U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry today reassured America's Arab allies that the U.S. will not allow them to be attacked “from outside,” in an apparent warning to Iran. He specifically mentioned Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Jordan and Egypt as Arab countries that the U.S. will defend.
“The United States will be there for the defense of our friends and our allies,” Kerry told reporters in Cairo. “We will not allow those countries to be attacked from outside. We will stand with them.” (AP, 3 Nonember)
“The United States will be there for the defense of our friends and our allies,” Kerry told reporters in Cairo. “We will not allow those countries to be attacked from outside. We will stand with them.” (AP, 3 Nonember)
Kerry spoke during the first stop on his trip to the Middle East, Europe and North Africa.
On Iran nuclear program, Kerry could not be more diect:
“Iran will not get a nuclear weapon,” Kerry said. “That is a promise by the president of the United States.”
Photo credit: Secretary of State John Kerry arrives in Cairo. Sunday, 3 November 2013. (Jason Reed, Pool/AP)
Way back in the 1980s, two obsolete Iranian phantoms dared to challenge 2 Saudi F-15s and both of the Iranians got blown out of the sky. The only people who are deluded enough to think the pathetic Iranian military can accomplish anything against the Saudis are people like Mark (who live comfortably in the U.S., because he's not crazy enough to actually serve in the Iranian army).
ReplyDeletecome on mate. saudis and arabs. they cannot organise a piss-up in a brewery. Iranian army is not a match for USA, totally agreed. But in 3 days Iran alone can wipe out all arabs from the map!
ReplyDeletelast time I checked, the Arabs had conquered Persia and forced the people there to accept a religion of Arab origin.
Deleteyour claim is based on nothing other than hot air.
You mean like the Iran Iraq war?
DeleteWhy do Iranians delude themselves with lies?
There was an Iranian king called Shahpour. In the old days there was a port in Iran called Bandar Shahpour. There was a reason why it was called "Shahpour". It was to remind Arabs what happens if they bolt so to speak. Shahpour was called Shahpour Zolaktaf by Arabs because he owned their shoulders. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapur_II
Delete"During the early years of the reign of Shapur, Arabs crossed the Persian Gulf from Bahrain to "Ardashir-Khora" of Pars and raided the interior. In retaliation, Shapur led an expedition through Bahrain, defeated the combined forces of the Arab tribes of "Taghlib", "Bakr bin Wael", and "Abd Al-Qays" and advanced temporarily into Al-Yamama in central Najd. He resettled these tribes in Kerman and Hormizd-Ardashir. Arabs named him, as "Dhul-aktāf" or "Zol 'Aktāf" that means "The owner of the shoulders" after this battle."
Sadly the new regime changed those names and appeased to arabs. That is probably one of the greatest mistakes. Iranian identying themselves with arabs""
The Bundahishn, an Zoroastrian encyclopedic text mentions that:
“ During the rulership of Shapur, the son of Hormizd, the Arabs came; they took Xorig Rūdbār; for many years with contempt (they) rushed until Shapur came to rulership; he destroyed the Arabs and took the land and destroyed many Arab rulers and pulled out many number of shoulders[6]
Last time I checked, the modern Arab states have not been able to conquer Iran. The only one that even attempted to do anything to Iran militarily, failed.
DeleteTypical us arrogance,its not up to them to decide whether iran will develop a nuclear deterrent,that choice is irans and irans alone and if they decided to persue that option there would be precious little that the us could do about it
ReplyDeleteAnonymousNovember 3, 2013 at 12:13 PM
The last time an arab was silly enough to take on iran he ended up bitterly regretting it.The saudis cannot even maintain their own war machine without an enormous amount of western help,In a shooting war I dont see the saudis doing any better than saddam,indeed I think they`d do a lot worse,but then I dont see the saudis ever being so stupid as to challenge iran militarily,most of the saudis cities and vital infrastructure is within range of irans short range missiles,the damage that iran could do to the saudis military and civilian infrastructure would be enormous
If Iran ever decides to get build nukes, there's absolutely NOTHING the US can do about it. This is Kerry spewing his usual BS to his scared kings and Sheiks who're just mad that the US can't fight their wars for them.
ReplyDeleteWhat did the US do to stop North Korea from getting the bomb? Kerry will say anything to get those fat Sheiks to sign more billion dollar arms deals. Nothing to see here, move on!!!
Nobody takes Kerry serious anyway. He's caught telling blatant lie and Putin called him out for it. He's a disgraced person who only finds respect among undemocratic minions like the Al Sauds, Qatar and assorted nobodies...!!!
actually, should Iran begin to assemble nuclear weapons the US could simply bomb the assembly sites and destroy the facilities and personnel.
DeleteAnonymousNovember 4, 2013 at 6:12 PM
DeleteAnd how would they even know where iran would be assembling its nuclear arsenal.The americans cant even gaurentee the destruction of deeply buried sites like fordow,if iran truly wanted the bomb it would have it already and the first the us would`ve known about it was when iran tested it.Kerry can tell all the lies he likes to reassure the scared sheiks,but even he knows that if iran decided it needed a nuclear deterrent there would be sfa that the arabs and the us could do about it apart from learning to live with it
the US knows a fair amount and can certainly obliterate the deepest hole that the regime hides its weapon workshops in.
Deleteand the US would have little difficulty in doing so.
three weeks and every site would be reduced to rubble.
Anonymous November 5, 2013 at 5:26 PM
DeleteAnd I imagine quite a lot of the us military infrastructure in the middle east would be destroyed in retaliation.If the us was as confident as you seem to think then why have they done nothing as irans nuclear infrastructure grows by leaps and bounds,why did they do nothing when the dprk began to build their nuclear arsenal?.I think you greatly overestimate what the us can do,and more importantly the price it is willing to pay for such action
I echoe the statements of Anon 5:26PM.
DeleteUSAF would have no difficulties reach the targets and dropping MOABs on all underground facilities.
Lord have mercy on that poor country if the US really gets to work on the Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program.
November 6, 2013 at 5:00 AM-----
Deletefirst of all, do not attempt to equate US action vis-a-vis Iran with US action vis-a-vis North Korea. there is no equivalency to be had. perhaps you might remember that when the US decided to take military action against North Korea, the US bombed the hell out of it and US troops overran all of North Korea right up to the Yalu River.
back then, as now, the Chinese intervened to protect the North Koreans......
On the other hand, no great power protects Iran.... and Iran damn sure can not protect itself from US bombardment should the US determine that all the warnings issued to Iran against any attempt to assemble nuclear weapons were being ignored.
There is little desire in the US for bombing Iran and the US prefers to negotiate an end to the Iranian nuclear weapons development program rather than taking any military action.
However, should it come to military action, the US isn't going to be deterred by Iranian efforts to damage US military facilities in the Middle East. Iran can not do all that much, the facilities are expendable and replaceable, and damage to them will bring far, far greater damage to Iran in reply.
Iran can not trade blows with the US without suffering more damage than it can absorb.
And there's no need for doing so. Iran will have to submit to a full inspection program and ongoing monitoring to end the weapons development program activity that Iran doesn't really need and which Khamenei swears won't result in nuclear weaponry in any case.
"Iranian nuclear weapons development program". If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.
DeleteClassic hasbara tactic.
Anonymous November 6, 2013 at 3:33 PM
Delete"back then, as now, the Chinese intervened to protect the North Koreans"
Yeah I can just see china going to war with america over the dprk in this day in age,actually it was the dprks own fire power,of which it has rather a lot pointed at the south that made the us think twice about any attacks up north
"Iran can not do all that much, the facilities are expendable and replaceable" god where to start.The iranians have the largest ballistic missile forces in the region numbering anywhere from the mid hundreds right up to a couple of thousand,these are not saddams tens of poorly modified scuds with a cep measured in kms.There is nothing expendable about the us military infrastructure in the middle east,it took decades to build and cost billions and thats without factoring in the many tens of thousands of us soldiers and civilians who live and work in those facilities,a good example would be:
– al-Minhad air base in Dubai, UAE
– Fifth Fleet HQ – Bahrain
– Kuwait, three bases, 15,000 US troops,, including a couple of brigade combat teams and a combat aviation brigade.
– Al Udeid Air Base, Qatar, forward HQ of US Central Command
– Overall in the region there are reportedly 40,000 American servicemen
its irans ability to target these facilities and its ability to shut down the straits and with that remove 20+% of the worlds oil from the market,its these capabilities that provide iran with a very effective deterrence based defence
"Iran can not trade blows with the US without suffering more damage than it can absorb."
Actually the us options in the event of a war would be rather limited,this would not be a repeat of libya or iraq in 91 0r 03 with the saudis or kuwaitis providing a base from which to attack,iran can easily blockade the gulf and destroy any target in either country,neither of them would be so foolish as to become directly involved.This leaves the us with only a couple of options:carrier strikes flown from carriers based a minimum of 3-400kms out in the indian ocean or strikes flown all the way from europe/us,the problem for the us is that without the use of its bases in the middle east its ability to project power is limited,iran on the other hand can bring all its power to bare.Both sides can inflict a lot of damage on each other and for that reason I dont see the us starting any wars with iran in the near future,the cost both economic and military would be very high,the outcome would at best be very uncertain,and there is just no more appetite amongst the citizens of the west for yet another us initiated middle eastern war
"weapons development program" There isnt one Full Stop.Irans nuclear facilities are inspected and monitered,and there has been no diversion of fissile material,but this is not an excuse for the iaea to pull an unscom and start sniffing around places it has no business being
Anonymous November 6, 2013 at 8:16 AM
ReplyDeleteThe MOAB would do little to irans nuclear sites like natanz or fordow,as it is a blast weapon designed for surface use,not to mention that the only aircrat that could carry it,c130s,would be sitting ducks for irans air defences.Any attack would provide iran with all the excuse it would need to leave the npt,after that there would be no more monitoring of irans nuclear program and within six months to a year iran would very likely have the bomb.Iran also has a pretty formidable retaliatory capability,not only can it seal off the straits of hormuz for an indefinite period but its ballistic missile forces give it the ability to target any us facility,of which there are many, within 2000kms of irans borders,all in all iran has a pretty powerful deterrent
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/05/03/pentagon-upgrades-bunker-buster-bomb-in-attempt-to-penetrate-key-iran-nuke-site/
DeleteMay 2, 2013
DeleteWASHINGTON—The Pentagon has redesigned its biggest "bunker buster" bomb with more advanced features intended to enable it to destroy Iran's most heavily fortified and defended nuclear site.
The newest version of what is the Pentagon's largest conventional bomb, the 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, has adjusted fuses to maximize its burrowing power, upgraded guidance systems to improve its precision and high-tech equipment intended to allow it to evade Iranian air defenses in order to reach and destroy the Fordow nuclear enrichment complex, which is buried under a mountain near the Iranian city of Qom.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324582004578459170138890756