Jump to content

Iran commander calls U.S. military in Gulf a target not a threat - ISNA


webfact

Recommended Posts

Iran commander calls U.S. military in Gulf a target not a threat - ISNA

 

2019-05-12T084130Z_1_LYNXNPEF4B05Y_RTROPTP_4_USA-IRAN-AIRCRAFT.JPG

The fast combat support ship USNS Arctic pulls alongside the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln to conduct a replenishment-at-sea in the Mediterranean Sea, May 8, 2019. Michael Singley/U.S. Navy/Handout via REUTERS

 

GENEVA (Reuters) - A senior Iranian Revolutionary Guards commander said on Sunday the U.S. military presence in the Gulf used to be a serious threat but now represents a target, the Iranian Students' News Agency (ISNA) reported.

 

The U.S. military has sent forces, including an aircraft carrier and B-52 bombers, to the Middle East in a move that U.S. officials said was made to counter "clear indications" of threats from Iran to American forces in the region.

 

The USS Abraham Lincoln is replacing another carrier rotated out of the Gulf last month.

 

"An aircraft carrier that has at least 40 to 50 planes on it and 6,000 forces gathered within it was a serious threat for us in the past but now it is a target and the threats have switched to opportunities," said Amirali Hajizadeh, head of the Guards' aerospace division.

 

"If (the Americans) make a move, we will hit them in the head," he added, according to ISNA.

 

U.S. President Donald Trump also has increased economic pressure on Iran, moving to cut off all its oil exports, to try to get Tehran to curb its nuclear and missile programs as well as end support for proxies in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen.

 

Speaking to CNBC in an interview to be broadcast on Monday, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the U.S. deployments came in response to intelligence about potential Iranian attacks and aimed both to deter them and to be able to respond if necessary.

 

"We've seen this reporting," Pompeo said. "It's real. It appears to be something that is current, that is things we're worried about today."

 

"In the event that Iran decided to come after an American interest - whether that be in Iraq or Afghanistan or Yemen or any place in the Middle East - we are prepared to respond in an appropriate way," he said, adding that "our aim is not war."

 

Iranian navy commander Rear Admiral Hossein Khanzadi said on Sunday that American forces must exit, according to ISNA. "The presence of the Americans in the Persian Gulf region has reached its end and they must leave the region," Khanzadi said.

 

Major General Hossein Salami, appointed head of the Guards last month, told parliament on Sunday the United States had started a psychological war in the region, the parliamentary spokesman said.

 

"Commander Salami, with attention to the situation in the region, presented an analysis that the Americans have started a psychological war because the comings and goings of their military is a normal matter," spokesman Behrouz Nemati said, according to parliament's ICANA news site.

 

(Reporting by Babak Dehghanpisheh; Additional reporting by Arshad Mohammed in Washington; Editing by Elaine Hardcastle, Edmund Blair and Will Dunham)

 

reuters_logo.jpg

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-05-13
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Don't usually see MSC ships on front page news, they're usually not photographed.

On a less frivolous note than my previous post, U-Tube is full of videos of these supply ships replenishing carriers at sea.

 

 

 

Edited by Old Croc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BestB said:

Do tell how conflict with Iran would unite 99% of the Muslim countries where majority are sunnis and hate Shias with passion , especially Iran .

Go back and read my post again. I made it simple. A clue - look for the common denominator

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

Of course he would say that , but unfortunately it is true .

 

 

Just ' indications ' no prove whatsoever ...

 

 

If they move , it may easily become the beginning of a new WW with Russia and China backing the Iran ...

 

 

" Potential " attacks ... from Iran , the USA or Israel ... I mean WHO is the aggressor here ?

It clearly is not Iran .

 

Another the-sky-is-falling post. A new WW, no less. With Russia and China backing Iran. Neither of which is known for substituting interests with a principled approach, least of all on behalf of other nations.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, blazes said:

Some knee-jerk reactions here....unlike almost all previous presidents since WW2, Trump has not yet sent American troops to put boots on the ground in any foreign country.  

Much to the frustration of his current crop of  Generals wanting a new personal gong !

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Much to the frustration of his current crop of  Generals wanting a new personal gong !

 

The three prominent generals (Mattis, McMaster, Kelly) who previously served on Trump's administration were considered to have a relatively moderating effect on policy, despite being "hard-liners".

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Morch said:

 

The three prominent generals (Mattis, McMaster, Kelly) who previously served on Trump's administration were considered to have a relatively moderating effect on policy, despite being "hard-liners".

Is the  key word "previously" ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

Is the  key word "previously" ?

 

The key word is keeping it real. Could you actually identify the "current crop of generals", or give examples for their expressed frustration of being denied a "new personal gong"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

The key word is keeping it real. Could you actually identify the "current crop of generals", or give examples for their expressed frustration of being denied a "new personal gong"?

No. Don't want to.  The POTUS has repeatedly demonstrated the  defence of petulance. ????

However I will concede a little  and provide  my original comment as I should have put it.

 

Much to the frustration of his current crop of  Generals wanting a new personal gong ?

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dumbastheycome said:

No. Don't want to.  The POTUS has repeatedly demonstrated the  defence of petulance. ????

However I will concede a little  and provide  my original comment as I should have put it.

 

Much to the frustration of his current crop of  Generals wanting a new personal gong ?

 

 

 

 

 

So basically, just making up stuff in lieu of actual facts or arguments. But do go on complaining about Trump doing the same...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

So basically, just making up stuff in lieu of actual facts or arguments. But do go on complaining about Trump doing the same...

lol. Asking a  question or proposing a motive is not making things up. Discussion and debate necessarily requires such. Without such the world may just as well be flat.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, webfact said:

A senior Iranian Revolutionary Guards commander said on Sunday the U.S. military presence in the Gulf used to be a serious threat but now represents a target

Iran has chosen a "war of words" against the US armada instead of direct military aggression. Are they practicing Sun Tzu who said, "Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake."

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.











×
×
  • Create New...