Russia's ideas about many things, spin around their biggest friend in the ME.
Iran.

The US missile defense was going to be 30 interceptors in Europe.
The russians have 1000's of warheads. Conventional and non-conventional.
US missile defense was never about Russia.
It was designed to defend against a small nation, with a small number of long range platforms.
The Pac. Coast US missile defense system was hedge against NK concerns.

NK is not Russia's best friend in the Pac Rim.
So they are not worried about the West coast Missile defense.

The best case: Russia wants Iran to have a long range nuclear card.
That the west will not be able to counter.

Worst case: It is Russia. Maybe they are okay with a Nuclear Iran that will use them.

bob

Iran has decided to give the RQ-170 back to Obama:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/chec....

A pink one, too...LOL.

U.S. troops quietly surge into Middle East
David S. Cloud, Tribune Co.

Friday, January 13, 2012

Washington --

The Pentagon has quietly shifted combat troops and warships to the Middle East after the top American commander in the region warned that he needed additional forces to deal with Iran and other potential threats, U.S. officials said.

Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, who heads U.S. Central Command, won White House approval for the deployments late last year after talks with the government in Baghdad broke down over keeping U.S. troops in Iraq, but the extent of the Pentagon moves is only now becoming clear.

Officials said the deployments are not meant to suggest a buildup to war, but rather are intended as a quick-reaction and contingency force in case a military crisis erupts in the standoff with Tehran over its suspected nuclear weapons program.

The Pentagon has stationed nearly 15,000 troops in Kuwait, adding to a small contingent already there. The new units include two Army infantry brigades and a helicopter unit - a substantial increase in combat power after nearly a decade in which Kuwait chiefly served as a staging area for supplies and personnel heading to Iraq.

The Pentagon also has decided to keep two aircraft carriers and their strike groups in the region.

Earlier this week, the American carrier Carl Vinson joined the carrier Stennis in the Arabian Sea, giving commanders major naval and air assets in case Iran carries out its recent threats to close the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic chokepoint in the Persian Gulf, where one-fifth of the world's oil shipments passes.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg....

that Stratfor article was some good dope. thanks.

China has intensified its opposition to unilateral US sanctions on Iranian oil and finances, saying Beijing needed to maintain energy cooperation with Iran and warning that efforts to ban crude shipments could disrupt markets

A pink drone, I always want one of those.

bob

Russia says strike on Iran would be 'catastrophe'
Jan 18, 2012, 06.13PM IST

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world....

MOSCOW: Russia on Wednesday warned that a military strike on Iran would be a "catastrophe" with the severest consequences which risked inflaming existing tensions between Sunni and Shiite Muslims.

"As for the chances of this catastrophe happening, you would have to ask those constantly mentioning it as an option that remains on the table," foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said when asked on the chances of military action.

Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak earlier said in Jerusalem on Wednesday that his country was not even close to deciding to attack Iran and believed that a military option remained "very far away".

Lavrov warned of the "severest" consequences of an attack that he warned would spark a regional refugee crisis and incite inter-communal tensions in the region.

"I have no doubt in the fact that it only add fuel to the fire of the still-simmering Sunni-Shiite conflict. And I do not know where the subsequent chain reaction will end.

He added that punitive sanctions aimed at winning more transparency from Iran had "exhausted" themselves and only hurt the chances of peace.

"Additional unilateral sanctions against Iran have nothing to do with a desire to ensure the regime's commitment to nuclear non-proliferation," Lavrov told reporters at an annual briefing outlining Russia's foreign policy views.

"It is seriously aimed at suffocating the Iranian economy and the well-being of its people, probably in the hope of inciting discontent."

His comments came as EU diplomats closed in on a July date for a full oil embargo that would suit nations such as Italy with a strong reliance on Iranian supplies.

Lavrov said Russia had evidence that Iran was ready to cooperate more closely with inspectors from the United Nations IAEA nuclear watchdog and was preparing for "serious talks" with the West.

He also hinted that Europe and the United States were imposing the measures with the specific purpose of torpedoing new rounds of talks.

"Iran is now waiting for an (IAEA) delegation so that it can discuss serious issues. So the sanctions that can now be adopted by the European Union can hardly improve the atmosphere or make the talks productive," said Lavrov.

"All possible sanctions that could impact Iran's behaviour in the nuclear sphere or its cooperation with the IAEA have been exhausted," said Lavrov.

Quote:

The best case: Russia wants Iran to have a long range nuclear card.

I don't believe it.

-- After Afghanistan, Chechnya and the Moscow subway bombings, Russia should be as hip as anyone else to the menace of Islamic fundamentalism.

If they they want a nuclear Iran, then they're the biggest dopes on Earth.

Bez - I think, rightly or wrongly, they see the Chechens and Iranians as separate, distinct groups with different goals that pose different threats to them.

Trader_kid: That's because they are. The Persians are sophisticated and primarily of the Persian culture, not Islam. The Chechens are a different lot, never had a culture outside of their particular mountain tribe(s).

I agree - the Chechens have a particular beef with the Russian government that the Iranians don't.

the Chechens make those hillbilies in the movie 'Deliverance' look like paragons of sophistication. but seriously, the Chechens are more like Afghanis than they are Iranians.

The Persian Culture is actually incredibly fascinating and the country is equally fascinating. Plus they have great skiing, incredible food, beautiful women, and access to the Caspian. Really, if the place hadn't been taken over in 1979 by the Ayatollah of Rock and Rolla, Iran would be a great place to visit.

And wicked smart and great traders. I have yet to meet a stupid Iranian - either here or in Los Angeles.

Quote:

if the place hadn't been taken over in 1979 by the Ayatollah of Rock and Rolla, Iran would be a great place to visit.

Your tax dollars at work.

^ Well, asi it's not as if we have a monopoly on *******s and ******* behavior

Lk: No, but we certainly know how to fund them when we find them elsewhere.

Clinton: "They have to give up their nuclear weapons program" and come to us "with a plan to do so."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/20....

"Yes, you read "three" correctly. Order a hit on a president in order to preserve Israel's existence. Think about it. If I have thought of this Tom Clancy-type scenario, don't you think that this almost unfathomable idea has been discussed in Israel's most inner circles?
Another way of putting "three" in perspective goes something like this: How far would you go to save a nation comprised of seven million lives ... Jews, Christians and Arabs alike?

You have got to believe, like I do, that all options are on the table."

Iran 'definitely' closing Strait of Hormuz over EU oil embargo
Published: 23 January, 2012, 16:07

http://rt.com/news/iran-close-strait-hor....

Tensions in the Gulf could reach a breaking point as a senior Iranian official said Iran would “definitely” close the Strait of Hormuz if an EU oil embargo disrupted the export of crude oil, the semi-official Fars news agency reports.
The announcement came in response to a decision by the European Union on Monday to impose an oil embargo on Iran over the country’s alleged nuclear weapons program.

“The pressure of sanctions is designed to try and make sure that Iran takes seriously our request to come to the table,” EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said.

However, with Washington’s decision to deploy a second carrier strike group in the Gulf, the EU’s attempt to pressure Iran economically could greatly increase the likelihood of all-out war in the region.
The Strait of Hormuz is the vital link between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.
It is also one of the most strategic chokepoints in the world when it comes to oil transit.
With world oil output estimated at some 88 million barrels per day in 2011, the US Energy Information Administration estimated that some 17 million of those barrels passed through the Strait.
If economic sanctions sufficiently pressure Iran to retaliate by closing down the Strait, nearly 20 per cent of worldwide oil trade would be impacted, resulting in a massive spike in global energy costs.
With over half a million regular forces and an additional 120,000 personnel in the country’s elite Revolutionary Guard, analysts believe the consequences of a US-led war against Iran would dwarf recent Western-backed military incursions the Middle East.

Thus far, the US decision to maintain two carrier strike groups in the region has been described as “a routine activity” by Iran.

But the vast US military buildup in the region, which was bolstered when the Pentagon dispatched an additional 15,000 troops to the neighboring nation of Kuwait, was only the latest step in an obvious attempt by Washington to strengthen its military capabilities in the region.

However since 1988, when the United States managed to destroy some 25 per cent of Iran’s larger naval capability during Operation Praying Mantis, Iran has spent the last two decades preparing its Revolutionary Guard naval forces to exploit the vulnerabilities of the United States’ larger conventional forces.

According to Revolutionary Guard commander Brigadier General Jafaari, "The enemy is far more advanced technologically than we are, we have been using what is called asymmetric warfare methods… our forces are now well prepared for it," he said, as cited by Global Bearings.
Ultimately, the latest round of brinkmanship between Iran and the West may force Iran to the negotiating table over its uranium enrichment program.

However, the EU strategy of averting "chaos in the Middle East" by tightening the economic noose around Iran could spark the very conflagration it was ostensibly trying to avert.

Not sure if this is reported yet or not, but USS Lincoln has joined the Carl Vinson and the John Stennis in the Straits of Hormuz.

http://gizmodo.com/5878393/you-dont-see-....

Beautiful photos of the carriers at the link.

didn't learn from Pearl Harbor huh!! you don't have your power close to each other

damm FOOLS

Preidt-

Also, in that small area, CTFs are vulnerable to swarm tactics.

Diplomatically, the EU oil embargo seems half-assed to me. It is like the EU saying "We are kind of broke right now, so we cannot implement the embargo. But in about six months, we feel committed to finally kill the economies of Italy, Spain, and Greece, and you will suffer too!" It is not so convincing. Why give them six months of time to cancel their nuclear weapons program? I wonder whether it is deliberate or some result of bad EU foreign policy? These days, one never knows...

On other hand, let's say the Iranians believe them. What would be the likely response? I would think: "We have six months to finish The Bomb. Let's do it fast." And, as other have noted, this would then defuse the whole mess for now, since nobody wants to risk nuclear war and oil shock etc.

The Eurasian Triple Entente: Touch Iran in a War, You Will Hear Russia and China
Mahdi Darius NAZEMROAYA | 22.01.2012 | 00:00

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/20....

Despite the areas of difference and the rivalries between Moscow and Tehran, Russian and Iranian ties are increasing. Both Russia and Iran share many commonalities. They are both major energy exporters, have deeply seated interests in the South Caucasus, oppose NATO’s missile shield, and want to keep the U.S. and E.U. from controlling the energy corridors around the Caspian Sea Basin. Moscow and Tehran also share many of the same allies, from Armenia, Tajikistan, and Belarus to Syria and Venezuela. Yet, above all things, both republics are also two of Washington’s main geo-strategic targets.

The Eurasian Triple Entente and Iran’s Significance for Russia and China

With the inclusion of the Chinese, the Russian Federation and Iran are widely considered to be allies and partners. Together the Russia Federation, the People’s Republic of China, and the Islamic Republic of Iran form a barrier against the United States. The three form this through a triple alliance that is the core of a Eurasian coalition resisting Washington’s encroachment into Eurasia and America’s quest for global hegemony. The Chinese primarily face U.S. encroachment from East Asia and the Pacific, the Iranians primarily face U.S. encroachment in Southwest Asia, and the Russians primarily face U.S. encroachment in Eastern Europe. All three states also face U.S. encroachment in Central Asia and are wary of the U.S. and NATO military presence in Afghanistan.

Iran can be characterized as a geo-strategic pivot. The entire geo-political equation in Eurasia will change on the basis of Iran’s political orbit. Should Iran ally with the United States and become hostile to Beijing and Moscow, it could seriously destabilize Russia and China and wreak havoc on both nations. This would be due to its ethno-cultural, linguistic, economic, religious, and geo-political links to the Caucasus and Central Asia.

Iran could also become the greatest conduit for U.S. influence and expansion in the Caucasus and Central Asia, because Iran is the gateway to Russia’s soft southern underbelly (or “Near Abroad”) in the Caucasus and Central Asia. In such a scenario, Russia as an energy corridor would effectively be upset and challenged as Washington would unlock Iran’s potential as the primal energy corridor for the Caspian Sea Basin and advocate for Iranian pipelines. Part of Russia’s success as an energy transit route has been due to American efforts to weaken Iran by preventing energy from transiting through Iranian territory.

If Iran changed camps, the Chinese economy and China’s national security would also be held hostage on two counts. Chinese energy security would be threatened directly because Iranian energy reserves would no longer be secure and subject to U.S. geo-political interests. Additionally, Central Asia could also re-orient its orbit should Washington open a direct and enforced conduit from the open seas via Iran.

Thus, both Russia and China want a strategic alliance with Iran as a means of screening them from the geo-political encroachment of Washington. “Fortress Eurasia” would be left exposed without Iran. This is why neither Russia nor China could ever accept a war against Iran. Should Washington transform Iran into a client then Russia and China would be under threat.

Misreading the Support of China and Russia for U.N. Security Council Sanctions

There is a major misreading of past Russian and Chinese support of U.N. sanctions against Iran. Even though Beijing and Moscow allowed U.N. Security Council sanctions to be passed against their Iranian ally, they did it for strategic reasons that intended to keep Iran outside of Washington’s orbit. In reality, the United States would much rather co-opt Tehran as a satellite or junior partner than take the unnecessary risk and gamble of an all-out war with the Iranians. What Russian and Chinese support for past sanctions did is allow for a wider rift to emerge between Iran and Washington. In this regard realpolitik is at work. As American-Iranian tensions broaden, Iranian relations with Russia and China become closer and Iran becomes more and more entrenched in its camp with Moscow and Beijing.

Russia and China would never support crippling sanctions or any form of economic embargo that would threaten Iranian national security. This is why both China and Russia have refused to be coerced by Washington into joining its new 2012 unilateral sanctions. The Russians have also warned the European Union to stop being Washington’s pawns, because they are hurting themselves by playing along with the schemes of the United States. In this regard Russia commented on the impractical and virtually unworkable E.U. plans for an oil embargo against Iran. Tehran has also made similar warnings and has dismissed the E.U. oil embargo as a psychological tactic that is bound to fail.

Russo-Iranian Security Cooperation and Strategic Coordination

In August 2011, the head o the Supreme National Security Council of Iran, Secretary-General Saaed (Said) Jalili, and the head of National Security Council of the Russian Federation, Secretary Nikolai Platonovich Patrushev, meet in Tehran to speak about the Iranian nuclear energy program and bilateral cooperation. Russia wanted to help Iran rebuff the new accusations Washington was preparing to attack Iran with. Soon after Patrushev and his Russian team arrived in Tehran, the Iranian Foreign Minister, Ali Akbar Salehi, would fly to Moscow.

In September 2011 both Jalili and Patrushev would meet again, but this time in Russia. Jalili would go to Moscow first and then cross the Urals to the Russian city of Yekaterinburg. The Yekaterinburg meeting between the two took place at the sidelines of an international security summit and was important because it was announced that both the highest bodies of national security in Moscow and Tehran would coordinate henceforth by holding regular meetings and a protocol was signed by both men in support of this. At Yekaterinburg, both Jalili and Patrushev would also hold meetings with their Chinese counter-part, Meng Jianzhu. The outcome of one meeting would be that Jalili and Jianzhu would call for similar steps to be taken by the national security councils of Iran and China. They would also make Chinese and Iranian calls for the establishment of a supranational security council within the Shanghai Cooperation Council to confront joint threats faced by Beijing, Tehran, Moscow, and the rest of the Eurasian organization.

Also in September 2011, Dmitry Rogozin, the Russian envy to NATO, announced that he would be visiting Tehran in the near future to speak about the NATO missile shield project, which both the Kremlin and Iran oppose Reports claiming that Russia, Iran, and China were planning on creating a joint missile shield would quickly start to surface. Rogozin, who had warned in August 2011 that Syria and Yemen would be attacked as stepping stones to confront Tehran, would respond to the reports by publicly refuting plans for the establishment of a joint Sino-Russo-Iranian missile shield project.

The following month, in October 2011, both the foreign ministries in Russia and Iran announced that they would be expanding ties in all fields. Soon after, in November 2011, Iran and Russia signed a strategic cooperation and partnership agreement between their highest security bodies covering economics, politics, security, and intelligence ties and coordination. This was a long anticipated document that both the Russian and Iranian sides were working on for a long time. The agreement was signed in Moscow by the Deputy Secretary-General of the Supreme Security Council of Iran, Ali Bagheri (Baqeri), and the Under-Secretary of the National Security Council of Russia, Yevgeny Lukyanov.

In November 2011, the head of the Committee for International Affairs in the Russian Duma, Konstantin Kosachev, also announced that Russia must do everything it can to prevent an attack on neighbouring Iran. At the end of November 2011 it was also announced again that Dmitry Rogozin would definitely visit both Tehran and Beijing in 2012. It was disclosed that Rogozin and a team of Russian officials would be going to both Iran and China to hold strategic discussions on collective strategies against common threats.

Russian National Security and Iranian National Security are Attached

On January 12, 2012, Nikolai Patrushev told Interfax he feared that a major war was coming and that Tel Aviv was pushing the U.S. to attack the Iranians. He dismissed the claims that Iran was secretly manufacturing nuclear weapons and said that for years the world had continuously heard that Iran would have an atomic bomb by next week ad nauseum. His comments would be followed by a dire warning from Dmitry Rogozin.

On January 13, 2012, Rogozin, who the Kremlin announced would become a Russian deputy prime minister, declared that any attempted military intervention against Iran would be a threat to Russia’s national security. In other words, an attack on Tehran is an attack on Moscow. In 2007, Vladimir Putin essentially mentioned the same thing when he was in Tehran for a Caspian Sea summit, which resulted in George W. Bush Jr. warning that World War III could erupt over Iran. Rogozin’s statement is merely a declaration of what has been the position of Russia all along: should Iran fall, Russia would be in danger.

Iran is a target of U.S. hostility not just for its vast energy reserves and natural resources, but because of major geo-strategic considerations that make it a strategic springboard against Russia and China. The roads to Moscow and Beijing also go through Tehran, just as the road to Tehran goes through Damascus, Baghdad, and Beirut. Nor does the U.S. want to merely control Iranian oil and natural gas for consumption or economic reasons. Washington wants to put a muzzle around China by controlling Chinese energy security and wants Iranian energy exports to be traded in U.S. dollars to insure the continued use of the U.S. dollar in international transactions.

Moreover, Iran has been making agreements with trade partners, such as China and India, under which business transactions will not take place using euros or U.S. dollars. In January 2012, both Russian and Iran also replaced the U.S. dollar with their national currencies, respectively the Russian rouble and the Iranian rial, in their bilateral trade. This is an economic and financial blow to the United States.

Where Syria is Situated in the National Security Concerns of Iran and Russia

Russia and China with Iran are all staunchly supporting Syria. The diplomatic and economic siege against Syria is tied to the geo-political stakes to control Eurasia. The instability in Syria is tied to the objective of combating Iran and ultimately turning it into a U.S. partner against Russia and China.

The cancelled or delayed deployment of thousands of U.S. troops to Israel for Austere Challenge 2012 was tied to ratcheting up the pressure against Syria. On the basis of a Voice of Russia report segments of the Russian media erroneously reported that Austere Challenge 2012 were going to be held in the Persian Gulf, which was mistakenly picked up by news outlets in other parts of the world. This helped highlight the Iranian link at the expense of the Syrian and Lebanese links. The deployment of U.S. troops was aimed predominately at Syria as a means of isolating and combating Iran. Speculatively, the cancelled or delayed Israeli-U.S. missile exercises probably included preparations for missile and rocket attacks not only from Iran, but also from Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Territories.

Aside from its naval ports in Syria, Russia does not want to see Syria used to re-route the energy coordinators in the Caspian Basin and the Mediterranean Basin. If Syria should fall these routes would be resynchronized to reflect a new geo-political reality. At the expense of Iran, energy from the Persian Gulf could also be re-routed to the Mediterranean through both Lebanon and Syria in the Levant.