Iran Launches Missiles at Indian Ocean, Threatens US

**Rome101** · July 09, 2011, 07:08 AM

Iran launched long-range missiles at the Indian ocean and threaten to attack U.S. aircraft carriers if "the West" attacks Iran.

A senior Revolutionary Guard commander threatened Saturday that US aircraft carriers would be targeted if Iran came under attack amid a standoff with the West over Tehran's nuclear program.

Iran has often warned of major retaliation if they faced a military strike from Israel or the West, but the latest comments appear tailored to emphasize the expanding range of Iranian missiles following 10 days of war games. The exercises included unveiling underground missile silos that Iran says is capable of multiple launches

"Aircraft carriers ... are moving targets. If the enemy threatens us, we will target them," said Amir Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the Guard's aerospace force, in comments broadcast on state TV.

Hajizadeh also confirmed that Iran secretly conducted missile tests in February that he claimed hit targets at the "mouth of the Indian Ocean" – an apparent reference to areas near the Strait of Hormouz at the southern end of the Gulf. Hajizadeh gave no further details. In April, the commander of the Revolutionary Guard said Iran's arsenal is capable of striking "remote regions outside the Persian Gulf."

Iran has tried to project its military might outside the Gulf, where the US has several air bases and the home port of the Navy's 5th Fleet in Bahrain.

Iran has said its missiles can reach Israel and US military bases in the region. Two Iranian warships entered the Mediterranean in February for the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and an Iranian submarine returned this week after a journey that included the Red Sea.

Iran also says it has the ability to produce missiles with an even greater range than those currently in its arsenal, but won't manufacture them because Israel and US bases are already within reach.

Last month, British Foreign Secretary William Hague told the House of Commons that Iran has conducted covert tests of ballistic missiles since October in addition to the publicly announced military maneuvers.

Hajizadeh only confirmed that missile tests were carried out. It was not clear if the covert tests in February were the same as claimed by Hague.

The Islamic Republic remains locked in a standoff with the West over its nuclear program, which the US and its allies suspect is aimed at developing atomic weapons. Iran denies the charges, and says the program is only for peaceful purposes.

Iran conducts several war games every year as part of its military self-sufficiency program that started in 1992, and frequently unveils new weapons and military systems during the drills.

Source

**~~Heavy Weapons Guy~~** · July 09, 2011, 08:01 AM

Good news!

**Rome101** · July 09, 2011, 08:02 AM

Why?

**~~Heavy Weapons Guy~~** · July 09, 2011, 08:13 AM

Originally Posted by Rome101

Why?

I'm supporting Iran and Westerners are my enemies.

**~~Yosemite~~** · July 09, 2011, 08:03 AM

well at least they're ready to defend themselvse if theyre attacked

**alhoon** · July 09, 2011, 08:09 AM

OK, even if they can target US aircarriers, that's not terrible. They didn't threatened innocents, they threatened aircarriers. Not to mention that aircarriers tend to, you know, carry airpanes that can shoot down missiles.

Also, you may want to add a bit more in the OP. It's not good to have a source and a quote without some comments of yourself.

**PointOfViewGun** · July 09, 2011, 08:20 AM

Saying that you're gonna defend yourself if you're attacked is not really a threat.

**alhoon** · July 09, 2011, 08:25 AM

Originally Posted by TheDarkLordSeth

Saying that you're gonna defend yourself if you're attacked is not really a threat.

^
That too.

**Heathen Hammer** · July 09, 2011, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by TheDarkLordSeth

Saying that you're gonna defend yourself if you're attacked is not really a threat.

This.

**a tw player** · July 09, 2011, 08:52 AM

Have the Iranians not seen/heard of the many levels of defence that a missile would have to pass through to impact a carrier?

**Caelifer_1991** · July 09, 2011, 09:07 AM

Saying that you're gonna defend yourself if you're attacked is not really a threat.

^ This.

**Rome101** · July 09, 2011, 09:20 AM

Their military power games are dangerous. They are threatening to fire missiles at US buildings and personnel if a Western nation attacks them - basically saying "if France/England/Israel/Spain/Canada/Brazil/Germany/Hungary/Poland/Vatican shows hostility, we'll kill American soldiers". That's not self defense in my book. In my book, self defense is attacking X because X attacked, not attacking X because Y attacked.

They are also threatening Israel for no apparent reason (Israel never harmed them in any way - there was even a militaristic cooperation before the revolution took place).
Anyhow, I'm against ANY theocracy having any kind of military strength. The Dark Ages established well that religion sparks war like a flamethrower in the rye and I fear Iran's fueled hatred towards the US (like the embassy kidnap some 20 years ago).

**~~removeduser_4536284751384~~** · July 09, 2011, 09:28 AM

Originally Posted by Rome101

Their military power games are dangerous. They are threatening to fire missiles at US buildings and personnel if a Western nation attacks them - basically saying "if France/England/Israel/Spain/Canada/Brazil/Germany/Hungary/Poland/Vatican shows hostility, we'll kill American soldiers". That's not self defense in my book. In my book, self defense is attacking X because X attacked, not attacking X because Y attacked.

You know full well there's only two western nations that are a threat to Iran.

Originally Posted by Rome101

They are also threatening Israel for no apparent reason (Israel never harmed them in any way - there was even a militaristic cooperation before the revolution took place).
Anyhow, I'm against ANY theocracy having any kind of military strength. The Dark Ages established well that religion sparks war like a flamethrower in the rye and I fear Iran's fueled hatred towards the US (like the embassy kidnap some 20 years ago).

Isreal is a possible threat to them - the virus that damaged their nuclear program had biblical references buried in the code. They have never been on good terms.

This isn't sabre rattling. This is Iran just being assertive and saying it can defend itself. Not that its missiles could take out carriers.

**Charrua** · July 10, 2011, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by Rome101

Their military power games are dangerous. They are threatening to fire missiles at US buildings and personnel if a Western nation attacks them - basically saying "if France/England/Israel/Spain/Canada/Brazil/Germany/Hungary/Poland/Vatican shows hostility, we'll kill American soldiers". That's not self defense in my book. In my book, self defense is attacking X because X attacked, not attacking X because Y attacked.

What the deuce ... since when Brazil is NOT from the 'Axis of Evil' ????

**Reshad** · July 11, 2011, 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by Rome101

Their military power games are dangerous. They are threatening to fire missiles at US buildings and personnel if a Western nation attacks them - basically saying "if France/England/Israel/Spain/Canada/Brazil/Germany/Hungary/Poland/Vatican shows hostility, we'll kill American soldiers". That's not self defense in my book. In my book, self defense is attacking X because X attacked, not attacking X because Y attacked.

They are also threatening Israel for no apparent reason (Israel never harmed them in any way - there was even a militaristic cooperation before the revolution took place).
Anyhow, I'm against ANY theocracy having any kind of military strength. The Dark Ages established well that religion sparks war like a flamethrower in the rye and I fear Iran's fueled hatred towards the US (like the embassy kidnap some 20 years ago).

Thats not at all what they are saying. but most likely , none of those countries will get involved with Iran unless the U.S declares war on Iran first

**PointOfViewGun** · July 09, 2011, 09:27 AM

Care to provide the direct quote from an Iranian official with links to your source showing that they're gonna attack US targets regardless of the identity of the attacker?

**Caelifer_1991** · July 09, 2011, 09:30 AM

I get the feeling that even if the translation is correct in regards to "with the west", that they were regarding the US and maybe Israel.

**Armenum** · July 09, 2011, 10:14 AM

It's not new rhetoric really. All Iran is saying is that it will give punitive response if attacked by US (or Israel) which is normal to do. Iran right now would not be interested at all to launch any attacks first - and in my view the US is less likely now to attack Iran, and hence Israel as well. The military option is fading, fortunately.