, a blockade of Iranian ports not shutting off the SoH.

[GlobalNav]

Originally Posted by MAINJAFAD

The ROE was more to do with stopping USAF and USN pilots from shooting at their own sides aircraft as there were normally more US aircraft in the sky than NVAF ones. It was a military decision not a political one! .

Well, ... it depends on which ROE provision you refer to. Non BVR A-A attacks perhaps, but also not attacking SAM sites and fighter bases in the North.

[Timelord]

Originally Posted by DogTailRed2

How do you sweep modern mines?
WW2 examples were either cut with a Paravane or blown up with an anti-magnetic device.
These modern mines are passive and intelligent.

You don’t sweep, you hunt. Detect them with sonar then send a diver or ROV down to blow it up.

[larssnowpharter]

A not so hypothetical situation:

A Chinese registered vessel, with a Chinese crew and cargo, bound for a Chinese port transits the SoH into the Indian Ocean. It has hailed by a USN ship and instructions issued to allow a boarding party. The Chinese vessel calls in one of the Chinese Navy vessels. Doesn't stop. What are the RoE now.
It all sounds potentially pretty dangerous to this onlooker.