• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Israel stations nuclear missile subs off Iran

jujuman13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Link
Israel stations nuclear missile subs off Iran - Times Online

Quote(Three German-built Israeli submarines equipped with nuclear cruise missiles are to be deployed in the Gulf near the Iranian coastline.

The first has been sent in response to Israeli fears that ballistic missiles developed by Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, a political and military organization in Lebanon, could hit sites in Israel, including air bases and missile launchers.)

With this latest information about Israeli intention, one can be reasonably certain that the Iranian Navy may also have Submarines cruising the waters off the Israeli coast.
 

rathi

Count Smackula
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 10, 2006
Messages
7,890
Reaction score
4,730
Location
California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
With this latest information about Israeli intention, one can be reasonably certain that the Iranian Navy may also have Submarines cruising the waters off the Israeli coast.
The Russians didn't sell Iran submarine launched cruise missiles along with their kilo-class submarines, so they would be limited to attacking shipping rather than land targets.
 

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,603
Reaction score
26,254
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Iran's strategy, if attacked would be to take a few ships out in the Straits of Hormuz and sink them. That would block the majority of the world's oil supply right there. Iran does have other measures at its disposal, but the Straits of Hormuz would be their number one priority.
 

Polynikes

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
522
Reaction score
163
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Iran's strategy, if attacked would be to take a few ships out in the Straits of Hormuz and sink them. That would block the majority of the world's oil supply right there. Iran does have other measures at its disposal, but the Straits of Hormuz would be their number one priority.
The U.S 5th fleet is well trained in various scenarios that would threaten the closing of the Strait of Hormuz, I have no doubt about their capabilities to keep the strait open.
 

Djoop

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
1,932
Reaction score
683
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They can prevent ships from sinking? That's pretty awesome!

With the current economic crisis, it's not going down in Europe or the US at this point in time. Nope, attacking Israel would be the only way to secure the apocalyptic circumstances needed for the return of the 12th imam.

Those who wonder "who believes this crap?" are in for a surprise.
Twelver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hitchens is right saying that religion has the power to make good people do horrible evils.
 
Last edited:

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,504
Reaction score
50,051
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Things may be lining up for some major ugliness very soon. Iran and Israel, N and S Korea... and then there's their backers, the USA, Russia and China.
 

ScottD

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
977
Reaction score
412
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Things may be lining up for some major ugliness very soon. Iran and Israel, N and S Korea... and then there's their backers, the USA, Russia and China.
If we went to war with N. Korea and Iran, Russia and China would surely back us, and not them. They may be on good terms with those countries, but we are more important allies, and more fearsome enemies, then N.Korea and Iran combined.
 

Polynikes

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
522
Reaction score
163
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They can prevent ships from sinking? That's pretty awesome!

With the current economic crisis, it's not going down in Europe or the US at this point in time. Nope, attacking Israel would be the only way to secure the apocalyptic circumstances needed for the return of the 12th imam.

Those who wonder "who believes this crap?" are in for a surprise.
Twelver - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hitchens is right saying that religion has the power to make good people do horrible evils.
They can prevent from ships getting in to position to be sunk. There is a small amount of space that is optimal for sinking the ships so they will block the strait, and the commanders of the 5th fleet are well aware of this. Please know a little bit of what you are talking about before you make belligerent sarcastic comments.
 

Degreez

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
What hypocrisy in this thread.

Where are the people who were complaining about the provocation from a humanitarian ship in international waters?

I guess a ship full of blankets and human rights activists is more of a threat than a submarine with nuclear missiles on board. Pathetic.
 

Goshin

The Hammer of Chaos
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 16, 2009
Messages
45,504
Reaction score
50,051
Location
Dixie
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
What hypocrisy in this thread.

Where are the people who were complaining about the provocation from a humanitarian ship in international waters?

I guess a ship full of blankets and human rights activists is more of a threat than a submarine with nuclear missiles on board. Pathetic.

There are reports that weapons have already been found on the "humanitarian aid" ship.

Israel is being threatened with possible ballisitic missle attacks. They are preparing to defend themselves and keeping all options open if their survival is threatened... as any nation would.
 

Degreez

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
There are reports that weapons have already been found on the "humanitarian aid" ship.

Israel is being threatened with possible ballisitic missle attacks. They are preparing to defend themselves and keeping all options open if their survival is threatened... as any nation would.
Knives have been the only thing confirmed. I guess Israel believes Hamas can use knives to create a world class mortar system.
 

Djoop

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2009
Messages
1,932
Reaction score
683
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
They can prevent from ships getting in to position to be sunk. There is a small amount of space that is optimal for sinking the ships so they will block the strait, and the commanders of the 5th fleet are well aware of this. Please know a little bit of what you are talking about before you make belligerent sarcastic comments.
Spread the word because there are quite a few orgs committing precious time and funds to study the effects of a possible war with Iran, and blocking the strait has always been a part of those studies. Whether the american navy is able, and I do have my doubts, to prevent it, does not remove that risk. Since you suggest you really know what you're talking about I hope you realise that Iran wouldn't necessarily play by the rules.
 

Goobieman

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
They can prevent ships from sinking? That's pretty awesome!
They can stop the ships from reaching the straits... by sinking them.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
What hypocrisy in this thread.

Where are the people who were complaining about the provocation from a humanitarian ship in international waters?

I guess a ship full of blankets and human rights activists is more of a threat than a submarine with nuclear missiles on board. Pathetic.
If Israel told Iran it was going to bring its nuclear subs within its territorial waters in order to deliver aid to a group that was fighting Iran from across a border, then Iran would be perfectly within its authority to tell them not to do so. If Israel declared that it would do so anyways regardless of what Iran said and continued to move toward those waters, then Iran would be perfectly justified in taking action to prevent that from happening.
 

Phantom

John Schnatter 2012
Joined
Sep 11, 2009
Messages
638
Reaction score
184
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Progressive
The U.S 5th fleet is well trained in various scenarios that would threaten the closing of the Strait of Hormuz, I have no doubt about their capabilities to keep the strait open.
Better keep your fingers crossed.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Better keep your fingers crossed.
You say that as if you're not hoping for the same thing. Are you excited at the prospect of Iran blocking the straits?
 

NolaMan

Well-known member
Joined
May 5, 2010
Messages
808
Reaction score
203
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Iran's strategy, if attacked would be to take a few ships out in the Straits of Hormuz and sink them. That would block the majority of the world's oil supply right there. Iran does have other measures at its disposal, but the Straits of Hormuz would be their number one priority.
This is simply incorrect. Simply sinking a few ships in the Stait of Hormuz would in no way shut it down in the manner this thread seems to indicate. The threat to the area will come from an Iranian anti-ship missile capability. They are well equipped with Silkworm and Seersucker missiles, as well as C-802s. That will be the real problem, especially if they make them all mobile sites. At that point, we would really be unable to hunt them down and kill them before they could deploy.

Putting that aside however, if Iran does actually pursue this course, one might expect China to react in a very harsh manner, as vast amounts of the oil they consume comes through Hormuz as well.
 
Last edited:

Polynikes

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 7, 2009
Messages
522
Reaction score
163
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Spread the word because there are quite a few orgs committing precious time and funds to study the effects of a possible war with Iran, and blocking the strait has always been a part of those studies. Whether the american navy is able, and I do have my doubts, to prevent it, does not remove that risk. Since you suggest you really know what you're talking about I hope you realise that Iran wouldn't necessarily play by the rules.
They certainly wouldn't play by the rules, and one of the biggest threats I see to this scenario is Iran loading a ship up with civilians, sailing it to the optimal sinking zone, unloading the civilians on to a trailing ship and the proceeding to sink the original ship. The 5th fleet is capable of blockading certain areas, but not en masse, and there would be only so many SEAL platoons capable of boarding and neutralizing such ships.

Iran's premier anti-ship missile, the SS-N-22 also known as the Sunburn, is one of the scariest aspects of a battle to keep the strait open.

The Sunburn can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or: a 750-pound conventional warhead, within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern that hugs the deck and includes "violent end maneuvers" to elude enemy defenses. The missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system. Should a US Navy Phalanx point defense somehow manage to detect an incoming Sunburn missile, the system has only seconds to calculate a fire solution not enough time to take out the intruding missile. The US Phalanx defense employs a six-barreled gun that fires 3,000 depleted-uranium rounds a minute, but the gun must have precise coordinates to destroy an intruder "just in time."
 

Degreez

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
If Israel told Iran it was going to bring its nuclear subs within its territorial waters in order to deliver aid to a group that was fighting Iran from across a border, then Iran would be perfectly within its authority to tell them not to do so. If Israel declared that it would do so anyways regardless of what Iran said and continued to move toward those waters, then Iran would be perfectly justified in taking action to prevent that from happening.
If.

And you may have a point IF it was Iran's territorial waters when Iran took action to prevent a breach of its security. But you don't have a point if Iran took action while the Israeli nuclear subs were around say... the Strait of Hormuz.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Yes, it's an "if," because we're discussing a hypothetical situation that was created because your original analogy wasn't directly on point.

And you may have a point IF it was Iran's territorial waters when Iran took action to prevent a breach of its security. But you don't have a point if Iran took action while the Israeli nuclear subs were around say... the Strait of Hormuz.
In the scenario I mentioned, I think they absolutely would have that authority regardless of whether it was in their water yet or not.
 

Goobieman

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2006
Messages
17,343
Reaction score
2,876
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
NO that is against international law called laws of the sea
There's a lot of IFs that go along with that. If the Iranians are moving to block the free navigation of the straits, that too violates "the law of the sea" and can be acted against.
 

Degreez

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 2, 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,021
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
In the scenario I mentioned, I think they absolutely would have that authority regardless of whether it was in their water yet or not.
Well lucky for us opinion does not formulate international law. A preemptive strike when the only credible threat is words will never be justified. A preemptive strike when a credible threats exists and is imminent is completely justified.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Well lucky for us opinion does not formulate international law. A preemptive strike when the only credible threat is words will never be justified. A preemptive strike when a credible threats exists and is imminent is completely justified.
A ship traveling directly toward territorial water with the stated purpose of delivering aid to people engaged in conflict with the sovereign state constitutes mere words?

Someone should call Daniel Webster and explain that to him.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom