TUBAGBOHOL.com with Ligalig Mike Ortega

Inside Bohol => Talk of the Town => Topic started by: balong on May 16, 2019, 01:58:13 PM

Title: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 01:58:13 PM
The US military is sending a carrier strike group, a bomber task force, fighter jets, an amphibious landing ship, and a surface-to-air missile battery to the Middle East as a show of force to Iran. There is a ton of firepower heading that way.

The USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group, which consists of the carrier and its powerful carrier air wing, as well as one cruiser and four destroyers, began moving into the region with an unspecified number of B-52 Stratofortress heavy long-range bombers earlier this week.

US Air Forces Central Command announced Thursday that F-15C Eagle fighter jets were repositioned within the theater to "defend US forces and interests in the region." On Friday, the Pentagon announced that the USS Arlington, an amphibious landing ship, and a Patriot surface-to-air missile battery are on their way.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 01:59:09 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5a85dfd3d0307226008b4718-960-600.jpg)
Aircraft carrier: USS Abraham Lincoln
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 01:59:56 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5773f5e688e4a7b32e8b4b2f-960-663.jpg)
Carrier air wing: fighters, electronic-attack aircraft, early-warning aircraft, and rotary aircraft
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:00:38 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cd1e6d4021b4c09eb09c99c-960-528.jpg)
Cruiser: USS Leyte Gulf
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:01:20 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cd1e7b8021b4c0bc4794065-960-619.jpg)
4 destroyers: USS Bainbridge, USS Gonzalez, USS Mason, and USS Nitze
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:02:04 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/558aaa86eab8ea5b3d57802a-960-641.jpg)
Bombers: B-52s
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:02:46 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cd5ee0e021b4c082a0dc556-960-641.jpg)
Fighters: F-15C Eagles
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:03:37 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cd5eecb021b4c0a1c2757c3-960-640.jpg)
Amphibious Landing Ship: USS Arlington
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:04:25 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cd5e96c021b4c06a74ca884-960-608.jpg)
Air-and-Missile Defense: Patriot battery
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:05:31 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cdac6bf021b4c3e5b4fe9a3-960-480.jpg)
The Alvaro de Bazan-class Spanish navy frigate ESPS Mendez Nuez (F 104) pulls into Naval Station Norfolk prior to deployment with the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:06:29 PM
Spain has decided that it doesn't want its frigate sailing with the USS Abraham Lincoln into the Persian Gulf to challenge Iran.
The Spanish defense ministry announced Tuesday that the new mission is inconsistent with the agreement on joint operations signed by the US and Spain.
The Spanish warship will rejoin the carrier strike group once its deterrence mission concludes and it returns to regularly-scheduled operations.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 02:07:53 PM
The US military is exploring a plan to deploy 120,000 troops to the Middle East as tensions with Iran intensify
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 11:29:20 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cda0869021b4c473a6fdf33-1136-568.jpg)
US soldiers conduct breaching operations in a mock-urban environment.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 11:30:28 PM
The US military briefed President Donald Trump's national-security aides on a revamped plan that could result in the deployment of up to 120,000 troops to the Middle East, according to national-security officials cited in a New York Times report published Monday.

The reported plan calls for the deployment of troops in the event that Iran either attacks US forces or ramps up its nuclear-weapons program, several unnamed US officials told The Times.

The plan does not indicate whether US troops would invade Iran, the newspaper said. The number of troops deployed to the Middle East would be close to the roughly 130,600 service members deployed to Iraq in 2003.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 11:32:22 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cdd2d2f021b4c05e71f3af4-1920-960.jpg)
An Iranian flag next to a ground-to-ground Sajil missile at an undisclosed location in Iran in 2008.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 16, 2019, 11:34:17 PM
Pictures showing Iranian paramilitary forces loading missiles onto boats are behind a recent sharp escalation in tensions between the US and Iran, The New York Times reported Thursday.

The May 3 overhead images showed fully assembled missiles being loaded onto boats in the Persian Gulf, three officials told The Times, raising concerns that they could be used by Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps to target US Navy vessels.

Other intelligence reportedly hints at threats to commercial shipping vessels and to US troops in Iraq from Tehran-backed militias.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 17, 2019, 09:34:32 PM
Iran's top general tells Iraqi militias to prep for 'proxy war' amid US-Iran tensions

A top Iranian general has told Iran-backed militias in Iraq to “prepare for proxy war” in the wake of heightened tensions between Iran and the U.S., which accused the militias of moving missiles toward American forces.

Qassem Soleimani, a commander of Iran’s extraterritorial military operations Quds Force, called for a meeting with the militias three weeks ago, but the exact timing of the gathering remains unclear, the Guardian reported Thursday.

“It wasn’t a call to arms, but it wasn’t far off,” a senior intelligence source told the newspaper.
The meeting likely played a role in the Trump administration’s decision this week to pull all non-essential government staff from Iraq. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Iraqi officials that Iran-backed militias have moved their missiles near to the bases housing Americans.

Other countries soon followed the threat assessment of the U.S., with Britain raising threat levels for its troops in Iraq on Thursday. Both Germany and the Netherlands suspended a training mission in Iraq.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 17, 2019, 09:35:47 PM
But intelligence collected by the U.S. government appears to also suggest that both Iran and the U.S. may have misread each other as being offensive rather than defensive, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Iran apparently thought the U.S. was planning an attack on Iran, which prompted the regime to prepare for counterstrikes.

MIKE POMPEO SAID IRAN-BACKED MILITIAS MOVED ROCKETS NEAR AMERICAN BASES IN IRAQ

At the same time, some within the Trump administration say that the same intelligence also suggests that Iran was planning to strike first. Such intelligence may have formed the basis of Pompeo’s claim during his meeting with the Iraqi top brass.

Iran has recently threatened to pull out of the nuclear deal and resume higher uranium enrichment if no new deal is put in place, while Pompeo told the Iraqi top brass that U.S. intelligence showed Iran-backed militias moved missiles near bases housing American forces.

Iran’s foreign minister, Mohammad Zarif, on Thursday deemed new sanctions imposed by the Trump administration as “unacceptable” but noted that the country is committed to the nuclear deal.

“We believe that escalation by the United States is unacceptable and uncalled for. We have exercised maximum restraints,” he said during a visit to Japan.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 18, 2019, 12:21:28 PM
pastila ug mag gera. tapos ang maligayang araw. kay hayahay na man pag ajo ang pagka butang dinhi sa states. AYAW INTAWON
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:10:04 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/594d686ba3630f87028b5191-750-383.png)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:10:51 AM
John Bolton, President Donald Trump's national security adviser, announced on Sunday that the US would send the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier and its associated strike group to the waters near Iran to "send a message" and respond to vague threats.

But the US will be sending the powerful carrier to a job it's arguably ill-suited for, putting thousands of sailors at a major military disadvantage. And if a conflict were to arise, the sinking of a US aircraft carrier would be in Iran's sights.

Though the carrier's deployment to Iran's nearby waters may have been planned long ago, Bolton has been clear that the ship's return to the region marks a response to "a number of troubling and escalatory incident and warnings" from Iran.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:12:57 AM
While Bolton did not get into specifics, a report from Axios said Israel passed the US "information on an alleged Iranian plot to attack" US forces or interests in the region.

The Wall Street Journal cited US officials as saying new intelligence "showed that Iran drew up plans to target U.S. forces in Iraq and possibly Syria, to orchestrate attacks in the Bab el-Mandeb strait near Yemen through proxies and in the Persian Gulf with its own armed drones."

US aircraft carrier strike groups represent the highest order of naval power ever put to sea, but they're not the right tool for every job.

Caitlin Talmadge, an associate professor of security studies, said on Twitter that US carriers are "designed for operations on the open ocean."

As a floating air base with guided-missile destroyers and cruisers sailing nearby for antimissile defenses from land and sea, the carriers are best off when moving around far from the range of missiles fired from the shore.

In the shallow brown waters of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow pass through which about one-fifth of the world's oil passes through, Iran's outdated submarines and missiles see a vastly uneven playing ground leveled out.

"Ideally, a Nimitz-class carrier would operate within comfortable range of its targets (based on the range of its air wing) but at sufficient stand-off distance to minimize the risk of enemy threats," Omar Lamrani, a senior military analyst at the geopolitical consulting firm Stratfor, told Business Insider. "This varies based on operating environment but is usually between 300 to 400 nautical miles."
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:14:11 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/55421c2d6da8113861bf23c7-960-640.jpg)
Iranian military personnel participate in the Velayat-90 war game near the Strait of Hormuz.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:17:35 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/573dd4e252bcd0210c8c3d57-960-480.jpg)
Gunner’s Mate 2nd Class Levi Horn observes as Operations Specialist 3rd Class Monica Ruiz fires a 50-caliber machine gun during a live-fire qualification aboard amphibious assault ship USS Boxer.US Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Brian Caracci
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:25:12 AM
Iran harassed and humiliated the US Navy under Obama, pero karon nga president na si Trump, medyo mi kalma ang Iran, hadlok sila ni Trump. mao nga delikado jud ug mahimo ning gera, mao ni pabilo sa WW3. wa na tay kadaganan, way katagoan. Kay nuclear warhead missiles na ang mang lopad, mas deadly pa ni sa atomic bomb
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:27:13 AM
ang atong mahimo, mag ampo lang kanunay nga dili mahitabo ang WW3
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:28:55 AM
Iran's navy made a point of harassing and humiliating the US Navy in 2016 after then-President Barack Obama had sealed the Iran deal, but since August 2017, the US Navy says things have changed.

"It seems like they've absolutely made a conscious decision to give us more space," Navy Cmdr. William Urban recently said. "That is definitely a change in their behavior."

Iran would charge US Navy ships with fast attack craft, buzz fighter jets with drones, and even shine lasers at helicopters operating at sea during Obama's presidency.
But the worst, most embarrassing incident occurred in January 2016, when Iran's navy seized two US Navy rivernine boats and the 10 sailors on board after the ship wandered into Iranian waters due to mechanical issues. They broadcast footage of the sailors, crying, in detention, on television across the country. Iran later announced plans to build a monument commemorating the event.

Later that year Iranian ships conducted "unsafe and unprofessional," and often taunting maneuvers around US Navy ships in the Persian Gulf five times in about a month.

In September of that same year, Trump addressed Iran while on the campaign trail. "When they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats and they make gestures at our people that they shouldn't be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water," Trump said.

Shortly after Trump's election, the incidents noticeably stopped, despite Trump's open hostility towards Iran, compared to Obama's attempts to appease them.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:30:59 AM
mao ni delikado kay isog man si Trump, dili mo atras ug gera. mao nga medyo mi kalma ang Iran. pero gamay ra ang bikil, ug kini mahimong pabilo sa WW3, patay tang tanan hasta ok-ok ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 20, 2019, 04:35:13 AM
(https://emojipedia-us.s3.dualstack.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/google/146/grinning-face_1f600.png)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 23, 2019, 07:56:44 AM
(https://cdni0.trtworld.com/w960/h540/q75/55861_GULF190519RTR_1558234915125.JPG)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 23, 2019, 07:59:58 AM
How real is the risk of war?

Both Iran and the United States are on the record denying they want a war and it's hard to see how it would be popular in either country. But the military situation in the Middle East is inherently unstable, and there are multiple potential flashpoints. U.S. and Iranian military forces are in close proximity across the region.

There's a risk of miscalculation or accident. U.S. and Iranian boats crisscross in the Persian Gulf, where Iran captured some U.S. sailors in 2016. Iranian officials have threatened to block the narrow Strait of Hormuz. Pro-Iranian militias move in the same cities in Iraq as U.S. troops and have attacked them in the past. They're also close to each other in Syria.

The U.S. has major military bases in Qatar and Bahrain, just across the Gulf from Iran.

Some of Iran's hard-liners might welcome a conflict with the U.S. because it would undermine moderate Iranians who want to engage with the West.

And a small conflict could grow. Iran could engage in underground attacks around the region or outside it. Israel or Saudi Arabia might take the opportunity to attack their big regional rival.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 24, 2019, 06:27:20 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5bca2e6e3762f6336e65a188-1920-1280.jpg)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 24, 2019, 06:28:07 PM
The aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth, Britain's largest warship, sailed into New York Harbor Friday, marking the first visit of a British carrier to the city in nearly a decade.

The Portsmouth-based Queen Elizabeth, displacing over 70,000 tons, will stay in New York for a week, according to a statement from the Royal Navy.

Check out these amazing photos from the Royal Navy of their carrier sailing into the harbor.

"I am delighted and proud to have brought HMS Queen Elizabeth into New York Harbor for the first time," Captain Jerry Kyd, the ship's commanding officer, stated upon arrival. "This visit is very symbolic of the intimate relationship the Royal Navy has with the US Navy and Marine Corps."
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 24, 2019, 06:29:28 PM
mo laban ang british sa US. mi bisita sa new york ang ilang mga barko de gera. nanimahong gera na jud
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 24, 2019, 06:31:01 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5bca2d5d98b249338c142a7b-960-640.jpg)
HMS Queen Elizabeth Royal Navy
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 24, 2019, 06:31:39 PM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5bca2dfaead52d332f73f277-960-640.jpg)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 25, 2019, 06:26:00 AM
More US troops requested to deter Iran

U.S. Central Command is requesting additional defensive capabilities that could lead to as many as 5,000 to 10,000 additional troops being sent to the Middle East to deter Iran, a U.S. official told ABC News.

On Thursday afternoon, acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan confirmed that the Pentagon is asking for more forces, but would not confirm any numbers, saying that it was not 5,000 or 10,000.

"What we are focused on now is do we have the right force protection in the Middle East?," he told reporters outside the Pentagon.

"What we’re looking at are there things we can do to enhance force protection in the Middle East," he added.

Shanahan acknowledged that such a request " may involve sending additional troops."

There was a meeting at the White House on Thursday where the Central Command request was to be considered, according to two U.S. officials, who stressed that it was unclear which portions of the CENTCOM request could be approved at this White House meeting.
(https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/syria-gty-er-181219_hpMain_4x3t_384.jpg)
 PHOTO: A convoy of US forces drive near the village of Yalanli, on the western outskirts of the northern Syrian city of Manbij,

The U.S. official told ABC News Wednesday that the defensive capabilities and weapons systems were being requested, and that the number of additional forces will depend on which capabilities are approved.

The CENTCOM request has been in the works for some time, the U.S. official said.

There are currently 60,000 to 80,000 U.S. troops serving in the Middle East including 14,000 in Afghanistan, 5,000 in Iraq, 2,000 in Syria, 10,000 in Kuwait, 10,000 in Qatar and thousands more at sea and elsewhere in the region.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford briefed the House and Senate Tuesday on President Donald Trump's Iran strategy, including recent intelligence of an increased Iranian threat and the U.S. reaction to it, the deployment of an aircraft carrier strike group and B-52 bombers and the ordered departure of non-emergency personnel from Iraq.

After hearing from the officials, Democratic lawmakers expressed alarm over the administration's posture in the Middle East and the possibility of a conflict with Iran.

Additional defensive capabilities could include additional Patriot anti-missile batteries, like the one already deployed to an unspecified location in the Middle East to deter Iran. Also under discussion are additional aircraft, including reconnaissance aircraft, and additional air and missile defense systems, said a U.S. official.

CENTCOM could be requesting additional U.S. Navy ships to the region beyond the USS Abraham Lincoln Strike Group and the USS Kearsarge Amphibious Group that are currently in the North Arabian Sea.

But it's unclear when additional ships could arrive in the region. Two weeks ago, the Pentagon announced that the USS Arlington would be headed to the Middle East to swap out with another ship, but that has yet to occur as the Arlington is currently in Spain.

The new CENTCOM request for additional defensive capabilities and forces comes as Shanahan said on Tuesday that the threat of Iranian attacks against U.S. forces had been put "on hold."

U.S. officials said the Iranian threat to U.S. forces continues even as Iran has pulled back some weapons systems. Two U.S. officials said that Iran has removed cruise missiles from two civilian dhows that posed a risk to U.S. Navy ships, commercial ships and land targets.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 25, 2019, 06:30:55 AM
As tensions mount between the United States and Iran, American and Iranian leaders publicly insist they want to avoid war. Yet history is littered with accidents, misperceptions, miscalculations, hidden bureaucratic agendas and other factors that produced armed conflicts nobody seemed to want. This is one fictional example of how easily a war between the United States and Iran could start. None of this has happened — but it could.

On Aug. 7, 2018, Qasem Soleimani, the commander of the Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force, rushed out of an emergency session of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council. The meeting discussed how to respond to news that Iran’s oil sales — the lifeblood of the Islamic republic’s economy — had plummeted to only a few hundred thousand barrels a day, down more than 2 million barrels in just 18 months, because of U.S. sanctions.

Soleimani had a few important calls to make. The first two went to the commanders of Asaib Ahl al-Haq and Kataib Hezbollah, the most prominent Iranian-backed Shiite militias in Iraq. Since the defeat of the Islamic State’s territorial “caliphate,” these militants had been itching to turn their sights on the 5,000 U.S. troops who remained in Iraq, with the goal of driving them out. Soleimani had cautioned patience, but his guidance now took a decisive turn: “Brothers, you have my authorization. Follow the righteous path.”

Soleimani’s next call was to Hasan Nasrallah, the leader of Lebanese Hezbollah, the most capable Iranian proxy in the Middle East. Despite hundreds of Israeli strikes in recent years against Hezbollah arms shipments and Iranian bases in Syria, the organization and its backers in Tehran had not yet waged an all-out war across Israel’s northern frontier. Still, everyone knew that such a conflict was inevitable at some point, and Soleimani told Nasrallah that the time might be approaching. “The American-Zionist alliance is plotting and a storm is coming,” he said. “Be ready.”

One week after Soleimani’s calls, a U.S. diplomatic convoy traveling from the heavily fortified Green Zone to Baghdad International Airport was hit by several powerful roadside bombs. A high-level State Department political officer, three other diplomats and a U.S. Army colonel were killed instantly.

Within hours, other attacks followed, including a barrage of rocket and mortar fire on the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad that destroyed the main dining hall and killed five Iraqis cleaning the grounds. At the same time, a suicide attacker hit a U.S. military unit operating in eastern Syria, near the Iraqi border. Two American Special Operations troops were killed, and two more were taken hostage by a Syrian militia widely believed to be backed by Iran.

Under any circumstances, these incidents would spark a crisis. But they occurred against a backdrop of escalating tensions and provocations between Washington and Tehran that had begun after the Trump administration withdrew from the Obama-era nuclear agreement with Iran in 2018. The subsequent “maximum pressure” campaign the administration applied to cut off Iran’s oil sales and connections to the international banking system deepened the siege mentality in Tehran. The U.S. decision to designate the Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, overruling warnings from the Pentagon, made the situation even tenser. Iran responded by restarting some proscribed nuclear activities and carrying out calibrated provocations in May, hoping to reciprocate U.S. pressure and build leverage in the event that negotiations with the Great Satan ever resumed.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 27, 2019, 02:50:26 AM
(https://nationalinterest.org/sites/default/files/styles/desktop__1486_x_614/public/main_images/iaio_qaher-313_5.jpg?itok=erBmaCxB)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 27, 2019, 09:46:00 PM
(https://s.newsweek.com/sites/www.newsweek.com/files/styles/embed_tablet/public/2017/11/22/rtx3cwdl.jpg)
An Iranian vessel steers close to the U.S. Navy coastal patrol craft USS Thunderbolt, right, in the Persian Gulf in a still image from video provided by the U.S. Navy, on July 25. Encounters between U.S. and Iranian ships in the Persian Gulf are routine and often tense. Iranian warships are set to leave the waters of the Persian Gulf to sail across the world to tour the Gulf of Mexico.
U.S. NAVY/HANDOUT VIA REUTERS
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 27, 2019, 09:47:52 PM
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-fWj1a0Xqamw/XOvVIiKgFcI/AAAAAAAC8Zg/hj26wdDFj2gJZ2v00eq99jnhEzGL9phCgCLcBGAs/s400/1.webp)
U.S. deploys 1,500 troops to 'bolster defenses against Iran'. Pictured: An F/A-18E Super Hornet flying above the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier in the Arabian Sea. AFP
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 27, 2019, 09:50:19 PM
 The U.S. military presence in the Middle East is at its “weakest in history”, a deputy commander of Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards was on Sunday quoted by the semi-official news agency Fars as saying.

U.S. President Donald Trump has tightened economic sanctions against Iran, and his administration says it has built up the U.S. military presence in the region.

It accuses Iran of threats to U.S. troops and interests. Tehran has described U.S. moves as “psychological warfare” and a “political game”.

“The Americans have been present in the region since 1833 and they are now at their weakest in history in West Asia,” said Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, a deputy Guards commander, according to Fars.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 27, 2019, 09:51:48 PM
(https://the-drive-2.imgix.net/https%3A%2F%2Fapi.thedrive.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F05%2Ff-35a.jpg%3Fquality%3D85?q=70&w=1440&ixlib=js-1.2.1&s=dd1f4bea87ac7d9560c7ae6bbebda6b5)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 27, 2019, 09:52:52 PM
he Pentagon has announced it will deploy approximately 1,500 personnel to the Middle East, including fighter jets, reconnaissance and surveillance aircraft, a battalion of Patriot surface-to-air missile systems, and combat engineers. However, U.S. military officials have already clarified that some 600 of these personnel are already in the region and will simply be extending their tours. The deployments are in response to still largely nebulous claims from the U.S. government that intelligence showed Iran and its proxies were preparing to launch attacks on American interests in the Middle East.

Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick Shanahan revealed basic details about the new force posture on May 24, 2019, though he did not say specifically where the additional personnel would be arriving. The day before, he had dismissed various news reports that had said the United States was considering sending between 5,000 and 10,000 additional troops to the region. It should be noted that tthe U.S. military already has tens of thousands of troops in the Middle East.

Since National Security Advisor John Bolton first announced the Iranian threat on May 6, 2019, the U.S. military has sent B-52H bombers, F-15C Eagle fighter jets, and an additional battery of Patriots to the region, as well as expedited the deployment of the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and her associated carrier strike group to the area. The U.S. Navy also sent the amphibious ship USS Arlington to swap places with another already sailing in and around the Persian Gulf.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 27, 2019, 09:59:10 PM
sandali po lamang tayo'y mag commercial. kong wala nitoy wala ring hanapbuhay

subay lang mo kanunay dinhi sa  tubagbohol.com  sa mga balita nga dili ninyo ma basa sa manila bulletin, cebu daily news, bohol chronicle  hihihihi

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 29, 2019, 09:15:59 PM
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/13/us/politics/13dc-military1/merlin_154774206_93e8940b-0f98-4a1b-a2b4-0aeae468332c-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
The aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln last week in the Persian Gulf. As a precaution, the Pentagon has moved an aircraft carrier and more naval firepower to the gulf region.CreditCreditU.S. Navy, via Associated Press
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 29, 2019, 09:18:55 PM
WASHINGTON — At a meeting of President Trump’s top national security aides last Thursday, Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan presented an updated military plan that envisions sending as many as 120,000 troops to the Middle East should Iran attack American forces or accelerate work on nuclear weapons, administration officials said.
The revisions were ordered by hard-liners led by John R. Bolton, Mr. Trump’s national security adviser. They do not call for a land invasion of Iran, which would require vastly more troops, officials said.

The development reflects the influence of Mr. Bolton, one of the administration’s most virulent Iran hawks, whose push for confrontation with Tehran was ignored more than a decade ago by President George W. Bush.

It is highly uncertain whether Mr. Trump, who has sought to disentangle the United States from Afghanistan and Syria, ultimately would send so many American forces back to the Middle East.

It is also unclear whether the president has been briefed on the number of troops or other details in the plans. On Monday, asked about if he was seeking regime change in Iran, Mr. Trump said: “We’ll see what happens with Iran. If they do anything, it would be a very bad mistake.”

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 29, 2019, 09:20:14 PM
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2019/05/13/us/politics/13dc-military2/merlin_154196253_287af293-9304-475d-bb11-6c5c64b1fb48-superJumbo.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp)
Since John R. Bolton became the national security adviser in April 2018, he has intensified the Trump administration’s policy of isolating and pressuring Iran.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 30, 2019, 09:14:51 PM
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/resizer/xO8cw1cJUuJquPRPzZm4FG7LdH8=/1484x0/arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/EDKV4B4IINHUPJ3VXP2QRB766I.png)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on May 30, 2019, 09:17:46 PM
Iran is a maritime power bordered by the Caspian sea to the north and the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman to the south. It shares land borders with several troubled U.S. allies, including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Turkey and Iraq.

Its location in the center of Eurasia is particularly important for trade. About a third of the world’s oil tanker traffic passes through the Strait of Hormuz, which is bordered by Iran and Oman. At its narrowest point, this shipping route is just under two miles wide. Blocking it could lead shipments of daily global oil exports to drop by an estimated 30 percent.

In terms of conventional military strength, Iran is far weaker than the United States. But the country has long pursued asymmetric strategies that could allow it to inflict serious damage on U.S. interests in the region.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, a force loyal to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and separate from the regular military, has an external special operations arm known as the Quds Force that has helped build proxy forces in places such as Iraq, Lebanon and Syria. It funds militias such as Hezbollah, which is powerful in its own right.
Iran has used these type of groups to target Americans before. Earlier this year, a revised Pentagon estimate found Iranian proxy forces had killed at least 608 U.S. troops in Iraq between 2003 and 2011. Iranian proxies could cause havoc in Iraq and Afghanistan again.

Iran’s navy has a real advantage against the United States, too. It doesn’t need big ships or firepower to block off the Strait of Hormuz, for example, but could use mines or submarines to force a halt in trade.

U.S. war games have suggested that speedboat suicide attacks and missiles could be surprisingly effective against the American military. A 2017 report from the Office of Naval Intelligence found that the navy of the Revolutionary Guard, which is distinct from Iran’s regular navy and focuses on smaller and faster but still heavily armed vessels, had received more responsibilities to protect the Persian Gulf.


Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 01, 2019, 12:09:18 AM
dugay man mag gera. bijaan na lang ning topic
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 01, 2019, 08:27:27 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5ce43c5b021b4c57ba70b0fd-1920-960.jpg)

Sailors work around an MV-22 Osprey aboard the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln in the Arabian Sea, May 17, 2019. Associated Press
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 01, 2019, 08:28:09 AM
On paper, Iran's military is no match for the US's armed forces.
But Tehran has asymmetric capabilities that it could bring to bear, and conditions on the ground as well as unexpected factors would make any US victory a costly one.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 01, 2019, 08:29:27 AM
If the long history of military conflict teaches us anything, it's that wars, like marriages, are easier to get into than out. War with Iran would be no exception.

On paper, it would hardly be a contest. "It won't be a fair fight," promised Gen. Frank McKenzie this month as tensions flared and the US dispatched warships and bombers in response to unspecified threats from Iran to US interests in the Persian Gulf region.

As the head of US Central Command, McKenzie would be in charge of drawing up and executing the battle plan, assuming he's not micromanaged by the White House.

Even while dismissing as "fake news" a New York Times report that contingency planning called for sending 120,000 US troops to the Middle East, President Trump indicated that his inclination is to go big or go home.

"If we did that, we'd send a hell of a lot more troops than that," he said.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 01, 2019, 08:58:29 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cdfe376021b4c2e403122b3-960-739.jpg)
Aviation Ordnanceman 3rd Class Alexandrina Ross, right, and Aviation Ordnanceman Airman Hunter Musil, left, inspect a bomb on the USS Abraham Lincoln while in the Arabian Sea, May 15, 2019. Associated Press
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 02, 2019, 02:57:11 AM
The US military is far superior to Iran's in every significant way. Iran's air force consists of about 330 combat aircraft, mostly aging or obsolete US, Chinese, and Soviet models, including American F-14s that predate the 1979 Islamic Revolution.


Its navy has about 130 combatant surface ships, along with three diesel submarines, and its troops number a little over half a million, with roughly 350,000 soldiers in the army and another 150,000 in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which the Trump administration has just labeled a terrorist organization.

America's military enjoys state-of-the art weaponry and employs battlefield tactics honed by decades of real-world combat. Iran's ability to modernize its military has been crippled by four decades of sanctions, and it hasn't fought a major war in 30 years.

In a conventional force-on-force war, like the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the US would win in short order, at least on paper. But wars aren't fought on paper, and the last notable tank-on-tank conventional land battle was the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq.

"There are two ways to fight the United States military, asymmetrically and stupid, and you hope that your enemies pick stupid," former national security adviser retired Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster said at a conference in Washington this month. In 2003, Saddam Hussein picked stupid. Iran would want to avoid that mistake.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 02, 2019, 02:57:46 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/59f8f6a658a0c131008b4706-960-642.jpg)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 02, 2019, 02:58:48 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5141f2ec69beddc97b000005-960-642.jpg)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 08, 2019, 04:01:25 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cd5e974021b4c07a34a00c2-960-480.jpg)
The Army test fires Patriot missiles. U.S. Army photo
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 08, 2019, 04:02:57 AM
The US military is deploying additional assets to the Middle East to deter a possible Iranian attack, the Pentagon announced on Friday.

The USS Arlington, an amphibious transport-landing dock used to move troops for expeditionary operations, and a Patriot surface-to-air missile battery are on their way to the US Central Command area of responsibility

These assets will join the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group and the B-52 bomber task force deployed to this region earlier in the week.
The US is sending even more firepower to the Middle East in response to unspecified threats from Iran, the Pentagon announced on Friday.

The USS Arlington, a San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock used to move Marines, amphibious assault vehicles, conventional landing craft, and rotary aircraft, and a Patriot surface-to-air missile battery capable of eliminating certain types of incoming missiles and aircraft are on their way to the US Central Command area of responsibility.

The deployment is part of an ongoing effort that began on Sunday to deter a possible Iranian attack on US forces or interests in the region, the Department of Defense said, stressing that the movement of US assets is "in response to indications of heightened Iranian readiness to conduct offensive operations against US forces and our interests."
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 08, 2019, 04:04:17 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cd1f62a021b4c0d0079d7b8-960-480.jpg)
An F/A-18E Super Hornet on the flight deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. US Navy photo
by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Jeff Sherman
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 08, 2019, 04:06:12 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5a85dfd3d0307226008b4718-960-600.jpg)
Aircraft carrier: USS Abraham Lincoln
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 08, 2019, 04:06:46 AM
Adm. John Richardson, the chief of naval operations, previously described aircraft carriers as a "tremendous expression of US national power." A carrier strike group is an even stronger message. "CSGs are visible and powerful symbols of US commitment and resolve," US European Command said in a statement on Tuesday.

The USS Abraham Lincoln, a mobile sea-based airfield, is the lead ship for the carrier strike group that bears its name and is outfitted with a highly capable carrier air wing.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 08, 2019, 04:07:41 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5773f5e688e4a7b32e8b4b2f-960-663.jpg)
An F/A-18E Super Hornet. Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Ryan U. Kledzik/US Navy
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 09, 2019, 02:17:26 AM
Cruiser: USS Leyte Gulf
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cd1e6d4021b4c09eb09c99c-960-528.jpg)
Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers are multi-role warships that run heavily armed with 122 vertical-launch-system (VLS) cells capable of carrying everything from Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles to surface-to-air missiles and anti-submarine-warfare rockets.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 09, 2019, 02:25:18 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cfa614a11e205224e17b3f4-750-375.jpg)

A near collision between Russian destroyer and US cruiser in the Philippine Sea. US 7th Fleet
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 09, 2019, 02:27:37 AM
naa pay problema sa iran, naa na poy problema sa russia. hapit magka bangga-ay ang duha ka warships. ug nag bangga pa, gera jud ang resulta
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 09, 2019, 02:29:59 AM
The US and Russia are blaming each other for a close encounter in the Philippine Sea on Friday, when a Russian destroyer nearly collided with a US Navy cruiser.

The US Navy has backed up its version of events with photos and videos.


The US Navy caught a Russian destroyer on video as it closed with a US warship, nearly colliding with the American vessel in a dangerous close encounter at sea.

The Russian destroyer DD572, which Russia identified as the Admiral Vinogradov, closed with the US Navy Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruiser USS Chancellorsville on Friday, putting the sailors on board at risk, US 7th Fleet said in a statement.

The US Navy says the Russian vessel engaged in "unsafe and unprofessional" conduct at sea. Specifically, it "maneuvered from behind and to the right of Chancellorsville, accelerated, and closed to an unsafe distance of approximately 50-100 feet."
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 09, 2019, 02:30:56 AM
The Russians are telling a different story, accusing the US Navy of suddenly changing course and cutting across the path of its destroyer. The US Navy has released videos of the incident to back its narrative.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 09, 2019, 02:31:25 AM
Naval affairs expert Bryan Clark offered some clarity on just how risky this type of situation is, explaining that 50 - 100 feet for a destroyer is comparable to being inches from another car while barreling down the freeway.

"It's really dangerous," he told Business Insider. "Unlike a car, a ship doesn't have brakes. So the only way you can slow down is by throwing it into reverse. It's going to take time to slow down because the friction of the water is, of course, a lot less than the friction of the road. Your stopping distance is measured in many ship lengths."

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 09, 2019, 02:32:41 AM
"When someone pulls a maneuver like that," Clark added, "It's really hard to slow down or stop or maneuver quickly to avoid the collision."

The Russian version of the story is that the US ship is to blame.

"The US guided-missile cruiser Chancellorsville suddenly changed course and cut across the path of the destroyer Admiral Vinogradov coming within 50 meters of the ship," the Russian Ministry of Defense said in a statement. "A protest over the international radio frequency was made to the commanders of the American ship who were warned about the unacceptable nature of such actions."
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 11, 2019, 02:18:23 AM
(https://amp.businessinsider.com/images/5cf7f5f811e205191a23b8e0-960-480.jpg)
US Army rocket artillery.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 17, 2019, 04:28:50 AM
(https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2019/6/16/ce0230f3e2e04e0b9e451ee63835940a_18.jpg)
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman said Iran did not respect Japanese diplomatic
efforts and responded by attacking tankers [File: Waleed Ali/Reuters]
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 17, 2019, 04:30:13 AM
Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has accused archrival Iran of attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman, adding he "won't hesitate" to tackle any threats to the kingdom.

Two tankers were struck by explosions on Thursday, the second attack in a month in the strategic shipping lane amid a tense United States-Iran standoff, prompting fears of a regional conflagration and sending oil prices soaring.

"We do not want a war in the region... But we won't hesitate to deal with any threat to our people, our sovereignty, our territorial integrity and our vital interests," MBS told pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat in an interview published on Sunday.

Is Iran to blame for suspected attacks on Gulf tankers?

"The Iranian regime did not respect the presence of the Japanese prime minister as a guest in Tehran and responded to his (diplomatic) efforts by attacking two tankers, one of which was Japanese," MBS added in his first public comment since the attacks.

Prince Mohammed also accused Iran "and its proxies" of the May 12 attacks on four tankers anchored in the Gulf of Oman off the United Arab Emirates' port of Fujairah.

Thursday's attack on the two tankers - Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous that was carrying highly flammable methanol when it was rocked by explosions and the Norwegian-operated Front Altair - came around the time Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was meeting Iranian leaders in Tehran.

US President Donald Trump has said the twin attacks had Iran "written all over it", rejecting Tehran's vehement denial.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted that the US had "immediately jumped to make allegations against Iran without a shred of factual or circumstantial evidence".
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 17, 2019, 04:31:55 AM
Search for evidence
The US military on Friday released grainy footage it said showed an Iranian patrol boat removing an "unexploded limpet mine" from one of the tankers.

Speaking from Muscat, Al Jazeera's Mohamed Vall said that more investigations were being carried out about the attacks.


US releases video it claims shows Iran removing mine from tanker

"The Americans have sent a team to board one of the two tankers that have been hit to collect more evidence.

"Also, the foreign minister of the UAE has said his country has submitted more evidence to the Security Council … [which they say shows the incident] was state-sponsored. There wasn't a mention of Iran, but Saudi Arabia and the UAE have from day one supported the American version of events," Vall said.

Both sides have also continued to beat the drums of war.

"The Americans say they are capable of waging a war and forcing Iran to stop sabotaging the waterways of the Gulf and disrupting oil supplies to the world.

"Iranians, on the other hand, are saying they have done nothing wrong, but if forced to war, they are ready to defend themselves," said Vall.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 17, 2019, 04:33:19 AM
UAE's Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan on Saturday called on world powers "to secure international navigation and access to energy", a plea echoed by regional ally Saudi Arabia after the incident sent crude oil prices soaring.

Saudi Arabia calls for 'decisive' action over tanker attacks
Iran has repeatedly warned in the past that it could block the strategic Hormuz Strait in a relatively low-tech, high-impact countermeasure to any attack by the US.

Doing so would disrupt oil tankers travelling out of the Gulf region to the Indian Ocean and global export routes.

The UAE's Sheikh Abdullah, whose country is bitterly opposed to Iranian influence in the region, called for a de-escalation of tensions.

"We remain hopeful in attaining a broader framework for cooperation with Iran," he said at a summit in Bulgaria.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia's Energy Minister Khalid al-Falih called for a "swift and decisive" response to threats against energy supplies after Thursday's "terrorist acts".
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 17, 2019, 04:34:41 AM
The Japanese tanker's Tokyo-based operator Kokuka confirmed on Saturday the stricken vessel was heading to port in the UAE.

"We still don't know if the tanker goes to Khor Fakkan or Fujairah as they are very close," said a spokesperson, referring to the two Emirati ports on the Gulf of Oman.

Maritime experts would then seek to transfer the highly flammable cargo to shore, according to an unnamed official quoted by Japanese state media.

The other ship, the Front Altair, has left Iran's territorial waters, multiple sources said on Saturday.

The ship is "heading toward the Fujairah-Khor Fakkan area" in the UAE, the head of ports for Iran's southern province of Hormozgan told the semi-official news agency ISNA.

The tanker "has left Iran's territorial waters", he said, adding that it was being towed and sprayed with water to cool the hull.

A spokesperson for Frontline Management, the Norwegian company which owns the ship, said "all 23 crew members of the tanker departed Iran" and flew to Dubai on Saturday.

"All crew members are well and have been well looked after while in Iran," she said.


Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 20, 2019, 11:28:13 PM
5163
(https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/2a889e7/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Feb%2F4fc727dca6e9b8e53fc1a71eee43c9%2Fmedia%3A078610e7fe754ac2acd28dbb0544c4e6Congress_Impeachment_Politics_40140.jpg)
In this June 13, 2019 file photo, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., speaks
during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 20, 2019, 11:31:19 PM
WASHINGTON (AP) — THE Latest on the United States and Iran

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the U.S. cannot be "reckless" amid rising tensions with Iran.

Pelosi said Thursday she doesn't think President Donald Trump wants to go to war. And she said the American people don't want war either.

"There's no appetite for going to war in our country," she said.

The country needs to be "strong and strategic" about protecting its interests, Pelosi said, and "cannot be reckless."

Pelosi called a caucus-wide meeting of Democrats for later Thursday on Iran. House and Senate leadership will also be briefed by administration officials.

Tensions between Tehran and Washington have been rising over the collapsing nuclear deal with world powers. On Thursday Iran's Revolutionary Guard shot down a U.S. surveillance drone.

President Donald Trump declared Thursday that "Iran made a very big mistake" in shooting down a U.S. drone.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders says Trump was briefed Wednesday night and again Thursday morning about the incident. She says the administration also will keep in touch with lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Trump made his comment on Twitter in midmorning.

American and Iranian officials are disputing the circumstances of the incident.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard said it shot down the drone over Iranian airspace. The U.S. military is calling the downing an "unprovoked attack" and said it occurred over international airspace in the Strait of Hormuz.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 20, 2019, 11:33:26 PM
(https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/1aa6891/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fbc%2F6c%2F70033bf94c51b84dab0b9f35ebdd%2F190620-newsirandrone-editorial.jpg)
Iran's Revolutionary Guard commander Gen. Hossein Salami, said shooting down the American drone should
serve as a warning that the U.S. should “stay away,” Iranian state media reported Thursday morning
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 20, 2019, 11:35:27 PM
Iran shot down a U.S. drone near Iranian airspace in what Tehran calls a "clear message" to the U.S. that it will respond to what it perceives as acts of aggression.

U.S. Central Command, which oversees military operations in the Middle East, confirmed the incident early Thursday, saying an Iranian surface-to-air missile shot down the unarmed RQ-4 Global Hawk surveillance drone. The headquarters disputed as "false" Iranian claims that the drone was operating in Iranian airspace.

"This was an unprovoked attack on a U.S. surveillance asset in international airspace," Navy Capt. Bill Urban, a spokesman for the command, said in a statement.

The incident comes at a time of particularly high tensions between Washington and Tehran, following U.S. claims that Iran as of last month presents new and dangerous threats to Americans and their allies in the region. The Trump administration has unilaterally withdrawn itself from the 2015 agreement restricting Iran's nuclear capabilities but also limiting America's ability to impose harsh sanctions, and followed through with what it considers a "maximum pressure campaign" against the Iranian regime.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 20, 2019, 11:36:30 PM
Top officials from each country have stated they do not intend to start a war. But both the U.S. and Iran have increasingly turned to military options in response to a string of contentious incidents in recent days, sparking fears that a military escalation following an incident like Thursday's could prove inevitable.

Maj. Gen. Hossein Salami, commander of Iran's elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, said shooting down the American drone should serve as a warning that the U.S. should "stay away," Iranian state media reported Thursday morning.

"Borders are our red lines and any enemy which violates them will not go back home and will be annihilated. The only way for enemies is to respect Iran's territorial integrity and national interests," Salami said. "We declare that we do not want war with any country but we are fully ready for war and the [incident today] was a clear instance of this precise message."

In an unprecedented move, Iran said earlier this week it plans to break from the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal, which analysts considered a threat it would pursue nuclear weapons if the U.S. did not dial back its sanctions regime.


Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 20, 2019, 11:37:12 PM
The strike followed U.S. confirmation that Iranian proxies in Yemen had tried to shoot down another American drone that was surveilling two cargo ships that were disabled by some sort of explosion a week ago. Top U.S. officials at the White House, Pentagon and State Department affirm that Iran was solely behind the attack, deploying operatives who placed limpet mines on the ships while they were transiting the Strait of Hormuz, a key shipping lane near Iranian waters.

Yemen's Houthi rebels, backed by Iran, successfully shot down another U.S. drone the week before.

Senior members of Congress have expressed concern that the Trump administration may preemptively attack Iran under congressional authorization from 2001 that allowed the U.S. to pursue the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks and their associates. Top Trump officials, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, have insisted in recent weeks that Tehran is coordinating with al-Qaida leaders.

The Trump administration's top envoy to Iran, Special Representative Brian Hook, on Wednesday refused to answer questions from a special meeting of the House Foreign Affairs Committee regarding whether the Trump administration believed it has such authority.

"If the use of military force is necessary to defend U.S. national security interests, we will do everything we need to do," Hook said.

It was not immediately clear Thursday morning whether the U.S. considered Iran's shooting down its drone as a threat to its national security interests.

Analysts last week said suspicion that the Iranian military carried out the attacks on the cargo ships – rather than farming the job out to a proxy group and granting Tehran deniability – served as evidence that the Trump administration's pressure campaign has forced Iran to act with greater desperation.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 20, 2019, 11:38:24 PM
American officials, however, insist the pressure campaign has proven successful in isolating Iran's ability to sell its oil and raise the cash it needs. Hook said Wednesday, "our pressure campaign is working."

He described it as "an economic and diplomatic one," adding "Iran has not responded to this in a diplomatic fashion."

"It has responded to it with violence, and we very much believe Iran should meet diplomacy with diplomacy, not with terror, bloodshed and distortion."

Following reports in early May that Iran posed a new threat, the U.S. expedited deploying the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group to the region, and sent a strategic bomber group. It has subsequently bolstered its military presence, including acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan's confirming on Monday he would send 1,000 more forces to the region to help protect those already there.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 21, 2019, 08:12:52 PM
5531
(https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/b1c8256/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2F17%2F1e525dc718161e76d0e0ccafd1f9f7%2Fmedia%3A854196b8daa041a99ca5c671a906def8US_Iran_12387.jpg)
Outgoing acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan arrives for a meeting with
President Donald Trump about Iran carrying a folder marked secret, at the
White House, Thursday, June 20, 2019, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon) THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 21, 2019, 08:13:59 PM
A U.S. official says the military made preparations Thursday night for limited strikes on Iran in retaliation for the downing of a U.S. surveillance drone, but approval was abruptly withdrawn before the attacks were launched.

The official, who was not authorized to discuss the operation publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity, says the targets would have included radars and missile batteries.

The New York Times reported that President Donald Trump had approved the strikes, but then called them off. The newspaper cited anonymous senior administration officials.

The White House on Thursday night declined requests for information about whether Trump changed his mind.

Trump spent most of Thursday discussing Iran strategy with top national security advisers and congressional leaders. Asked earlier in the day about a U.S. response to the attack, he said, "You'll soon find out."

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 21, 2019, 08:16:51 PM
A top Democrat says President Donald Trump "certainly listened" to what lawmakers had to say during a White House meeting Thursday on the situation in Iran.

Rep. Adam Schiff, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, says congressional leaders urged the president to work with U.S. allies. They stressed the "need for de-escalation" and cautioned the administration about "the risk of unintended consequences" amid heightened tensions in the Middle East.

Schiff told The Associated Press, "The president certainly listened to what we had to say."

The California Democrat says he doesn't know how the administration will respond. He says he underscored that the administration cannot rely on the authorization for use of military force approved after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

He says the meeting was "cordial" and not confrontational.

__

6:15 p.m.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is urging a "strategic, smart" response, in concert with U.S. allies, to the downing of an unmanned U.S. drone by Iran.

Pelosi says the "high-tension wires are up" in the region and says the U.S. "must do everything we can not to escalate the situation, but also to make sure our personnel in the region are safe."

The California Democrat tells reporters it is not clear whether the incident was an intentional attack, but adds, "whatever it is, it was Iranian."

She says Democrats made it clear to President Donald Trump at a meeting Thursday that the White House would need authorization from Congress before launching military action against Iran.

__

5:30 p.m.

Top Democrats are warning President Donald Trump that he would need authorization from Congress before launching military action against Iran.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer says he told the president during a classified briefing at the White House that there must be a "robust, open debate" and Congress should "have a real say."

He said he's worried the administration "may bumble into a war."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the administration should engage with U.S. allies "and do everything in our power to de-escalate."

The more-than-hourlong briefing on Iran was attended by leaders of both parties.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said afterward that he could confirm that a drone shot down by Iran was flying over international waters. He says the drone was fired upon from Iranian soil.

__

5 p.m.

Top administration officials and lawmakers have left the White House after a more than hourlong briefing about Iran's downing of an American surveillance drone in the Middle East amid mounting tension between the U.S. and Iran.

The White House invited House and Senate leaders and Democrats and Republicans on the House and Senate intelligence and Armed Services committees to meet with President Donald Trump on Thursday.

Others who arrived for the meeting included CIA Director Gina Haspel, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan and Army Secretary Mark Esper, who Trump has said he'll nominate as defense secretary.

Shanahan was carrying a folder stamped "SECRET/NOFORN," an intelligence classification category prohibiting distribution to anyone outside the United States government.

___

3:30 p.m.

Top administration officials and lawmakers are arriving at the White House for a briefing about Iran's downing of an American surveillance drone in the Middle East amid mounting tension between the U.S. and Iran.

The White House invited House and Senate leaders of both parties and Democrats and Republicans on the House and Senate intelligence and Armed Services committees to meet with President Donald Trump on Thursday.

It's unclear if Trump is planning a U.S. response. He told reporters that Iran made a "very big mistake" but also said he has the feeling that it might have been the result of someone being "loose" or doing something "stupid."

Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan and Army Secretary Mark Esper, who Trump has said he'll nominate as defense secretary, also arrived for the meeting.

___

3:10 p.m.

Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden says that President Donald Trump has made military conflict with Iran more likely and that "another war in the Middle East is the last thing we need."

Biden made the remarks Thursday as tensions between Washington and Tehran escalated over the downing of an American drone over Iranian airspace.

Biden says Trump's strategy in Iran is "a self-inflicted disaster" since Trump withdrew the U.S. from the Iran nuclear agreement negotiated when Biden was vice president.

Biden says there's no question that Iran "continues to be a bad actor that abuses human rights and supports terrorist activities." But he says the U.S. needs presidential leadership at this moment.

___

2:55 p.m.

Democratic presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand is demanding that President Donald Trump abstain from sending American troops into a conflict with Iran without congressional approval.

The New York senator outlined her position in a sharply worded letter to the White House on Thursday.

Gillibrand writes that she's "deeply concerned that your administration's stepped up military presence in the Middle East, in conjunction with your dangerous and confusing rhetoric, may lead the United States into a protracted, costly, and unnecessary war with Iran. Such a war is not authorized, would unnecessarily risk the lives of Americans and our allies, cause enormous human suffering, and destabilize the economy."

Gillibrand's position is not unique in her party, but she becomes one of the first Democratic presidential candidates to share her concerns with the White House directly.

___

1:50 p.m.

The White House is inviting House and Senate leaders for a briefing with President Donald Trump on Thursday afternoon to discuss tensions with Iran.

That's according to two people familiar with the invitation who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss it.

In addition to House and Senate leaders of both parties, the White House extended the invitation to the top Democrats and Republicans on the House and Senate intelligence and Armed Services committees.

The briefing comes after Iran's Revolutionary Guard shot down a U.S. surveillance drone. Trump said it might have been a mistake executed by someone just being "loose and stupid" and was coy about whether the U.S. would respond. He told reporters, "you'll find out."

— Mary Clare Jalonick

___

12:35 p.m.

President Donald Trump is playing down Iran's downing of an American drone, saying that it might have been a mistake executed by someone just being "loose and stupid."

Trump told reporters Thursday that the shoot down of the drone was a "new wrinkle" in escalating tensions between the U.S. and Iran — a "fly in the ointment."

He was coy about whether the U.S. would respond, saying only that "you'll find out."

He said he has a feeling that it was a mistake — that a "general or somebody" made a mistake in shooting that drone down.

But he added that Iran made a "big mistake" and that the U.S. "will not stand for it."

Trump's words appear to signal that there may not be an immediate U.S. response to the incident.

___

12:20 p.m.

President Donald Trump says Iran made a "very big mistake" when it shot down a U.S. drone, but he isn't saying how the U.S. plans to respond, saying only "you're going to find out."

Trump is speaking to reporters while meeting with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as tensions between Washington and Tehran escalated over the downing of the drone, the U.S. exit from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal and sanctions crippling Iran's economy.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard said it shot down the drone over Iranian airspace. The U.S. military is calling the downing an "unprovoked attack" and said it occurred over international airspace in the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump said: "It was in international waters."

Iran's Revolutionary Guard says it shot down the RQ-4 Global Hawk drone over Iranian airspace.

___

12:20 p.m.

A senior U.S. military official says Iran shot down an unmanned American aircraft over international waters in an attempt to disrupt U.S. efforts to monitor the Persian Gulf area.

Air Force Lt. Gen. Joseph Guastella says the shooting down of the drone follows recent threats to international shipping commerce in the region that the U.S. has blamed on Iran.

The commander of U.S. Central Command air forces in the region disputed Iranian claims that the drone was over Iranian air space.

Guastella told reporters Thursday that the aircraft was at high altitude and at least 34 kilometers from Iranian territory when it was shot over the Gulf of Oman.

___

11:05 a.m.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the U.S. cannot be "reckless" amid rising tensions with Iran.

Pelosi said Thursday she doesn't think President Donald Trump wants to go to war. And she said the American people don't want war either.

"There's no appetite for going to war in our country," she said.

The country needs to be "strong and strategic" about protecting its interests, Pelosi said, and "cannot be reckless."

Pelosi called a caucus-wide meeting of Democrats for later Thursday on Iran. House and Senate leadership will also be briefed by administration officials.

Tensions between Tehran and Washington have been rising over the collapsing nuclear deal with world powers. On Thursday, Iran's Revolutionary Guard shot down a U.S. surveillance drone.

___

10:20 a.m.

President Donald Trump declared Thursday that "Iran made a very big mistake" in shooting down a U.S. drone.

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders says Trump was briefed Wednesday night and again Thursday morning about the incident. She says the administration also will keep in touch with lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Trump made his comment on Twitter in midmorning.

American and Iranian officials are disputing the circumstances of the incident.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard said it shot down the drone over Iranian airspace. The U.S. military is calling the downing an "unprovoked attack" and said it occurred over international airspace in the Strait of Hormuz.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 21, 2019, 09:44:19 PM
continuous ang atong coverage kay thrilling na ni ug sugod. nanimahong komo hihihihi. lisod ug ma dajon ni unja mahimong nuclear. patay tanan hasta ok-ok
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 21, 2019, 09:46:08 PM
(https://scontent.ftpa1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/64744224_2472321176162160_6066470305772077056_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&_nc_oc=AQnCGv0OpTd8JnnQHyEKiC0Lv1NHhn1ZnkoEuLt3uUzyqaWvazwWtBgByFRIEB_PETA&_nc_ht=scontent.ftpa1-1.fna&oh=aa5c99ee09f3665c82ec8109803121a8&oe=5DBF2175)
mao ni mahimong resulta. killed ta tanan ug mahimong nuclear warfare. wala tay ka daganan
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 21, 2019, 09:48:33 PM
dili nimo ni ma basa sa manila daily inquirer, cebu daily news, bohol standard. anhi ra ni nimo masubay sa tubagbohol kronikol. busa ayaw ninyo sipyata .
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 04:29:32 AM
na anghelan. gi recall ni trump ang retaliatory strike against iran
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 04:30:48 AM
Trump Calls Off Retaliatory Strike Against Iran
Hours after Iran reportedly downed a sophisticated U.S. drone, the president recalled a military strike after it launched.

By Paul D. Shinkman, Senior National Security Writer June 21, 2019, at 9:27 a.m.

presko ug lab-as jud ni nga balita. this is the latest news
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 04:32:01 AM
(https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/46ae019/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2F3e%2Ff8%2Ffa83682e4b2687f027a38f235b0e%2F190621-newstrumpiran-editorial.jpg)
President Donald Trump originally approved the military strike after Iran shot down
a multimillion-dollar U.S. drone on Thursday, June 20, 2019.(EVAN VUCCI/AP)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 04:32:55 AM
PRESIDENT Donald Trump on Thursday night abruptly called off a military strike against Iran that had been planned in retaliation for the downing of a sophisticated American drone over international waters.


The New York Times first reported that the president had approved the retaliatory measure after Iran shot down a multimillion-dollar Navy RQ-4 Global Hawk drone with a surface-to-air missile near the Strait of Hormuz.

Military and diplomatic officials were reportedly expecting the strike against Iranian radar and missile sites as late as 7 p.m. Eastern time on Thursday, with planes in the air and ships in position to carry it out. It's not clear whether Trump abruptly changed his mind about carrying out the strikes or if some unforeseen logistical hurdle interfered with the U.S. plans.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 04:33:42 AM
In a series of tweets Friday morning, Trump said the U.S. was "cocked & loaded to retaliate last night on 3 different [sites]" before a general told him 150 people would die in the strike.

Trump said he believed the strike was "not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone." He added he is in "no hurry" and that sanctions his administration has imposed against Iran are "biting." He said he added more Thursday night.

The strike would have been Trump's third against targets in the Middle East. He ordered two missile strikes against Syrian targets in 2017 and 2018. He also authorized a previously planned Navy SEAL raid in Yemen days into his administration in early 2017, which resulted in the death of one of the commandos.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 04:34:13 AM
Speaking to reporters earlier on Thursday, Trump said Iran had made "a very big mistake" in attacking the drone, which Tehran on Friday continued to say was in Iranian airspace at the time it was shot down. Trump also indicated he believed Iran's top leadership may not have ordered the strike, suggesting instead that it may have been carried out by someone "loose and stupid."

U.S. officials said the drone was shot down over international waters, where it fell after it was shot down. Officials from Iran claimed Friday it had recovered parts of the drone within its territory.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 09:07:43 AM
(https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/3f3c2b3/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2F2b%2F8f%2F8278d3134d2185a165b54740b930%2F190620tankerfire.fire.Getty.jpg)
Fire and smoke billow from the Norwegian-owned Front Altair tanker on June 13, 2019,
in the Gulf of Oman. Benchmark crude oil prices this week jumped after Iran shot down
a U.S. surveillance drone near the Strait of Hormuz.(AFP/GETTY IMAGES)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 09:24:26 AM
BENCHMARK CRUDE OIL prices this week experienced their biggest jump in months after Iran shot down a U.S. surveillance drone near the Strait of Hormuz, prompting concerns about further regional unrest and threats to oil security in the Middle East.

Brent crude oil, the benchmark for global prices and U.S. gasoline, had climbed by more than 8% since Monday and by over 5% in just the past 36 hours, as of Friday afternoon, after President Donald Trump announced that he had called off a retaliatory military strike against Iran. West Texas Intermediate, which tracks prices for the light, sweet crude produced in the U.S., had shot up by more than 11%.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 09:26:11 AM
The leap in prices amounts to a remarkable turnabout for a market that had seemed all but impervious to price hikes.

"We certainly did see a jump when this occurred, particularly when it wasn't clear what kind of response we were looking at," says Ellen Wald, president of Transversal Consulting and a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Global Energy Center. "It's a fairly good increase from where we were earlier."

While the escalation of tensions with Iran was the most obvious driver of the spike in oil prices, it occurred in the wake of other events this week that also may have had an influence.

The downing of the drone occurred less than 48 hours after President Donald Trump revealed Tuesday that he would be meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping at next week's G-20 summit in Japan – fueling hopes that an end or even just an easing of the two countries' tit-for-tat sanctions may be in sight. The Federal Reserve meanwhile indicated that it wouldn't raise interest rates and left the door open for a future cut, offering further reassurance to markets that there may not be a feared slowdown in demand.

In the wake of both developments, the S&P 500 – which Brent crude prices have closely tracked – and the Dow Jones industrial average had each climbed by more than 2.5% as of Friday.

"I wouldn't be surprised if some of this elevation in oil prices is due to a more favorable economic outlook," Wald says.

Oil prices are notoriously difficult to predict. Demand from the summer driving season typically drives an increase in prices – going into the Fourth of July weekend last year, Brent was hovering around $80 per barrel.

Yet before Thursday, global worries about an abrupt dropoff in demand – sparked by the U.S.-China trade war and portents of a looming recession – had kept prices between an anemic $59 and $61 per barrel since the start of June. They remained there despite falling inventories of oil worldwide, regional unrest in major oil producing countries, an agreement by OPEC members and Russia to extend production cuts, and even attacks last week on a Japanese and a Norwegian oil tanker near the Strait of Hormuz – events that once would have ignited fears about supply and sent prices soaring. Crude was fetching about $15-20 less than the same period last year, and roughly $10-15 less than analysts anticipated.

Booming U.S. oil production is perhaps most responsible for insulating markets from wild swings in prices, at least for now: Hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling in the past decade have propelled the country to become the world's top oil producer, and in recent months it's seen production rise even as dozens of rigs have gone offline.

"Underlying all of this is the fact that U.S. production continues to grow solidly this year, and it's also expected to grow next year, which is why if demand growth weakens, then the market could be looking at an oversupply," says Ann-Louise Hittle, vice president for oils research at the consulting firm Wood Mackenzie.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 09:27:30 AM
Yet experts also generally agreed that investors' concerns about a drop-off in demand were keeping prices too low, especially based on what's often called the "fundamentals" – the basics of supply and demand. The question was what it would take to shake prices from their stupor.

"Oil prices barely budged on the news. This looks far too complacent," Steven Kopits, managing director of Princeton Energy Advisors, wrote in an email following last week's attack on the oil tankers. Predicting an increase in prices,he continued, "the risk on oil prices seems clearly to the upside over the next 10-day period."

Events this week seemed to provide that answer – at least for now. Between U.S.-Iran tensions, a potential end to the U.S.-China trade war and promising news from the Fed, Brent prices going into Friday afternoon were holding above $65. West Texas Intermediate was remaining around $57, but some analysts predicted it could reach $60 in the days ahead.

What happens with prices going forward depends on a variety of factors: If Trump and Xi signal significant progress in their scheduled talks next week, prices might jump. Conversely, Trump's disclosure Friday that he abruptly called off a planned military strike on Iran seemed to indicate that diplomatic and economic responses may still be on the table – perhaps avoiding a likely increase in oil prices caused by further military actions.

"From here, prices could go down $5 or they could go up $5, but it depends whether the U.S. reaches out to Iran or not. If it does, then oil prices will fall back to $62. If it doesn't, then we'll see another Iranian incident, after which there will be another very specific U.S. military response," Kopits says. "Then we're talking about Brent will be above $70 and WTI will be above $60."

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 11:51:50 PM
(https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/8fbef68/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2F23%2F61%2F5e6e10d146e1bd5c1fe1660e2085%2F190613-newsomanattack-editorial.jpg)
An oil tanker is on fire in the sea of Oman, Thursday, June 13, 2019. Two oil tankers near the strategic Strait of Hormuz were reportedly attacked on Thursday, an assault that left one ablaze and adrift as sailors were evacuated from both vessels and the U.S. Navy rushed to assist amid heightened tensions between Washington and Tehran.(ISNA/AP)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 11:53:08 PM
naka hinomdom na hinoon ko kaniadto sa SHEman pa ko pagka kita naho ining picture
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 22, 2019, 11:59:57 PM
wala pa tay balita karon. maayo na lang nangakak si trump, wala dayona ang gi plan nga retaliatory strikes against iran. lisod na kay mahimo unyang pabilo sa WW3.

gubot kanunay ning atong kalibotan. di mawala ning gera gera. maajo unta ug walay gera kay nahilona na ko dinhi sa states. naay gamatoy nga balay, mga kotse nga kagalkal. ano pang hanapin mo.

kadtong nag subay aning topic, tune in lang mo sa youtube for updates. up to date ang balita bahin sa US vs. Iran
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 03:28:20 AM
Trump warns Iran of ’obliteration like you’ve never seen before’
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 03:29:49 AM
6557
President Donald Trump warned the United States may launch a devastating military attack on Iran unless it comes to the negotiating table and drops its bid to develop nuclear weapons.

“I'm not looking for war, and if there is, it'll be obliteration like you’ve never seen before. But I’m not looking to do that. But you can’t have a nuclear weapon. You want to talk? Good. Otherwise you can have a bad economy for the next three years,” Trump said during an interview with NBC’s “Meet The Press” airing Sunday.


The president said he’d be willing to sit down with Iranian officials without preconditions.

The comments, made during an interview taped Friday, came the same day Trump confirmed on Twitter that he called off a retaliatory strike on Iran at the last minute Thursday night. He said he decided that the potential cost of human lives was “not proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone.”

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard said Thursday it had shot down an American drone, claiming it had entered Iranian airspace, a claim disputed by the U.S., which has maintained the drone was over international waters. Both countries have since produced what they say is evidence supporting their respective positions.

Trump said the U.S. had a “modest but pretty, pretty heavy attack schedule,” but planes were not in the air when he called off the attack.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 03:30:58 AM
The commander in chief said the response now should be increased sanctions on Iran’s economy.

“We’re increasing the sanctions now,” adding the country’s economy has already been “shattered.”

Trump said he believes Iranian officials want to negotiate and that any deal would have to be about nuclear weapons. He also claimed that Iran had violated the nuclear agreement struck by the Obama administration and other world powers.

“They cannot have a nuclear weapon,” he said. “They cannot have a nuclear weapon. They’d use it. And they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon.”

Trump also disputed that he sent a message to Iranian leaders through a third country, saying he did not want conflict, dubbing it “fake news.”

However, he also declined to send a message during the interview to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

“Wouldn’t be much different than that message,” Trump said.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 03:35:53 AM
The hysteria of war is once more gripping Washington. President Donald Trump reportedly ordered and later canceled airstrikes against Iran for its latest provocations. The litany of Iranian mischief is certainly a long one: Tehran has declared its intention to violate the Iran nuclear deal—the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action—by exceeding limits on enrichment stockpiles; it has, according to the Trump administration, assaulted oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, thus interfering with commercial traffic in an international waterway; and on Thursday it shot down a U.S. drone.

Having studied the Iranian regime for decades, I believe the purpose of all this, however, is not to start a war with America. More likely, it’s to enter talks with Washington claiming to be the empowered party that has withstood America’s strategy of maximum pressure. Before negotiating with the United States, Iran needs a narrative of success. And the events of the past few days, in which the Trump administration threatened and then backed off a military confrontation, have finally provided Tehran with a justification to enter talks with, in Iran’s telling, a chastened Washington.


You could see this narrative develop on Friday, when—hours after Trump reportedly called off airstrikes—the podiums of the Islamic Republic proclaimed victory. Tehran’s influential Friday Prayer leader Ali Akbari insisted, “The enemies also know that if they start a war, they will not end it.” General Amir Hajizadeh of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps boasted that it could have easily shot down a U.S. spy plan, “but we did not do it.” (Trump on Saturday nodded to the same event: “There was a plane with 38 people yesterday, did you see that? … They had it in their sights and they didn’t shoot it down. I think they were very wise not to do that. And we appreciate that they didn’t do that. I think that was a very wise decision.”)

The reality is more complicated than Iran’s assertions of success. First, the White House abrogated the JCPOA without being isolated internationally. Then, it managed to gain multilateral support for its economic sanctions, as European businesses complied with U.S. demands over the objections of Europe’s diplomats and politicians. By the International Monetary Fund’s estimate, due to the sanctions, Iran’s GDP will contract by 6 percent while inflation hovers around 50 percent. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo then announced 12 demands for a new nuclear treaty with Iran, sensibly suggesting that the U.S. has to address not just Iran’s nuclear weapons aspirations but also its penchant toward terrorism and regional subversion. And finally, the administration has made much progress in reducing Iran’s exports to zero.

In other words, Iran has much more to gain by negotiating with the U.S. than by continuing the confrontation. Iranian diplomats, who believe they came out of talks with the Obama administration with the longer end of the stick, think that if they enter any negotiating room they can easily beset their interlocutors. Stalemated talks will inevitably generate pressure on the Trump team by European allies and Democrats who will insist that the Pompeo parameters are unrealistic and must be abandoned. Many within the professional bureaucracy led by State Department diplomats, intelligence analysts and Pentagon generals are likely to echo these themes. The Iranians have seen these pressures and fears of another war in the Middle East drive both the Obama and the George W. Bush administrations to the negotiating table, and they hope the same factors will finally cause Trump and Pompeo to narrow their gaze to some modest changes in the JCPOA, rather than a total overhaul. But Iran’s leadership, which has insisted to its populace for two years that it will not enter talks with a truculent Trump, requires a narrative of success justifying its turnabout. The regime cannot enter negotiations as a supplicant battered by American sanctions.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 03:36:17 AM
I believe this is why Tehran in May opted for a riskier strategy of incrementally increasing pressure on America while whittling down its demands for resumption of nuclear talks. President Hassan Rouhani announced Iran would gradually reconsider its obligations under the JCPOA starting with retaining enriched uranium at home as opposed to sending it abroad. Then, the Trump administration accused Iran of attacking oil tankers around the Strait of Hormuz. Iran has denied the attacks, but Iran has often threatened Gulf shipping whenever it has faced sanctions and threats from America—a signal to the international community that the Islamic Republic is capable of obstructing oil commerce through one of the most strategically vital waterways. And then for good measure, Iran shot down an American drone. Tehran, I think, hoped that its incremental escalation would not lead to war, but generate a diplomatic process. It was a risky move, but one that may yet pay off.

Look closely, and you’ll see that in the past weeks, Rouhani and Foreign Minister Javad Zarif have also offered their own subtle olive branch. Rouhani stopped insisting that America rejoin the JCPOA as a precondition to talks while stressing, “We are for logic and talks if [the other side] sits respectfully at the negotiating table and follows international regulations, not if it issues an order to negotiate.” Zarif has cautioned Trump, “You campaigned against costly stupid interventions,” but a “conniving cabal of warmongers and butchers, the infamous B-Team, is plotting for way more than what you bargained for.” By separating Trump from his so-called belligerent advisers, Zarif intimated that Trump can be a statesmen if only he dispenses with the reckless aides who are, in Zarif‘s words, tricking him into war.


Some in the foreign policy community at times suggest that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei is opposed to any talks and will not permit his diplomats to reengage with the United States. But this is a misreading of Khamenei, who has routinely denounced talks in public while supporting them in private. After all, the talks with the Obama administration would not have taken place without his consent. In a recent speech, Khamenei claimed he had opposed the JCPOA and had warned Rouhani and Zarif not to trust the Americans. But he added that the executive branch, led by Rouhani, is responsible for diplomacy and that he himself rarely intervenes in such matters unless they threaten the revolution itself.

This tells us that if Rouhani in his role as the head of the executive branch wants to embark on talks with America, Khamenei will publicly express his skepticism while essentially allowing the negotiations to proceed. This is a convenient way for the supreme leader to disown controversial talks with the U.S. so that Rouhani will have to deal with any political blowback.

It’s clear to me that the talks between United States and Iran are coming. And the challenge for the Trump administration is to hold fast to the Pompeo parameters. Ultimately, the legacy of Trump’s Iran policy will be whether the adminisration can sustain its hawkish policy and move forward with successful negotiations or whether it will join its predecessor in abandoning its own sensible red lines for sake of an agreement at any cost.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 03:41:45 AM
(https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/45d0667/2147483647/resize/1160x/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F54%2Faf%2Fcc9cc4c0495cbc5f5d0414c353c8%2F190621-shafer-trump-getty.jpg)

                                    VERSUS

(https://static.politico.com/dims4/default/192a0b2/2147483647/resize/1160x/quality/90/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F64%2Fb3%2Fb64681e84ec1ba8ab2824115b055%2F19622-hassan-rouhani-ap-773.jpg)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 03:43:48 AM
hala kombate na. cool lang ang iran. kataw-an lang si trump. porbida ning ahong manok. menos ug labok hihihihi
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 03:47:46 AM
kotob ra man sa pangisog si trump. hala bombahi na poslan man.

bitaw mag ampo tang tanan oi. kay lisod ni ug masugdan. mahimo na unjang WORLD WAR 3 kay labanay na man. molaban ang russia ug china sa iran. unya kinsa may mo laban sa US. ang pilipinas? ma pordoy ta kay daku ug gasto ning gera.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 04:00:26 AM
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2018/09/1862/1048/615298bc-AP446885797862.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
A Ghader missile is launched from the area near the Iranian port of Jask port on the shore of the Gulf of Oman during an Iranian navy drill, Tuesday, Jan. 1, 2013. Iran says it has tested advanced anti-ship missiles in the final day of a naval drill near the strategic Strait of Hormuz, the passageway for one-fifth of the world's oil supply. State TV says "Ghader", or "Capable", a missile with a range of 200 kilometers (120 miles), was among the weapons used Tuesday. It says the weapon can destroy warships. (AP Photo/Jamejam Online, Azin Haghighi) (AP2013)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 04:39:32 AM
;D ::) 8)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 10:38:51 AM
5741
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2019/04/1862/1048/ContentBroker_contentid-0494ba6cf93a434f892437dccbf2f657.png?ve=1&tl=1)
FILE - In this Feb. 3, 2019 file photo, an Iranian clergyman looks at domestically built surface to surface missiles displayed by the Revolutionary Guard in a military show marking the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, at Imam Khomeini Grand Mosque in Tehran, Iran. On Monday, April 8, 2019, the Trump administration designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guard a “foreign terrorist organization” in an unprecedented move against a national armed force. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps went from being a domestic security force with origins in the 1979 Islamic Revolution to a transnational fighting force. (AP Photo/Vahid Salemi, File)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 10:15:20 PM
6915
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2019/06/920/518/RQ4-thumb.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Iranian official warns more US spy drones can be blown out of the sky

An Iranian military official said Monday that Tehran is capable of shooting down more
American spy drones as tensions between the two countries continue to simmer, according
to a report out of the country.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 10:16:25 PM
An Iranian military official said Monday that Tehran is capable of shooting down more American spy drones as tensions between the two countries continue to simmer, according to a report out of the country.

Rear. Adm. Hossein Khanzadi, Iran's naval chief, said Iran can deliver another “crushing response … and the enemy knows it," according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency.

IRAN LIKELY AT 'INFLECTION POINT,' LAUNCHING ATTACKS TO CHANGE 'STATUS QUO,' DEFENSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCY DIRECTOR TELLS FOX NEWS

Trump called off military strikes against Tehran after Iranians shot down a U.S. surveillance drone, which was valued at over $100 million.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 10:17:48 PM
Iran claimed that the drone was flying over its airspace at the time of the shooting. Washington insisted that the drone was over international waters.

In an interview on NBC’s “Meet The Press,” Trump said that he did not think the potential loss of life in Iran was “proportionate to shooting down an unmanned drone.”

Instead of a military strike, the president noted that his administration plans to ratchet up the already hefty sanctions on Iran. Trump is prepared to announce new sanctions on the country on Monday.

Trump expressed his willingness to open talks with Iranian officials without any preconditions – saying that he doesn’t want a war with the Islamic Republic, but if it comes down to an armed conflict it will be “obliteration like you've never seen before.”

The Associated Press and Fox News’ Andrew O’Reilly contributed to this report.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 10:19:42 PM
na isog na ang iran kay kotob ra man gud sa hata hata si trump. gi birahan unta nija dajon. unya nangakak man. wala dajona ang retaliatory strike.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 10:22:20 PM
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2019/06/1862/1048/3ccb3e93-AP19174361267415.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
U.S. National Security Advisor John Bolton gives statements to media in Jerusalem, Sunday, June 23, 2019. (Associated Press)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 10:24:01 PM
U.S. national security adviser John Bolton had a message for Iran on Sunday during his visit to Israel: He advised the leaders of the Islamic nation not to “mistake U.S. prudence and discretion for weakness.”

Bolton’s comment followed Friday’s confirmation by President Trump that he had called off a planned retaliatory attack against Iran following that country’s downing of a U.S. military drone Thursday in international airspace over the Strait of Hormuz.

Trump said he reconsidered action after deciding that the potential loss of life in a military action was not “proportionate” after Iran had attacked an unmanned aircraft.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 10:28:57 PM
On Saturday, Trump praised Bolton, saying he had confidence in his appointee despite some disagreements on some Mideast issues, Politico reported.

Bolton added Sunday that no one had granted Iran “a hunting license in the Middle East,” as he spoke alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu during his Mideast visit.

Late last month, Bolton had charged that Iran was responsible for attacks against oil tankers off the coast of the United Arab Emirates – and warned that the U.S. would strike back if attacked.

Bolton said Iran was “almost certainly” responsible for the tanker attacks.

Rhetoric between the U.S. and Iran has been sharpening in recent weeks as Iran feels the effects of sanctions imposed by the U.S. following Trump’s decision to withdraw from a 2015 nuclear agreement that Iran had negotiated with the U.S. and other world powers during the Obama administration.

Trump had repeatedly criticized the deal as not going far enough to ensure that Iran was not pursuing nuclear weapons.


tubagbohol.com's Rene BALONG Econg contributed to this report.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 11:28:40 PM
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2019/06/1862/1048/putin.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Russian President Vladimir Putin gestures answers a journalist's question after his
annual call-in show in Moscow, Russia, on Thursday. (AP)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 24, 2019, 11:30:47 PM
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin warned the U.S.  Thursday not to take military action against Iran following the recent downing of an American drone and attacks on oil tankers near the Strait of Hormuz.

Speaking on a televised call-in show, Putin said U.S. military action against Iran – which Washington blames for both events -- would be a “catastrophe for the region as a minimum" and trigger an escalation of hostilities with unpredictable results.

The comments came just days after the Trump administration announced that 1,000 additional American troops would be deployed to the Middle East.

The Pentagon has said that deployment includes security forces and troops for additional surveillance and intelligence gathering in the region.

The downing of the drone by a surface-to-air missile earlier Thursday was the most recent Iranian provocation in the region, coming on the heels of a disputed attack on a pair of oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman last week -- which the U.S. has blamed on Iran.

Iran claimed the U.S. drone on Thursday was over Iranian airspace when it was shot down.
A ministry spokesman, Abbas Mousavi, was quoted by the semi-official Tasnim news agency as saying that Iran cannot condone the "illegal trespassing and invading of the country's skies by any kind of foreign flying object."

But American officials stated unequivocally the incident occurred in international airspace.

Tensions also have been running high recently between the U.S. and Russia, stimulated by the near-collision between a Russian destroyer and an American warship occurring in the Philippine Sea earlier this month.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 25, 2019, 11:52:09 PM
7302
Iranian leaders believed that mining oil tankers in the Gulf of Hormuz and shooting down a U.S. drone would force President Trump to drop his tough “maximum pressure” policy against Iran by reversing the U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal (the JCPOA) and dropping increased U.S. sanctions. This was a reasonable assumption after eight years of President Barack Obama’s incompetent foreign policies including his “leading from behind” Middle East strategy and his “strategic patience” approach to North Korea.

Iran's leaders were wrong. President Trump is not about to back away from his Iran strategy which has been highly successful in denying Tehran revenue to spend on its nuclear and missile programs, terrorism, and meddling in regional disputes. Instead, President Trump, Monday doubled down on his Iran policy by approving new sanctions.

The president also knows he made the right call in withdrawing from the deeply flawed nuclear deal which lets Iran continue nuclear weapons-related activities like uranium enrichment and does not cover Iran’s missile programs and other threats it poses to the region.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 25, 2019, 11:52:58 PM
In addition, Israel produced clear evidence last year of Iranian cheating and lying on its JCPOA commitments when it revealed the “Iran nuclear archive” – a treasure-trove of documents stolen by Israeli intelligence on Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

At the same time, while President Trump promised during the presidential campaign and as president to end wars and not start new ones, he has made clear on numerous occasions, including in Syria and Afghanistan, that he is prepared to use military force when necessary to defend U.S. interests and those of our allies.

Iran dodged a bullet last week when Trump decided to call off airstrikes minutes before they were launched. Contrary to claims by his critics, this was not a sign of indecisiveness by the president – it reflected his decision that airstrikes that could kill 100-200 people were a disproportional and unjustified response to Iran’s shoot-down of an unarmed U.S. drone. Iranian leaders should conclude from this incident that the next time the president orders a military strike, they will not be so lucky.

The increased tensions with Iran are a result of Iran’s leaders attempting to use violence and terrorism to force President Trump to drop his maximum pressure policy. Obviously giving into these threats would be a sign of American weakness and amount giving into blackmail. The United States also should not remain in an agreement because the other party threatens to attack us if we withdraw.

Iranian leaders reacted angrily to the new sanctions imposed by President Trump Monday, calling them “outrageous and idiotic” and claimed they permanently closed the path to diplomacy.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 25, 2019, 11:53:39 PM
Such rants will have no effect on President Trump because he knows his approach to Iran is working – he has no need to offer Tehran concessions. Trump remains open to talks with Iran to find a diplomatic solution that addresses the full range of threats posed by Iran. If Iran wants to negotiate an end to U.S. sanctions, it will need to agree to significant concessions. The ball is in Iran’s court.

The U.S. presidency is often described as the most difficult job on earth because of the enormous responsibility as the leader of the free world and the requirement of having to make difficult decisions with no easy answers that sometimes may result in the loss of human lives. President Trump has demonstrated with his careful and prudent handling of the threat from Iran how he has excelled at meeting the heavy demands of being America’s commander in chief.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 25, 2019, 11:58:15 PM
(https://media2.foxnews.com/BrightCove/694940094001/2019/06/17/694940094001_6049154828001_6049153943001-vs.jpg)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 12:01:25 AM
(https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/af97100/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fca%2F8d%2F1cc45e8d40bdb7355b664e8e2118%2F190624-khamenei-editorial.jpg)
The Trump administration announced it would impose sanctions against
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Iran's head of state and
spiritual leader, on Monday. HANDOUT/ANADOLU AGENCY/GETTY IMAGES
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 12:03:05 AM
THE TRUMP administration escalated its "maximum pressure" campaign against the Iranian regime on Monday by taking the unusual step of sanctioning Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Iran's head of state and spiritual leader of its revolutionary government.

The new sanctions that Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin announced will also target the assets of the senior military leaders responsible for threatening the shutter of the Strait of Hormuz and the commander of Iran's air force, who Mnuchin said was responsible for shooting down an American drone in international waters on Thursday. The secretary's assessment seemed to overturn Trump's assertion last week downplaying Iran's recent behavior, specifically saying that its shooting down a U.S. drone was "a very big mistake" carried out by a "loose and stupid" lower ranking official.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 12:03:47 AM
Mnuchin said he will announce sanctions later this week against Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, one of Iran's most public figures who served an instrumental role in crafting the 2015 nuclear agreement brokered by the Obama administration.

The White House decision follows Iran's lashing out at existing, punishing sanctions – including against Qassem Soleimani, the shadowy head of Iran's elite Quds Force – that have crippled the Iranian economy and choked off its ability to sell oil.

It also comes at a time of perceived military escalation between Iran and American assets in the region.

"There's no question that locking up the money worked last time. And locking up the money works now," Mnuchin said from the White House briefing room, shortly after meeting with Trump in the Oval Office.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 12:04:41 AM
Mnuchin confirmed he had not coordinated these sanctions with American allies – an unusual approach for a decision as momentous as targeting the leader of a country that, for now, remains locked into the 2015 nuclear agreement with the U.K., China, Russia and other key European allies.

Russia decried the sanctions as "illegal."

Trump has faced criticism for an unclear approach to Iran marked by unspecific demands – warning against its developing a nuclear weapon or killing Americans in the region – and reports of infighting among his closest advisers.

Mnuchin said Monday of Iran, "If they want to come back to the negotiating table, we're ready."

"We look forward to a time in releasing sanctions, if they're willing to negotiate," the secretary said.

Iran has indicated it will never negotiate with the U.S. while sanctions remain in place.

"We consider these sanctions as hostile and in line with economic terrorism," Seyed Abbas Mousavi, a spokesman for Iran's Foreign Ministry, said Monday before Mnuchin announced the sanctions.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 08:48:32 PM
7643
The tension between the U.S. and Iran has reached a new height resulting in the downing of a U.S. drone by Iran and a possible airstrike that was called off by President Trump at the last minute. Earlier this week, it was confirmed that Iran shot down a U.S. drone over international waters, though Iran claims the U.S. violated their airspace.

Iranian state television released images of what it claimed was a U.S. Navy RQ-4A Global Hawk drone it shot down with a surface-to-air missile.

With the U.S. pulling out of the Iran Nuclear deal combined with crippling sanctions, Iran has made several threats to disrupt the transport of oil through the shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz, prompting Trump to order more military assets to the region.

US NAVY DRONE SHOT DOWN BY IRANIAN MISSILE OVER STRAIT OF HORMUZ IN 'UNPROVOKED ATTACK,' CENTRAL COMMAND SAYS

Here's what you need to know about the Strait of Hormuz and its major influence on the oil industry.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 08:49:29 PM
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2019/06/1862/1048/ContentBroker_contentid-354d808ba0564e42a3cd74203ffc479b.jpeg?ve=1&tl=1)
This map provided by the Department of Defense, Thursday, June 20, 2019, shows
the site where they say a U.S. Navy RQ-4 drone was shot down.  (Department of Defense via AP)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 08:51:53 PM
The Strait of Hormuz is a tiny strip of water located between the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Iran. It is the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf.

What's it used for?
It is in the territorial waters of Iran and Oman, which at its narrowest point is just 21 miles wide — with shipping lanes about 2 miles wide in either direction. It flows into the Gulf of Oman, where ships can then travel to the rest of the world.

Why is it so important?
It's essentially the gatekeeper to the world's biggest oil players.

Roughly one-fifth of the world’s crude oil is supplied by Gulf countries, which depend on unrestricted travel through the narrow strait, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

The Persian Gulf oil exporters include Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. Those countries transported almost 22 million bpd (barrels per day) of oil through the Strait within the first half of 2018, Reuters reports. Dozens of oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers exit the Persian Gulf through the Strait each day with most of the crude oil and natural gas going to Asian countries. If there is any disruption of oil through the Strait of Hormuz it could drastically affect the global oil price.
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 08:52:24 PM
Some Middle Eastern countries that travel through it on a daily basis such as the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia — frustrated by the limitations — have reportedly attempted to find alternative routes. But the narrow passageway still controls the oil market.

There are several alternative oil pipeline routes to bypass the Strait of Hormuz, but not enough to make up for the amount of oil that transits the Strait.

According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), there are three pipelines that could transport oil from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates that bypass the Strait: the East-West Pipeline, Abqaiq-Yanbu Natural Gas Liquids Pipeline from Saudi Arabia and the Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline from the United Arab Emirates.

The pipelines are also limited. The East-West Pipeline allows only 1.0 million bpd, while the Abu Dhabi Crude Oil Pipeline could take approximately 2.9 million bpd — a small fraction of the bpd that travel through the Strait of Hormuz on a regular basis.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 26, 2019, 08:55:00 PM
(https://a57.foxnews.com/static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2018/09/1862/1048/1f8b57e929b20e13750f6a706700d470.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
In this Jan. 19, 2012 file photo, a plane flies over the mountains in south of the
Strait of Hormuz as the trading dhows and ships are docked on the Persian Gulf
waters near the town of Khasab, in Oman.  (The Associated Press)
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 29, 2019, 01:06:10 AM
7909
(https://www.usnews.com/dims4/USNEWS/b079305/2147483647/thumbnail/970x647/quality/85/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcom-usnews-beam-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fa4%2F98487cec62bd5cf3a1d0077044b6f6%2Ftag%3Areuters.com%2C2019%3Anewsml_LYNXNPEF5R1ER%3A12019-06-28T135555Z_1_LYNXNPEF5R1ER_RTROPTP_3_MIDEAST-IRAN-USA-DRONE.JPG)
The purported wreckage of a U.S. military drone is seen displayed by the Islamic
Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) in Tehran, Iran. Tasnim News Agency/Handout
Title: Re: WW3 US vs Iran
Post by: balong on June 29, 2019, 01:07:14 AM
DUBAI (REUTERS) - IRAN said on Friday it had formally filed a complaint to the United Nations against the United States over the violation of its airspace with an unmanned drone shot down by Tehran earlier this month, the semi-official Tasnim news agency reported.

"The complaint was filed to the U.N. Security Council over the aggression against our airspace by the American drone ... the complaint states that Tehran reserves the right to respond firmly if the U.S. repeats the violation," Tasnim quoted deputy Foreign Minister Gholamhossein Dehghani as saying.

Tensions spiked between Tehran and Washington after Iran downed a U.S. military drone on June 20 that it said was flying over one of its southern provinces on the Gulf. Washington said the drone was shot down over international waters.
Powered by SMFPacks SEO Pro Mod | Sitemap
Mobile View
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2019, SimplePortal