Iran Answers Appeasement with Warships

httpen.wikipedia.orgwikiList_of_current_ships_of_the_Iranian_Navy  antiship missile noor c802Frigates Alvand Moudge Corvettes Bayandor Hamzeh5 Missile Craft Houdong KamanSina Patrol Coastal Pa (10)Despite the alleged “good faith” negotiations taking place between Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Secretary of State John Kerry, the world’s foremost state sponsor of terror is now testing the United States’ mettle. Iranian warships initially sent on their first trip to the Atlantic Ocean in January will now travel close to U.S. maritime borders. The move was revealed Saturday by a senior Iranian naval commander.

“Iran’s military fleet is approaching the United States’ maritime borders, and this move has a message,” said Adm. Afshin Rezayee Haddad of Iran’s Northern Navy Fleet,  according to Iran’s Fars news agency. Fars further noted that Iran had warned the Obama administration they would initiate the deployment “in the next few years” back in September of 2012. At the time, Iran’s Navy Commander R.-Adm. Habibollah Sayyari noted that the gesture would be aimed at countering the U.S. Navy’s presence in Iranian waters. The U.S. Navy’s 5th fleet is based in Bahrain, across the Persian Gulf from Iran.

The Islamic Republic News Agency (INRA) reported that Haddad said ships have already entered the Atlantic Ocean in waters near South Africa, after beginning their voyage from the southern Iranian port city of Bandar Abbas last month. The fleet consists of two ships, a helicopter carrier and a destroyer carrying an approximate total of 30 navy academy cadets in training as well as their regular crews. Their mission will last three months.

Earlier on the same day in a speech marking the 35th anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei lashed out at the U.S. He contended the United States would overthrow the Iranian regime if it were capable of doing so, and that Washington had a “controlling and meddlesome” attitude towards his nation. “American officials publicly say they do not seek regime change in Iran. That’s a lie. They wouldn’t hesitate a moment if they could do it,” he was quoted as saying by Fars.

Khamenei said nothing about the current negotiations, but explained that when dealing with the nation’s “enemies” Iran should be prepared to change tactics, even as it resists compromise on any of its primary principles. He also warned his nation to solve their own economic problems. “The solution to our economic problems is not looking out and having the sanctions lifted,” he said. “My advice to our officials, as ever, is to rely on infinite indigenous potentials.” 

Khamenei has nothing to worry about on the sanction front. The Obama administration has apparently convinced themselves they were little more than a tangential element in bringing Iran to the bargaining table regarding its nuclear ambitions. The the Islamic Republic has already been given the first $500 million of $4.2 billion in assets that had been frozen. “The first tranche of $500 million was deposited in a Swiss bank account, and everything was done in accordance with the agreement,” announced Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi on February 1. According to a U.S. official, subsequent payments will be “evenly distributed” over the next 180 days.

In a rare display of common sense, Congress voiced extreme displeasure in the “breakthrough” deal when it was announced by the Obama administration. As late as last Tuesday some members were still angered by the administration’s accusation that those seeking to maintain sanctions were tantamount to war-mongers. Sen. Timothy Kaine (D-VA) said that sanction supporters “are not pro-war and those that oppose it are not soft on Iran or anti-Israel. We all want exactly the same thing…we all will prefer if we can get to that diplomatically,” Mr. Kaine said.

Still others remained skeptical. “I am convinced that we should only relieve pressure on Iran in return for verifiable concessions that will fundamentally dismantle Iran’s nuclear program,” declared Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ). Two days later Menendez upped the ante, complaining that the negotiators were letting Tehran keep too much of its nuclear infrastructure intact. He is the lead sponsor of a bill that would impose new sanctions, but only after giving the negotiations a specific period of time to succeed. No doubt the reality that President Obama during his State of the Union address threatened to veto any sanctions bill, along with the fact that Menendez was denied an opportunity to bring his bill to the floor by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), played a part in his calculations.

However, the bill is languishing. Due, undoubtedly, to pressure and to avoid the Obama administration’s warmongering smears, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) has stopped pushing for the support of the bill, despite it having 59 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle. “We agree with the Chairman that stopping the Iranian nuclear program should rest on bipartisan support and that there should not be a vote at this time on the measure,” they announced.

The move, as explained by Breitbart’s Joel B. Pollak, was transparently political. He noted the nation’s foremost pro-Israeli lobbying group “has often abandoned winnable political fights to protect Democrats from the consequences of their dwindling support for Israel.” One day after Democrats and AIPAC caved, Iran announced it would be cruising warships off America’s coasts.

Regardless, the Obama administration remains committed to appeasement masquerading as diplomacy. Thus it mattered little that Menendez’s bill had a “hard floor” allowing for a full year of negotiations, including the six months of the “interim deal” plus a six month grace period (following a full decade of fruitless negotiations). Nor was anyone overly concerned that Russia negotiated a backdoor, $1.5 billion-a-month oil-for-goods deal in January, or that a group of 116 of France’s top businessmen visited Iran on a trade mission, as recently as last week. Both moves threaten to completely scuttle the next round of negotiations scheduled to begin Feb. 18 in Vienna, but the best the Obama administration can come up with is that such deals are “unhelpful” or of “serious concern.”

One is left to to wonder whether there is any serious concern regarding another provocation by Iran. On Friday, Iran’s state TV network aired a video titled “The Nightmare of Vultures,” simulating attacks on Tel Aviv, Haifa, Ben Gurion Airport and the Dimona nuclear reactor. The U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln, an American air craft carrier, as well as American aircraft and American military targets in the Persian Gulf, are also targeted for destruction, all in a hypothetical retaliation for an American or Israeli attack on Iran. The film opens with Khameni giving a speech in 2011 to graduates of the Imam Ali (a.s.) Military Academy. “Anybody who thinks of attacking the Islamic Republic of Iran should be prepared to receive strong slaps and iron fists from the Armed Forces,” he says. “And America, its regional puppets and its guard dog – the Zionist regime – should know that the response of the Iranian nation to any kind of aggression, attacks or even threats will be a response that will make them collapse from within.” 

So what kind of deal are Iran and the P5+1 likely to reach? One might be tempted to look at the “deal” the Obama administration reached with Syrian strongman Bashar Assad, regarding the removal of chemical weapons. Despite an agreement that called for a December 31, 2013 deadline for removing all such materials from Syria, only 4 percent of so-called priority one chemicals have been taken out of the country. Even Kerry was forced to admit the deal is a bust, and that “new approaches” were needed.

Negotiations with Syria and Iran might best be described as a feedback loop. Syria has watched Iran successfully stall for time for more than ten years thanks to weak international sanctions, which have now been watered down to the point of meaninglessness. Such spinelessness undoubtedly emboldened Assad, who initially ignored Obama’s “red line,” even as he slow walks chemical removal, while receiving additional arms from Russia. Tehran sees that fiasco unfolding, and decided that an interim deal — one that both sides have now agreed could be extended an additional six months if “good faith” bargaining continues — is their best bet. The deal not only provides additional time for stalling, but pays the regime $4.2 billion to do so. Meanwhile, Syria watches such toothless dithering while it plots its next move, which will not be lost on Iran, and so on and so on.

“If Iran’s leaders do not seize this opportunity, then I will be the first to call for more sanctions, and stand ready to exercise all options to make sure Iran does not build a nuclear weapon,” Obama said during his State of the Union speech. 

Obama also said this in 2012: “I have, at this point, not ordered military engagement in the situation…We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation. …” 

The Iranian warships will be here soon. There is nothing the Obama administration has done that would cause the Mullahs to change their calculus and change course. Not when American weakness abounds and the Iranians sense they’re on the march. 

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Bamaguje

    Traitorous wimp in the White House.

  • Dajjal

    Sending ships to international waters is now an act of war.

    • Phil McMorrow

      Their intentions are certainly open to doubt, are they not? The message should be “don’t f8&k with us or your naval inventory will be short by two ships.”

    • alericKong

      No, but it shows the moronic feebleness of Obama and Kerry, and how they were motivated completely by politics, not reality, when they unilaterally removed sanctions.

    • logdon

      When the nation sending those ships has threatened war against the country they’re headed for on countless occasions, yes.

      This is an Iranian sabre rattling trial of America’s mettle and unfortunately unlike John Kennedy who did halt Soviet ships in international waters, Obama, undoubtedly the most anti-American President in US history will allow it.

      Your pathetic sophistry has the usual mark of rights as long as they’re Islamic stamped all over it.

      Unfortunately for you you’re not dealing with the illiterate peasants which infest the Muslim corner of the world here.

      We are capable of thought outside the cloying dogma which ensures Islam its rightful place as undoubted second raters and which if the West unleashed its full potential would be back in the horrid little box it came from.

    • Paul of Alexandria

      Just so long as they stay in international waters and observe all proper procedures, no problem. However, the mullah’s aren’t promising just exercises and drills, are they?

      The Iranian leadership is either not yet ready to play in the international game, or they’re playing by an entirely different set of rules than the rest of us – and either can be very very dangerous when statements and actions are misinterpreted. The Iranians are speaking for their neighbors. In this part of the world, bluster and hyperbole is taken for normal. But they’re not in their own part of the world now; they’re in our part, and we’re used to dealing with the Russians.

  • Gamal

    What if those ships have missiles with nukes on them? Oh that can’t be true, Obama and Biden say that Iran doesn’t have nuclear weapons and we know we can trust them. Come to think of it they were warned by the Ambassador in Benghazi about the deteriorating situation there and did nothing. Well at least out superior CIA and excellent evesdropping NSA would know about it right? Well come to think of it they didn’t know about 9/11 or the marathon bombings even though they received repeated warnings from Russia about the danger of the Tzarnaev brothers. Well at least Obama is doing all he can to stop Global warming. Come to think of it a nuclear bomb would be very warm.

  • Phil McMorrow

    A high speed, low altitude fly over would capture their attention, followed by a shadow force off two attack subs.



      • Phil McMorrow

        The noise of the jet engines flat out and barely off the deck would have a humorous effect on all of the rookies on the Destroyer. The head would be quite busy. :)


          Would be nice of one of the ships developed a problem, became incapacitated, sank.

          • Phil McMorrow

            Nothing like a dip in the North Atlantic in February. Bracing before the hypothermia kicks in.

          • T800

            they’re not going anywhere near the North Atlantic.
            they’re coming up from the South Atlantic,around the Africa’s stormy Cape of Good Hope.

          • Phil McMorrow

            Where the great white sharks play. Even better.

        • T800

          Not a destroyer,it’s a missile frigate. (they just call it a “destroyer”)
          and accompanied by a support ship.

          • T800

            also,the Sabalan doesn’t have much in the way of air defense weapons,no SAMs except for handheld MANPADS. it’s a cruise missile frigate.

          • Phil McMorrow

            I was misinformed. Sorry.

    • T800

      you can be sure a US attack sub will be trailing the warship. they’re going around the Cape of Good Hope,and they’ll likely stop in Venezuela(perhaps to drop off some special weapons or gear for their missile base),and Cuba.
      P-3 Orion sub hunters will also be watching them. it’s good practice,and we’ll get data on their radars,comms,missile systems.
      they don’t gain much from it,either.

  • The Facts

    I can’t take Mr. Ahlert’s sense of impending doom about Iran very seriously if he has time in his lament to take a huge sidetrack to wail about AIPAC losing traction in the United States. In one moment, it’s “oh no! Iran is coming to nuke us!” In the next moment it’s “let me pause for a moment and bemoan the fact that AIPAC is wielding less lobbying power.” How is it that everything The Lobby wants to prevent gets magnified to the same gigantic scale?


      DEATH to fascist iran!

      HANG the fascist ayatollahs!


    • Norbert Haag

      Sure the greedy Jews are behind it. have your kind of creed ever come up with anthing new?

      Listen if you tell me you want to harm me i take it serious and will act accordingly rather then being foolish and arrogant taking your threat lightly. So, there is an easy solution to solve the conflict.

      Stop to threaten the western world and Israel.

      • The Facts

        Pretty sure I didn’t say the Jews were behind Iran’s decision to do a drive-by in their warships. Pretty sure I just said that Mr. Ahlert is making the AIPAC diss the same size and import as an Iranian flotilla.

        • Norbert Haag

          Oh sure i have to apoligize AiPAC is a muslim arganiztion, iI guess.

    • Habbgun

      Hey….hows my favorite left wing white trash doing these days. Do you ever quit? Of course you don’t. If you ever quit you’d be losing your self ratified sense of superiority and would be facing your actual inferiority.

      By the way I agree with your mother’s Victorian out of date values. That souvenir from the Occupy rally….the one where all your friends crapped in a memorial bucket and then draped it with tinsel and pasted on sparkles and fake rhinestones is a health hazard. It has got to go.

  • Baz

    Its a shame really, dont you think. I am going to wait and see what and where the three ships of the Iranian navy goes, and wait for them to get too close and the American Navy can then say , Oh you naughty boys back you go to your side of the water, and we will see you safely over that line. What a load of B,S.


      The crew of the ships of fascist iran will be praying to satan from the bottom of the ocean.

  • emptorpreempted

    The sooner they provoke some sort of combat the sooner they’ll find out how useless their armies actually are. These barbarians know how to murder women and children but up till now not even they have pretended to know how to fight.

    • Notalibfool

      Nice thought but with ObaMAO in charge we can’t win. As soon as an Iranian ship fires a shot our Dear Leader will cave in as always.

  • WhiteHunter

    One would think that Obama, as he wipes the mullahs’ spittle off his face after having defied his own Congress and ignored the warnings of clearer heads to give the ayatollahs everything they hoped for and more, would at least now, if only in response to the public humiliation and insult to his own exaggerated and unjustifiable pride, see the mortal and growing danger, and recognize the undeniable intentions of the enemy.

    In a bizarre reversal of the chronology of history, we’ve already had our “Munich, 1938.” It’s once again 1936, and the Iranians are marching into the Rhineland.

    Soon it will be September 1, 1939; and once again the West will be caught by surprise and unprepared to throw back the aggressor. But this time we have no Churchill to rally us and lead us to victory over the barbarians who seek our destruction.

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    Compare with President Reagan’s destruction of the entire Iranian Navy in a single day, and one can see how weak Obama is. Where is a Bedford Incident “accident” when you need one?

    • UCSPanther

      I understand that defeat of the Iranian Navy was both epic and anticlimatic at the same time…

    • T800

      I read about the sinking of the Sahand,and was highly disappointed in how many hits it took to sink the old frigate. 3 Harpoons,2 laser-guided 2000 lb bombs,and 2 Rockeye cluster bombs.
      Sabalan was heavily damaged,but survived,that’s one of the ships “coming to America”.

  • johnlittle

    Clausewitz opined that the quickest way to peace is to meet the enemy at the border and welcome them with open arms. Now, go figure.

    Cordially, John Little, Sr.

  • Paul of Alexandria

    The frightening things aren’t the Iranian warships per se. The U.S. Navy could dispose of them without breaking a sweak. If the president allows it. The big question – in an arena where there shouldn’t be such questions – is: will the U.S. President look after his own country’s interests?

    • Notalibfool

      Why would he start now? Has ObaMAO ever looked after American interests?

  • DontMessWithAmerica

    I just had a funny thought. Wouldn’t it be comical if Iran’s big navy was hijacked for ransom by Somali pirates as it tried to sail to America’s shores. To be serious, though, in the long term, this brilliant deal with Iran by Obama might haunt him for life. He has been called a Muslim and a liar and a Socialist and a Communist but this stupidity will bring out the racist in many folks who will start calling him just another dumb “N-word.”

    • T800

      it’s kinda hard to hijack a WARSHIP that has arms(like a 4.5″ cannon) and trained soldiers that WILL shoot back,but much easier to hijack a cargo ship that has NO arms. Iran has sent ships like this one to the Horn of Africa on anti-piracy missions.

    • David

      You don’t have to be a racist to be abhorred by his behavior. He’s really just another dumb eurotrash socialist/communist/America hater.

  • CrossWinds

    Dear Lord, even though our government does not acknowledge you, our laws oppose your commandments, our media does not honor you, our blatant sins provoke you, please protect us from our enemies. Amen………

    1 Kings 11:14……………
    Then the Lord raised up Hadad the Edomite, a member of Edom’s royal family, to be Solomon’s adversary.

  • T800

    Perhaps the Iranians won’t make it past the Cape of Good Hope. That gets some pretty rough weather regularly. It would be hilarious if one or both ships sank in the rough seas. up to Sea State 6 IIRC.
    Even if they make it close to US ,they aren’t much of a threat,and are good practice for our attack subs and P-3 Orions.
    A worse threat are ordinary,inconspicuous container ships that could have a hidden TEL aboard,with an EMP-attack nuclear tipped missile.

    This exercise is just one more indication of how weak the Iranians perceive Comrade Obama to be. they have been emboldened. that’s not good.

  • mcbee555

    Tehran has Obama figured for a sissy with a large ego who thinks he has all the answers. That’s why they’ll be sailing just out of U.S. water’s limits.

  • chris2146

    row, row, row your boat……

    2 boats, 2 BOATS!!!! Is that all they can muster lol, what the yanks should do is launch everything within range, carriers, destroyers, frigates, submarines, aircraft etc and show them want a proper navy looks like.

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      One Los Angeles-class attack boat would take out the “task force”, and those on board who lose their lives can thank the Mullahs and Obama for their deaths.

      However, Obama will never order such an action. It might be “provocative” …

  • Michael Santarella

    If he gives the order to STAND DOWN, he should be dragged out of the Whitehouse and hung from the nearest tree.

  • Change Iran Now

    Truly Barack Obama and John Kerry have secured
    peace in our time

  • antioli

    The American ships were never in the Persian Gulf. They were in the Arabian Gulf. That is where Bahrain is located.

  • Nighthawk
  • nopeacenow

    Iranian authorities have reportedly hanged Hashem Shaabani, a poet which the regime has accused of being “an enemy of God.” His execution should do more than anything else to provide an opportunity for Secretary of State John Kerry and UN Ambassador Samantha Power to embrace moral clarity, for it does more than anything to show the undeniable cruelty of the Islamic Republic and its murderous ideology.

  • David

    Iran is the country that fought Iraq all out for 8 years, with the best result they could get being a stalemate and a cease-fire. The US completely decimated these same Iraqis in less than 5 days. Perhaps Iran’s armed forces have improved by now, but keep in mind that these people are essentially no more than middle east Obamas. Full of posturing, horsedoodoo and incompetence.

  • T800

    I thought it hilarious that a US gov’t official called the two warships “rustbuckets”.
    also,when the Iranian official said they were in the Atlantic,they had not even made it round the Cape of Good Hope,were still in the Indian Ocean. Just another “Baghdad Bob”.
    they didn’t even send their best and newest warship,the Jamalan.
    Maybe they’re intended to be sacrificed,as a trigger for war. Even if they sink due to poor seamanship,Iran might claim the US sunk them.