Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 04/07/2026 11:28:56 AM PDT by EnderWiggin1970
In 1420, the mightiest military force in all of Christendom rode to war. The death of Czech reformist preacher Jan Hus, an early precursor to Martin Luther, had sparked a religious revolt in the lands of Bohemia. Masses of Czech peasants grabbed their pitchforks, forming armed bands that promised to defend their faith and their homeland. To call these people suicidal would have been an understatement: they were now at war not merely against the Holy Roman Empire, but against Christendom itself. As the Emperor Sigismund gathered his forces, Pope Martin V asked every Christian knight to fight the heretics. From England to Poland, heavily armored horsemen, the gold standard of medieval power, heeded the call — even as the Czechs themselves were first left wielding farm tools.
History is the mass grave of foolhardy peasant rebels who crumble the moment they meet serious military power. Yet the Czechs were lucky. For as it turned out, they started their revolt at the same moment as one of the most key pivot points in European history. Almost by accident, the Czechs would become the first people on the continent to successfully use gunpowder weapons. Once they did, the underlying math of military strength changed quickly and forever. The European knight, though he tried to cling on, would spend the rest of his days sliding into irrelevance.
(Excerpt) Read more at unherd.com ...
|
|
Click here: to donate by Credit Card Or here: to donate by PayPal Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794 Thank you very much and God bless you. |
Trump may mock the British navy for being reduced to a handful of rusty ships, but the US Navy is not far behind as it also shrinks, unable to act in one theatre without leaving others vulnerable. Chinese naval maneuvers near Taiwan were reported to have kept US assets from deploying to the Iran theater for example; the US navy has just 4 minesweepers, and despite the need for them has kept them thousands of miles away because losing even 1 would cripple its capabilities; but if we can't deploy assets where needed because we can't afford to lose them, what good are they?
It's a bit ridiculous for Trump to be demanding someone else open the Straits of Hormuz, as it shows American weakness in this sector. Perhaps keeping the Straits closed is a strategy to harm our enemies in Europe and China, but it telegraphs a message to the world that the US is no longer omnipotent. As cheap munitions proliferate, the risk of a shattering war in which an adversary cripples American superiority with assymetrical attacks is growing.
NOTE to Mods: You pulled my first posting of this claiming "altered headline". It was literally a copy-paste from the source headline. This time I included the subtitle, again, using copy-paste. If you have a different idea of what the headline actually is, please let me know!
It's a bit ridiculous for Trump to be demanding someone else open the Straits of Hormuz, as it shows American weakness in this sector.
It's ridiculous for Trump to be calling for others to open the Strait of Hormuz, but not because it shows American weakness.
It's ridiculous for him to be telling others to open the strait because: (1) it's only closed because of the U.S. military campaign, and (2) free passage through the strait is none of our business.
Item (2) is important. Because the U.S. is one of the only countries in the world that has not formally ratified the international agreement that governs maritime activity in a body of water like the Strait of Hormuz (the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea), we have no legal or diplomatic basis for doing anything to protect it or facilitate vessel operations there.
The straits are closed because Iran has closed them, and despite Trump falsely claiming the other night in a speech that they were “open” only a handful of ships are transiting, and that through the Iranian “toll booth.” Unless this is some sort of grand strategy to cripple European and Chinese adversaries, it comes across as a clear strategic failure on the part of the American leadership. That’s how the world is seeing it, despite what some people may be telling themselves.
The U.S. has no legal or diplomatic standing to protect shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, as we ourselves do not accept the governing U.N. agreement on international waters as binding.
Good old Alberta’s Child, seldom correct but never in doubt. The status of the approval of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea by both Iran and the United States is the same. Both have signed but neither have ratified. So your point number 2 is irrelevant. Point number 1 is ridiculous.
Funny, the lights in America are on and they’re off in Iran. How did that happen?
America’s launching skyscrapers into space, catching them and reusing them. No other country in that world has a capability and won’t for at least a decade. We dominate the universal high ground - space. We have totally dominated low earth orbit and we are going to colonize and dominate the Moon. We’re way ahead on the AI race, we are energy independent and are undergoing a massive re-industrialization. We’re moving so fast the rest of the world can’t even catch their breath.
We are the Czechs now in that scenario you posted.
Shut up you communist bastard, you closeted trans, liberal freak. Don’t you know the D has got this?
Feel free to get tired any time now.
I for one will welcome your speedy departure.
L
Right now I’m trying to figure out how promising to bomb Iran into the dark ages, imposing suffering on the Iranian people who are supposed to be our allies, makes any sense.
Watch the videos of Iranians cheering the bombing, hoping for the downfall of the Islamic regime. Alternatively, buy a clue.
To traverse the strait, ships pass through the territorial waters of Iran and Oman. Although Iran has not ratified the UNCLOS convention, most countries, including the U.S. which also has not ratified it, claim the right of passage as codified in the convention.
In 1959, Iran altered the legal status of the strait by expanding its territorial sea to 12 nmi (22 km) and declaring it would recognize only transit by innocent passage through the newly expanded area. In 1972, Oman also expanded its territorial sea to 12 nmi (22 km) by decree. Thus, by 1972, the Strait of Hormuz was completely "closed" by the combined territorial waters of Iran and Oman. In 1971, Iran took over the Greater and Lesser Tunbs islands west of Hormuz against Arab wishes, thereby extending control of the navigation channels.
During the 1970s, neither Iran nor Oman attempted to impede the passage of warships, but in the 1980s, both countries asserted claims that were different from customary (old) law. Upon ratifying UNCLOS in 1989, Oman submitted declarations confirming its 1981 royal decree that only innocent passage is permitted through its territorial sea. The declarations further asserted that prior permission was required before foreign warships could pass through Omani territorial waters.
Upon signing the convention in 1982, Iran entered a declaration stating "that only states parties to the Law of the Sea Convention shall be entitled to benefit from the contractual rights created therein", including "the right of transit passage through straits used for international navigation". In 1993, Iran enacted a comprehensive law on maritime areas, provisions of which conflict with UNCLOS provisions, including a requirement that warships, submarines, and nuclear-powered ships obtain permission before exercising innocent passage through Iran's territorial waters. The U.S. does not recognize any of the claims by Oman and Iran and has contested each of them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strait_of_Hormuz
I’ve documented here on FR for years how the Iranian regime has alienated its own people to the point that most of them don’t even call themselves Muslim. But Washington never lacks for stupidity, and the latest threats to harm the Iranian people as a whole may achieve something I didn’t think possible, driving Iranians back to supporting the current regime.
Think you should understand that of all countries, the US DoW has one of the most nimble, adaptive and enlightened attitudes towards emerging weapon systems and modalities.
They know that emerging threats and methods have to be taken seriously and countered or at least exploited.
It’s also understood that bureaucracies and entrenched suppliers are resistant to changing the status quo. So money intentionally flows towards a lot of unorthodox, even “heretical” approaches. One Palmer Luckey or Elon Musk can shake up the whole system, and they know it.
Every fighter pilot knows he’s a dinosaur, or at least riding one. Automated systems of all flavors - classical controls or AI - are capable and expendable in addition to taking up a lot less space. But it doesn’t take the humans out of the system entirely - just changes the roles.
Lots of lessons are constantly being learned, but you can be assured there are legions of eyes/ears/minds soaking it all up and using the conclusions.
Have you seen the movie The Longest Day? The scene as the naval bombardment begins and the Frenchman shouts “Vive La France” and waves the flag in joy as explosions erupt around him? That’s how the majority of Iranians feel. They know the rubble will be cleared, but there’s no future unless the regime is gone.
Sure thing Cervantes.....
Drones themselves are already up against microwave and laser weapons. The same technology that allows astronomers to get crisp pictures of space despite a murky atmosphere means that space based lasers will be able to focus on ground based targets. As for cheap weapons rocks tossed at Earth from the Moon hit with Atomic level energy. One very good reason to be there first .
“This article examines Operation Intradon, a covert British counter-insurgency operation in the northern Omani enclave of Musandam. The operation, which ran from December 1970 to March 1971, was driven by the political aim of forcing the Sultan of Oman to take administrative control of this ungoverned enclave. This would then provide protection to the Strait of Hormuz oil route and remove a threat to the process of federating British protected states into what became the United Arab Emirates.”
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09592318.2022.2066305
Even before UNCLOS existed, the 1958 Geneva Convention on the Territorial Sea – which Iran did ratify – recognized that straits used for international navigation could not be arbitrarily closed. Under that earlier system, foreign ships enjoyed what is known as “non-suspendable innocent passage.”
“It’s ridiculous for him to be telling others to open the strait because...”
Trump loves blowing up speedboats, but he loves humiliating arrogant, condescending Euroweenies even more.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.