Iran's Revolutionary Guard runs drill on disputed islands as U.S. military presence in region grows

The US needs to stay out of parts of the world that it has no business to be in

kurisupisuToday 04:20 pm JST

The US needs to stay out of parts of the world that it has no business to be in

And I assume Russia and Iran will stay out of Syria, right?

The US needs to stay out of parts of the world that it has no business to be in

And I assume Russia and Iran will stay out of Syria, right?

What?!!! Russia and Iran are there at the invitation of Syria's leader. In contrast, US is illegally occupying Syria, stealing its oil....

Lots of, shall we say interesting, contentions in the article treated as if they were facts.

The simple reality is that Iran's nuclear energy and isotopes program remains FULLY compliant with not only the NNPT but the now in force international law, the Nuclear Weapons Prevention treaty.

Iran has not supplied ANYONE with its MILITARY drones (the ones that it used to precision target the illegal US airbase that launched the terrorist attack on the Iraqi military commander and the Iranian counterterrorism expert on their way to a meeting with the democratically elected President of Iraq).

Iran has been trying to ENSURE the safe use of its waters for International shipping by enforcing the laws that international law requires it to, despite US attempts to turn Iranian waters into a place where piracy and dangerous navigation are protected.

Another sovereignty issue.

Are these islands, Abu Musa, Greater and lesser Tanbu inhabited? How do the islanders think about themselves' identity and sovereignty right now?

kurisupisuToday 04:20 pm JST

The US needs to stay out of parts of the world that it has no business to be in

EastmannToday 06:29 pm JST

Yankees get lost

go home

where on that map lies USA???

Where on the map does the US maritime fleet sail for trade? Everywhere, so they have a right and business being there to protect their trade routes and civilian ships using international waters. Educated people understand this, less educated people appear not to understand this.

If the US navy were protecting civilian ships, there wouldn't be an oil tanker, parked in American waters, with a cargo the US declares it seized lawfully, still waiting, after years, to be unloaded, because no private company wants to take on the liability of participating in an act of piracy, something that is considered a universally prosecutable crime.

And I assume Russia and Iran will stay out of Syria, right?

Both were invited by the legitimate government of Syria, unlike the Islamist terrorists and their funders and suppliers, the US, Turkey and Saudis.

What?!!! Russia and Iran are there at the invitation of Syria's leader. In contrast, US is illegally occupying Syria, stealing its oil....

What is funny about that comment is that the oil fields the US protects are operated by the Kurds and the oil is sold to the Syrian government. The revenues go to the Kurdish run Democratic Federation of Northern Syria.

The whole point of having US troops guard those oil fields is to prevent IS from regaining control. IS used to control those oil fields and used the revenue to finance their war and their caliphate. Keeping those oil fields out of IS hand deprives them of a former major revenue source. It also places US forces in a good position to attack residual IS forces, which if you notice happens pretty frequently.

If the US navy were protecting civilian ships, there wouldn't be an oil tanker, parked in American waters, with a cargo the US declares it seized lawfully, still waiting, after years, to be unloaded, because no private company wants to take on the liability of participating in an act of piracy, something that is considered a universally prosecutable crime.

As usual you have it wrong. There is no piracy involved. The US seized the tanker under lawful UN sanctions. The problem is the tanker is too deep for any US Gulf Coast port and has to be unloaded to lighters. All of the companies operating those lighters also have tankers that pass through the Straits of Hormuz an other facilities in the region. Iran has threatened retaliation against any company that unloads that tanker so the US is sending some amphibious assault ships loaded with Marines and an additional destroyer to prevent Iran from doing harm to any US owned assets. Nobody is worried about anyone being prosecuted for piracy because there was no piracy. Get a grip dude.

What is funny about that comment is that the oil fields the US protects are operated by the Kurds and the oil is sold to the Syrian government.

None of the revenue goes to the Syrian government.

The whole point of having US troops guard those oil fields is to prevent IS from regaining control. IS used to control those oil fields and used the revenue to finance their war and their caliphate.

Not quite...

The revenue goes to the Kurdish "self ruled government" to fund their fight against the Assad regime. ( Uncle Sam will not be happy if its used against the Turks) Meanwhile the US turns a blind eye to Saudi funding of the IS as long as it isn't used against US supported entities in the region.

The US troops are in the area to prevent the Assad regime from benefiting from oil revenues.

Are these islands, Abu Musa, Greater and lesser Tanbu inhabited? How do the islanders think about themselves' identity and sovereignty right now?

Greater Tunb has a surface of 10.3 km2 (4.0 sq mi). It is known for its red soil. There are conflicting descriptions about its population: While some sources state there are between a few dozen and a few hundred inhabitants others describe the island as having no native civilian population, only an Iranian military garrison. Lesser Tunb is uninhabited but has a small military airfield and garrison. Abu Masa is the largest of the three at some 12 square miles and has a population around 2,100.

The Islands were British protectorates until 1971. The British apparently intended them to become part of the UAE, which was also part of the British protectorate back then, when the Brits granted them independence and withdrew. Iran seized them before the UAE could take control.

Raw BeerAug. 2 05:28 pm JST

The US needs to stay out of parts of the world that it has no business to be in

And I assume Russia and Iran will stay out of Syria, right?

What?!!! Russia and Iran are there at the invitation of Syria's leader. In contrast, US is illegally occupying Syria, stealing its oil....

Mr KiplingAug. 2 11:50 pm JST

And I assume Russia and Iran will stay out of Syria, right?

Both were invited by the legitimate government of Syria, unlike the Islamist terrorists and their funders and suppliers, the US, Turkey and Saudis.

I'm sure Qatar and Bahrain are quite happy with the agreements to host US forces in their countries. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

RichardPearceAug. 2 05:56 pm JST

Iran has been trying to ENSURE the safe use of its waters for International shipping by enforcing the laws that international law requires it to, despite US attempts to turn Iranian waters into a place where piracy and dangerous navigation are protected.

That's a funny way to say "to a place where UN sanctions can be avoided". Hopefully the UK will clear things up for you soon and snapback the sanctions officially.

Mr KiplingToday 12:05 am JST

Meanwhile the US turns a blind eye to Saudi funding of the IS as long as it isn't used against US supported entities in the region.

Haven't you heard? Saudi is a China ally now.

Good thing my contract is about up, sounds like it’s time to get outta’ Dodge

Here we go the US yet again escalating tension and creating conflict, and if anyone bothers to check IS was created as a result of the US' illegal invasion of Iraq, which led to problems mentioned above regarding Syria.

North Korea, China, Iran, Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Somalia, Israel/Palestine, the list goes on...

LegrandeToday 02:32 am JST

Here we go the US yet again escalating tension and creating conflict, and if anyone bothers to check IS was created as a result of the US' illegal invasion of Iraq, which led to problems mentioned above regarding Syria.

Some good mental gymnastics that the US is escalating tensions... through making Iran do exercises I guess. Also while it is your goal to assign the responsibility for IS to the US, there is no reason to ignore the history of fundamentalism in the region.

North Korea, China, Iran, Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Somalia, Israel/Palestine, the list goes on...

Oh the US escalated tensions basically everywhere, including places that aren't at war right now. Quite a laundry list of grievances you got. I suggest a good shrink.

Meanwhile the US turns a blind eye to Saudi funding of the IS as long as it isn't used against US supported entities in the region.

Where did that story come from? Risible. The Saudis are part of the anti-IS coalition. Their air force attacks IS forces in Syria. IS has carried out attacks in Saudi Arabia. The Saudis consider IS their enemy.

Some wealthy private donors in the Qatar and to a lesser extent other Gulf states contribute some money to IS and the German government is saying the Qatari government provides major financial and arms support to IS (believable, they support the RSF with money and arms and have been laundering Wagner gold for years), however the great majority of their funds are derived from the illegal drug trade, sales of antiquities, a huge sum stolen from the Central Bank of Mosul, taxation and extortion (especially extortion of truck drivers hauling freight and aid shipments) in the few areas IS still has some control over as well as sales from agriculture since the land between the Tigris and Euphrates where IS has their last remaining stronghold is about the only place in Syria that grows wheat.

Haven't you heard? Saudi is a China ally now.

Saudi Arabia and China have been close for a very long time. The Chinese have a ballistic missile joint venture in Saudi Arabia and have in the past sold the Saudi Army a large number of their ballistic missiles.

The US troops are in the area to prevent the Assad regime from benefiting from oil revenues.

If that were true then why would the US let the Kurds sell the oil to the Syrian government? Syria can turn around and sell the oil if they wish. No one is saying they cannot. What is funny is that the Kurds sell Syria the oil and use the revenue earned to fight the Syrian government. The Syrians are financing their own enemy.

The last time I looked Iran was an oil exporter.

It behoves the Iranians to keep the Hormuz Straits open for ships.

If Iran wished to disrupt shipping then it could easily - it had not

The US is guarding its own interests, not anyone else’s security

Also, why does the US illegally occupy parts of Syria?

At whose invitation?

It is not wanted there

kurisupisuToday  06:34 am JST

The US is guarding its own interests, not anyone else’s security

Which it is allowed to do in international waters.