Oh I didn't say it was rightful.
I did say why they felt justified in doing it.
They're not the first country to suddenly and unilaterally break a treaty with their neighbors and they won't be the last.
I do think we have made a bigger deal out of it than it really is.

Your whole argument is based on justifying it when there is no justification.

The fact of the matter is the UN still doesn't recognize Russia's claim on the Crimean. They see it as a hostile occupation of another sovereign nation. Basically a land grab for 80% of the energy resources of a soverign nation with which Russia had signed a "Friendship Treaty" agreeing to the boarders in 1997.

Don't fall in the trap. Sometimes you just have to let his words speak for themselves. The Simone Biles of message board discussion.

---

Your whole argument is based on justifying it when there is no justification.

The fact of the matter is the UN still doesn't recognize Russia's claim on the Crimean. They see it as a hostile occupation of another sovereign nation. Basically a land grab for 80% of the energy resources of a soverign nation with which Russia had signed a "Friendship Treaty" agreeing to the boarders in 1997.

Don't fall in the trap. Sometimes you just have to let his words speak for themselves. The Simone Biles of message board discussion.

I wish you would let my words speak for themselves.

I was only explaining Russia's perspective on the matter, and you both assume I'm on Russia's side and that I think what they did is justified.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Late to the subject and Im not going to address the political stuff within this thread , just want to clear up some things about the actual attack.
In these types of operations simple is best, think KISS.
Guarantee that limpet mines where placed on the hulls when these ships where in port and timed to explode when the ships would be most likely at sea.
Simple, KISS operation: Several combat swimmers ride the tide under the ship, place the mines and continue with the tide to a safe distance away to exit the water to be picked up by a boat. Pretty easy as security in many foreign ports is very weak.
Conducted at night with rebreathers and it would be very hard to detect anything amiss.
Seems to me the mines were purposely weak or ineffective and not sure of the reason for that.
Iran can certainly build capable bombs/mines and their SF troops are pretty good.

---

Late to the subject and Im not going to address the political stuff within this thread , just want to clear up some things about the actual attack.
In these types of operations simple is best, think KISS.  
Guarantee that limpet mines where placed on the hulls when these ships where in port and timed to explode when the ships would be most likely at sea.
Simple, KISS operation: Several combat swimmers ride the tide under the ship, place the mines and continue with the tide to a safe distance away to exit the water to be picked up by a boat. Pretty easy as security in many foreign ports is very weak.
Conducted at night with rebreathers and it would be very hard to detect anything amiss.
Seems to me the mines were purposely weak or ineffective and not sure of the reason for that.
Iran can certainly build capable bombs/mines and their SF troops are pretty good.

Iran hasn't been good at anything since the Persian empire crumbled under the might of Alexander.

---

Late to the subject and Im not going to address the political stuff within this thread , just want to clear up some things about the actual attack.
In these types of operations simple is best, think KISS.  
Guarantee that limpet mines where placed on the hulls when these ships where in port and timed to explode when the ships would be most likely at sea.
Simple, KISS operation: Several combat swimmers ride the tide under the ship, place the mines and continue with the tide to a safe distance away to exit the water to be picked up by a boat. Pretty easy as security in many foreign ports is very weak.
Conducted at night with rebreathers and it would be very hard to detect anything amiss.
Seems to me the mines were purposely weak or ineffective and not sure of the reason for that.
Iran can certainly build capable bombs/mines and their SF troops are pretty good.

Iran hasn't been good at anything since the Persian empire crumbled under the might of Alexander.

Iran has very good SF troops and they are good at what they want to do, that is terror and terrorist operations. Besides like I said, it is a relatively easy op and candidly they could have done quite bit more damage if they wanted to.

---

Late to the subject and Im not going to address the political stuff within this thread , just want to clear up some things about the actual attack.
In these types of operations simple is best, think KISS.  
Guarantee that limpet mines where placed on the hulls when these ships where in port and timed to explode when the ships would be most likely at sea.
Simple, KISS operation: Several combat swimmers ride the tide under the ship, place the mines and continue with the tide to a safe distance away to exit the water to be picked up by a boat. Pretty easy as security in many foreign ports is very weak.
Conducted at night with rebreathers and it would be very hard to detect anything amiss.
Seems to me the mines were purposely weak or ineffective and not sure of the reason for that.
Iran can certainly build capable bombs/mines and their SF troops are pretty good.

Iran hasn't been good at anything since the Persian empire crumbled under the might of Alexander.

Never underestimate the capabilities of Iran.  While they are certainly no match militarily against a western country, they can still do a lot of damage if/when they want to.  It wouldn't be hard for them to completely shut down the strait.  Keeping it shut down is beyond their capability and would hurt them more than anyone else and they know it.

This whole thing is all about the sanctions against them that are working.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Iran hasn't been good at anything since the Persian empire crumbled under the might of Alexander.

Iran has very good SF troops and they are good at what they want to do, that is terror and terrorist operations. Besides like I said, it is a relatively easy op and candidly they could have done quite bit more damage if they wanted to.

A bit of trivia: we get the word "assassin" from the Persian Empire.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Iran has very good SF troops and they are good at what they want to do, that is terror and terrorist operations. Besides like I said, it is a relatively easy op and candidly they could have done quite bit more damage if they wanted to.

A bit of trivia: we get the word "assassin" from the Persian Empire.

---

Iran has very good SF troops and they are good at what they want to do, that is terror and terrorist operations. Besides like I said, it is a relatively easy op and candidly they could have done quite bit more damage if they wanted to.

A bit of trivia: we get the word "assassin" from the Persian Empire.

What? No way!

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Iran at it again.

Are they just trying to see how many countries more powerful than them they can piss off?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/10/politics/...index.html

---