Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on May 17, 2014
Iran Threatens U.S. Navy with ‘Suicide Missions’
A top Iranian naval commander said that he is prepared to order suicide attacks, drone strikes, and missile technology to “destroy the U.S. Navy” in any upcoming confrontation, according to an interview printed in Iran’s state-run media.
Iranian Naval Commander Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi, a member of Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), said that Iran is constantly training and preparing for a clash with the United States, according to a recounting of his remarks provided by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).
Fadavi revealed that Iran “compensates for its technological inferiority to the United States with a strategy of asymmetrical warfare, including suicide attacks and the use of speedboat and its missile capability,” according to MEMRI.
Additionally, Fadavi revealed that on “at least” three occasions senior U.S. officials have contacted Iran to establish a telephone hot line like the one used between the Soviet Union and the United States during the Cold War era.
Fadavi’s military threats come amid a massive military buildup by Iran, which claims to have duplicated and armed a downed U.S. drone and to have developed advanced ballistic missiles that could be capable of carrying a nuclear payload.
Fadavi additionally revealed in another interview earlier this month that the IRGC is preparing to use drones to perform suicide attacks and also arming drones to fire missiles.
While the United States possesses advanced military equipment, “these weapons are ineffective against a new [Iranian] strategy relying on faith, on a desire for martyrdom, and on [Iran’s] unique speedboats,” Fadavi said.
Iran will “not allow the U.S. to act against it from its bases in the Persian Gulf countries,” according to Fadavi, who claimed that U.S. forces in the region are being careful “not to cause a flare-up in the region because they know that they will lose any potential conflict with Iran,” according to MEMRI’s report on Fadavi’s remarks.
“U.S. naval forces in the region,” Fadavi claimed, “are obeying the orders of the IRGC” and “fear that Iranian vessels or missiles will target them.”
Iran maintains close conduct with its regional neighbors and will act to prevent the U.S. Navy from acting in the Persian Gulf, according to Fadavi.
Iran is also keeping a close eye on U.S. aircraft carriers, which a range of Iranian military officials have discussed destroying in recent weeks and months.
“The American aircraft carriers, which are the symbol of American military might, are under full oversight of the IRGC,” Fadavi was quoted as saying by MEMRI.
“The Americans and the rest of the world know that one of the IRGC navy’s operational goals is to destroy the U.S. Navy,” he said.
Fadavi additionally revealed that Iran has, “for many years now,” been building “models of American destroyers, cruisers, and frigates, and sinking them.”
“The Americans do not know most of the details, and their research institutes have presented very rough data regarding the scale models of aircraft carriers that we are building,” Fadavi said, adding that the Iranian navy can sink these duplicated U.S. ships “within 50 seconds.”
Fadavi said that the Iranian military trains so intensely in fighting U.S. warships so that if war eventually breaks out it can ensure “the defeat and humiliation of the Americans.”
“We want to drill operational and tactical operations of attacking an aircraft carrier,” he was quoted as saying.
The amendment would further require Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to fully detail any contractor that “has conducted a significant transaction with an Iranian person” or its government.
Washington Free Beacon
13 Comments on "Iran Threatens U.S. Navy with ‘Suicide Missions’"
Makati1 on Sat, 17th May 2014 9:07 am
Aircraft carriers are now the floating coffins of the Navy. Just as new weapons made the tank almost obsolete, so do modern missiles and tactics, as above, make carriers mostly obsolete.
The US navy knows it cannot come within 1,000 miles of China without taking the chance of their carriers being sunk by Chinese anti-ship missiles.
MSN fanboy on Sat, 17th May 2014 9:22 am
And the Chinese Navy Know if they ever fire a missile its WW3.
GregT on Sat, 17th May 2014 9:52 am
WW3, would not be in the best interest of the US either. China, Russia, and Iran, aren’t Iraq or Afghanistan. Which still begs the question, WTF is Washington doing in the Ukraine?
Davey on Sat, 17th May 2014 10:29 am
Settle Makaster you are squirming over China and her missiles it’s embarrassing. If that is the case why is China building carriers macki? China takes out a carrier the US will take out their entire Navy. Blow that Mak. You still squirming with delight?
Plantagenet on Sat, 17th May 2014 10:41 am
Obama should definitely add crazed Islamist suicide attacks on US carriers to the list of issues under consideration at the ongoing US-IRAN nuclear talks.
GregT on Sat, 17th May 2014 11:07 am
Plant,
You and Kenz should get together for a couple of beers. You might even expand your world views a little.
rockman on Sat, 17th May 2014 1:09 pm
And just watched “The Iron Lady” movie last night and saw the lesson the Brits learned about modern naval battle tactics and how easily a cheap Exorcist missile can change the game. But in the end the Brit marines got the job done.
Been a long time since WWI when military leaders thought attrition was the way to win a war. Of course back then as you pounded your adversary into the ground he didn’t have the nuclear option before you finished him off. Doesn’t even have to reach CA…Hawaii, Japan, Australia…all good enough for a final Curtin call.
Yep…no real winner…just some survivors.
Roman on Sat, 17th May 2014 2:49 pm
Only a world war can save humanity.
johnny on Sat, 17th May 2014 3:48 pm
Roman, That’s the dumbest thing I’ve heard so far.
Makati1 on Sat, 17th May 2014 6:37 pm
johnny, give Roman’s comment some thought in the longer term. He could be right.
Mike in Calif. on Sat, 17th May 2014 8:55 pm
This guy is the best entertainment since Baghdad Bob:
“Our initial assessment is that they will all die”
“Listen, this explosion does not frighten us any longer. The cruise missiles do not frighten anyone. We are catching them like fish in a river. I mean here that over the past two days we managed to shoot down 196 missiles before they hit their target.”
“We will welcome them with bullets and shoes.”
“What they say about a breakthrough [at Najaf] is completely an illusion. They are sending their warplanes to fly very low in order to have vibrations on these sacred places . . . they are trying to crack the buildings by flying low over them.”
“There are no American infidels in Baghdad. Never!”
“…they have started to commit suicide under the walls of Baghdad. We will encourage them to commit more suicides quickly.”
“Be assured, Baghdad is safe, protected.”
“NO! We have retaken the airport. There are NO Americans there. I will take you there and show you. IN ONE HOUR!”
“We blocked them inside the city. Their rear is blocked”
[On surrenders] “Those are not Iraqi soldiers at all. Where did they bring them from?”
johnny on Sat, 17th May 2014 11:11 pm
Makati, The next world war will probably go nuclear. You may want to live in a post nuclear world but I kinda like things as they are, with maybe some improvements. Of course, once the thousands of missiles start flying all bets are off. Mad Max seems to come to mind. I hope I’m wrong but at my age, I most likely won’t be around to see whats left. Neither will most of”humanity”.
MKohnen on Sun, 18th May 2014 2:34 am
I must say that the methods of stopping a US carrier group as outlined by this Iranian reminds me of the trenches being dug around Baghdad and set on fire to hamper the jet pilots. I really can’t see attack boats getting very far against high speed cannons. Missiles definitely have a better chance. In fact, against missiles I don’t understand how an aircraft carrier isn’t just a big floating coffin. As for the Chinese gaining aircraft carriers, it actually makes sense, but only for use against it’s adversaries that don’t have advanced missiles, not against the US.
And, of course, there’s the fact that a carrier group has never been used against a nuclear armed adversary (as far as I know.) I really can’t see how any group can defend against nukes. I know the argument that goes “They wouldn’t dare use nukes!”, but that’s a ridiculous argument. No country is going to allow themselves to be bombed in any meaningful way without retaliating with whatever they have. And using nukes against a military target doesn’t seem like it should contravene any particular convention. I would imagine the prohibition (for all it’s worth) is only against using them on civilian populations. A carrier group out on the ocean is a clear target, and probably a sitting duck!