Pentagon: Iran’s revolutionary guards behind ship sabotage off UAE coast as Abu Dhabi Mum

‘Well who the hell cares about Abu Dhabi’s mum, who the fuck’s she to us, anway?’ hollered Rear Admiral Michael Gilday.  General Rear Gild-the-Lily blustered on: ‘Who the fuck needs ‘evidence’, when we have Intel from Mossad?  And they say those terr’ists had attached magnetic limpet mines, those evil devils.  I don’t know how they delivered them; bathyscaphes or those friggin’ Russian spy dolphins for all I know, but who the hell cares? We know because Mossad told us so.

But The President had warned you that if they fuck with our interests anywhere around the globe, there’ll be hell to pay!  And our interests have a long reach, and don’t you forget it.

Well anyway, on Friday our great Commander-in-Chief ordered 1500 more troops, including a Patriot missile battery and a squadron of fighter jets, supplements the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group sent to the region earlier this month. It also includes the sending of additional reconnaissance and engineering support staff. to the region to protect our interests.  Take that, Iran!  We’ll get you in the end, mark my words!  We’re going to keep the peace if we have to Bomb the World!

More from wsws, May 25:

“Moreover, the Pentagon has already deployed nuclear capable B-52’s, F-16C fighter jets and Marines to the Middle East, while drawing up plans to send a further 120,000 military personnel to the region to attack Iran.”

“Should Iran be blamed for an attack on “US interests,” which could include anything from Saudi oil platforms to CIA-backed ISIS terrorist groups in Syria, the troops being sent to the Middle East would rapidly be thrown into a war.

“In addition to preparing for a direct clash with Iran, US imperialism is also arming its regional allies for war. The same day the latest troop increase was announced, the Trump administration released a “Memorandum of Justification” detailing plans to circumvent congressional oversight in order to sell US weapons to Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Jordan. The memorandum invoked an emergency under the Arms Export Control Act, permitting the executive branch to authorize weapons transfers. The weapons to be sent to the despotic Saudi regime and Gulf allies reportedly include laser-guided bombs. In total, US firms will sell more than $8 billion worth of arms to the three regimes.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who reportedly took the lead within the administration in advocating the sending of additional US troops, said the sale of billions of dollars of US weaponry to Washington’s allies was necessary to guard against “Iranian aggression.”

The statement announcing the weapons sales also justified the illegal transfer of bombs to the despotic Saudi regime as a counter to the “fundamental threat of malign Iranian activity” across the Middle East. This threat included an unsubstantiated allegation that Iran was responsible for the deaths of “over 600” US military personnel in Iraq.”

“The US war drive in the Middle East does not arise from the personal proclivities of Trump, his attack dog Pompeo, or his hawkish National Security Adviser John Bolton, who has been urging the US to bomb Iran for years. Rather, it is part of the US ruling elite’s effort to consolidate its unchallenged domination over the energy-rich and geo-strategically critical Middle East, and push back the influence of its chief rivals, above all Russia and China.

The reality is that Washington’s reckless escalation of military tensions with Iran enjoys bipartisan support. Ahead of this week’s State Department threat against Syria for alleged chemical weapons use, leading Democrats in both houses of Congress signed an appeal demanding that the White House “increase pressure on Iran and Russia with respect to activities in Syria.”

US Seeks War to Save Waning Middle East Influence 

(six mins; the links are under the video on youtube; ‘Eye-raq, Eye-ran’, eeep.)

(cross-posted from Café Babylon)

13 users have voted.


This is not like Pearl Harbor or various German incidents pre-WW I and WW II.
Those were world powers flexing their muscles trying to get the other side to back down. This, if actually done by Iran, would be like a mouse biting a lion's lip.

It's obviously false.

EDIT: When Iran's revolutionary government took US hostages, they were facing a USA with weak divided leadership and a country weary of VietNam. It was worth taking a chance and it paid off, sort of. The situation is very opposite now, the belligerent Trump administration is obviously thirsty for war, and absent a draft, the US public is, at a minimum, complacent.

Once on PBS I heard a military expert say that five nukes would obliterate 90% of the Iranian population. Jimmy Carter would never do that. The xenophobic Trump boasts of it. Why would they give Trump an excuse?

IMHO this is like the SS troops dressing in Polish uniforms, crossing the Elbe twice to blow up their own radio station, than retaliating for the Polish "invasion".

8 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture

@The Voice In the Wilderness

we'll ever know the truth about the iranian hostages, but the winner was of course: ronald reagan. this isn't pearl harbor as per the axis of powers, but the new axis of evil as per dubya, david frum, et. al: any nation who opposed USian power.

gadzukes, though; i thought folks might have appreciated my spontaneous satire. but as mr. wd says, i'm like red skelton who'd laughed the hardest at his own jokes. ah, well. so it goes...

6 users have voted.

@wendy davis

4 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture

@The Voice In the Wilderness

one way or another, for better or worse, for richer or i can't seem to stop!
and you may have missed my satire, but as the first comment in, you blessedly hadn't said: 'this is too long; can you break it up into parts?' nor 'could you please not use words like rada and such that i don't understand?' ; )

2 users have voted.

@The Voice In the Wilderness
They didn't even bother to come up with a good lie because they respect us so little

7 users have voted.
edg's picture

It's like totally believable that Iran would attack 4 ships with carefully placed bombs THAT KILLED NO ONE, SANK NO SHIPS, and caused damages that can be repaired easily and quickly at low cost. What a minimal impact way to start a war!!

10 users have voted.

@edg Let's say the lies are true. The US/SA/etc militaries and intelligence agencies could not detect the three acts of sabatoge? So in the likely event that Iran wages an asymetrical war, the US and allies will not be able to stop them?

8 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture


may be an oxymoron, but in any event: who's in charge of the war rooms? that's where we get into 'competing deep states', and all that jazz. but that's the reason so many 'anonymous pentagon generals/insiders' and 'anonymous CIA agents/insiders' are quoted in the papers of record (NYT an WaPo, srew the guardian pupppet), no? think they might have an agenda?

gotta go get me some rest.

6 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture


and it doesn't even reach the level of a 'false flag'. the port master at abu dhabi had even noted: 'no explosions, calms waters' etc. someone couldda even made the holes from inside the ships.

but i got to remembering this you'd had some fun with: 'US 'sees signs' Damascus 'may' have used chlorine in Idlib, threatens ‘quick & appropriate’ response'. now that was another false flag. but this is hilarious, and my guess this what the dude had said (via RTcom):

Talking with Washington is akin to talking with the devil, a senior official with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said, downplaying the US military presence in the region as the “weakest in history.”

“Negotiating with the devil, the Quran says, bears no fruit,” the deputy commander of the IRGC, Rear Admiral Ali Fadavi [dinnae know iran had Rear Admirals as well, lol], said, as cited by Fars News Agency.

Fadavi made his remarks while talking about the longtime lack of effective negotiations between Tehran and Washington.

He also did not mince his words on the state of the US military presence in the region, labeling it the “weakest in [its] history.” The influence of Saudi Arabia, a US major ally and arms-buyer, in the Middle East has also been diminished over the years, the official added."

5 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture

got it pretty close to right in his ‘Shielding the World From US Chaos Is No Easy Task’ at strategic culture, although it ain’t over till its over.

“Donald Trump’s foreign policy relies heavily on putting to use to the tools available to the Empire: economic terrorism, threats of war, diplomatic pressure, trade wars, etc. But in resorting to tried-and-true imperialism, it is isolating itself internationally from traditional allies and raising tensions on the global chessboard to an unprecedented level.

Threats of war against Venezuela, North Korea, Syria and Iran are now repeated on a daily basis. Economic measures involving tariffs or duties, in many ways comparable to declarations of war, are now habitual, whether directed at friends or allies. Iran and Syria are under sanctions, while Pyongyang is even prevented from docking one of its ships in its ports, thereby finding itself de facto placed under US embargo, such as was threatened against Venezuela.”

“The fate of the new multipolar world order essentially depends on how well China and Russia will be able weather Washington’s storm. It is naturally in the interests of the rest of the world that the chaos of Washington’s unipolarity will be brought to a close in the least chaotic and destructive manner.”

“Pentagon planners have no intention of revealing their military vulnerabilities in a war with Iran. The loss of US military prestige would also show to countries hitherto under Washington’s thumb that this dog has more bark than bite, making it all the more difficult for the US to browbeat countries with the threat of military force in the future.

What Trump seems to find difficult to understand is that his foreign policy is slowly eroding the superpower status of the US. The free pass Trump has given to the neocons and the pro-Israel and pro-Saudi lobbies have only served to bring the US the the brink of a new war with Venezuela, the DPRK, Iran or Syria. With Trump not really committed to any war himself, this will only lead to a humiliating backdown.”

the bolded is certainly the big question.

3 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture

i'll end with this quote via john wight on his 'end nato' piece at rt last week:

"It is a relic of the first Cold War which has done much to bring about the New Cold War, calling to mind the cogent analysis of Roman imperialism provided by political economist Joseph Schumpeter in the second decade of the 20th century:

There was no corner of the known world where some interest was not alleged to be in danger or under actual attack. If the interests were not Roman, they were those of Rome's allies; and if Rome had no allies, then allies would be invented. When it was utterly impossible to contrive such an interest—why, then it was the national honor that had been insulted. The fight was always invested with an aura of legality. Rome was always being attacked by evil-minded neighbors, always fighting for a breathing space. The whole world was pervaded by a host of enemies, and it was manifestly Rome's duty to guard against their indubitably aggressive designs. They were enemies who only waited to fall on the Roman people.

and from john trudell: Rich Man's Wars', and they're man's wars. who will stop the hegemon? those who can..and must. g' night.

2 users have voted.

Oil delivery not through the Strait of Hormuz. When Trump pulled his tiny from the Nuke Deal and applied sanctions, they said "If we can't sell oil, no one can sell oil." They are continuing their stated "War on Oil" to destabilize oil markets and damage the U.S. economy, that's what I think. winning

Next, I see Trump bombing something to smithereens in retaliation because of course. A baby man with multiple personality disorders and his finger tweeting MAGA all day. Of course.

I believe the pentagon is correct, that sabotage did occur and send a bigly message, the U.S. has lost this proxy war too. The United States of Loser War Mongering Chicken Shit Bomb Droppers. whoop de do LOSERS It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch. Send in the Navy now, the most chickenshit of all, yeah that'll work. big bombs tiny minds

The blowback from Trump and his Axis of Congressional Assholes is gonna be yuge, and last forever. And he still thinks he is "winning", that is the tiresome part. yawn

good luck planet

1 user has voted.
wendy davis's picture


your drift, and yes, iranian FM javad zarif has said that iran could close the strait by sinking a ship, but as i remember it, he'd noted that one of their old ships could be sunk.

it gets a bit confusing due to the varied coverage, but i'd thought that iran's demands that would guaranttee they wouldn't enrich high-grade uranium were: that the EU nations would keep to the JCPOA, keep buying iranian oil, and pressure trump to extend the expired waivers as well as back off on his war-by-other-means sanctions.

but the big news today is 'Iran proposes ‘non-aggression pact’ to Gulf neighbors as regional tensions soar',

"Iran has proposed signing a non-aggression pact to its neighbors, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said. At the same time, the country is ready to defend itself from any attack, be it “an economic war or a military one.”

“Tehran has offered to sign a non-aggression pact with its neighbors in the Gulf,” Zarif said on Sunday during a joint press conference in Baghdad with his Iraqi counterpart Mohamed al-Hakim.

Iran's top diplomat did not name an exact list of the countries eyed in the document, yet stressed that Tehran seeks to “build balanced relations” with all Gulf states. At the same time, Zarif cautioned that the country is ready to defend itself if attacked, by any means necessary.

Apart from that, several Saudi tankers were damaged under shady circumstances at a UAE port – and the blame was squarely put on Iran. Tehran maintained it was not involved in inflicting the minor damage on the vessels, blaming the incident on some sort of “Israeli mischief” instead.

Following the incident with the tankers and a drone attack on a Saudi pipeline, attributed to Yemen's Houthi rebels, Riyadh accused Iran of seeking to destabilize the whole region and vowed to confront it with “all strength and determination” if attacked.

Tehran, on its part, has repeatedly stated that it’s not plotting to attack anyone, yet is more than capable of retaliating and even “defeating” the US and its allies in the Middle East."

i did poke about to see if there were any more explicit lists, etc., but i did come across this interesting meeting as well:

'Russia welcomes Iran nonaggression initiative with Gulf, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says Iran's non-aggression initiative can become step to detente',

"This step can ease tensions in the region, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said, speaking at a news conference in Moscow, following the meeting with his Cuban counterpart Bruno Rodriguez Parrilla.

"To agree not to attack each other is the first step to defuse the tension. We would consider such an agreement to be beneficial," Lavrov said.

He cited a previous Russian offer to Arab countries to help work out a security conception, suggesting transparency in military affairs, joint military exercises and other confidence-building measures among Arab countries, the UN, EU and five permanent members of the UN security Council as guarantors.

"So far, there is no common position among the Arabs on this matter," he added.

Lavrov also added that he hoped talks in Norway would result in achieving of a generally acceptable solution to the current dispute in Venezuela.

now the creepy, but unsurprising news is that the T admin has approved the sale of 105 stealth bombers to japan, which is re-militarizing at an alarming rate, i expect because: north korea and china, but i may be wrong on that math. ah, there's more, but that's good for now.

2 users have voted.
wendy davis's picture

from b at moon of alabama:

New York Times Supports False Trump Claims About An "Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program" That Does Not Exist, today, may 27

he opens:

"During a press conference in Japan U.S. President Donald Trump today said (video):

And I’m not looking to hurt Iran at all. I’m looking to have Iran say, “No nuclear weapons.” We have enough problems in this world right now with nuclear weapons. No nuclear weapons for Iran.

And I think we’ll make a deal.

Iran said: "No nuclear weapons." It said that several times. It continues to say that.

Iran does not have the intent to make nuclear weapons. It has no nuclear weapons program.

But Trump may be confused because the U.S. 'paper of the record', the New York Times, recently again began to falsely assert that Iran has such a program.

A May 4 editorial in the Times claimed that Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps was running such a nuclear weapons program. After a loud public outrage the Times corrected the editorial. Iran's UN office wrote a letter to the Times which was published on May 6:

In an early version of “Trump Dials Up the Pressure on Iran” (editorial,, May 4), now corrected, you referred to a nuclear weapons program in describing the reach of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps.
The editorial is correct in criticizing the punishing aspects of the Trump administration policy toward Iran — one that has brought only suffering to the Iranian people and one that will not result in any change in Iran’s policies. But it was wrong to refer to a weapons program — a dangerous assertion that could lead to a great misunderstanding among the public.

Unfortunately that did not help. The NYT continues with the "dangerous assertion".

On May 13 the NYT reporters Eric Schmitt and Julian E. Barnes wrote in White House Reviews Military Plans Against Iran, in Echoes of Iraq War:

At a meeting of President Trump’s top national security aides last Thursday, Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan presented an updated military plan that envisions sending as many as 120,000 troops to the Middle East should Iran attack American forces or accelerate work on nuclear weapons, administration officials said.

One can not accelerate one's car, if one does not have one. The phrase "accelerate work on nuclear weapons" implies that Iran has a nuclear weapons program. It may that the White House falsely claimed that but the authors use the phrase and never debunk it."

(the video)

1 user has voted.