1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default Close The Strait of Hormuz? You COULD

    For about 24hrs maybe....

    Iran's Strait of Hormuz could easily be closed, admiral says

    AFP December 28, 2011 9:36 AM

    TEHRAN, Dec 28, 2011 (AFP) - Iran would find it "really easy" to close the world's most important oil transit channel, the Strait of Hormuz at the Gulf's entrance, but would not do so right now, Iran's navy chief said Wednesday.

    "Shutting the strait for Iran's armed forces is really easy — or as we say (in Iran) easier than drinking a glass of water," Admiral Habibollah Sayari said in an interview with Iran's Press TV.

    "But today, we don't need (to shut) the strait because we have the Sea of Oman under control, and can control the transit," he said.

    Sayari was speaking a day after Vice President Mohammad Reza Rahimi threatened to close the strait if the West imposed more sanctions on Iran, and as Iran's navy held war games in international waters to the east of the channel.

    World prices briefly climbed after Rahimi warned on Tuesday that "not a drop of oil will pass through the Strait of Hormuz" if the West broadened sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program.

    "The enemies will only drop their plots when we put them back in their place," the official news agency IRNA quoted Rahimi as saying.

    More than a third of the world's tanker-borne oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic choke point that links the Gulf — and its petroleum-exporting states of Bahrain, Iran, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — to the Indian Ocean.

    The United States maintains a naval presence in the Gulf in large part to ensure that passage for oil remains free.

    But Sayari asserted that the Strait of Hormuz "is completely under the control of the Islamic Republic of Iran."

    He said Iran's navy was constituted with the aim of being able to close the strait if necessary.

    France reacted by calling on Iranian authorities to respect international law and allow unhindered passage of all ships through the strait.

    Sayari meanwhile said the navy manoeuvres east of the strait were designed to show Gulf neighbours the power of Iran's military over the zone.

    Ships and aircraft dropped mines in the sea Tuesday as part of the drill, and on Wednesday drones flew out over the Indian Ocean, according to a navy spokesman, Admiral Mahmoud Mousavi.

    Iran has several times said it is ready to target the strait if it is attacked or economically strangled by Western sanctions over its nuclear program.

    An Iranian lawmaker's comments last week that the navy exercises would block the Strait of Hormuz briefly sent oil prices soaring before that was denied by the government.

    Tehran in September rejected a Washington call for a military hotline between the capitals to defuse any "miscalculations" that could occur between their navies in the Gulf.

    In Washington, U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner dismissed the latest threat from Iran's vice president.

    "I just think it's another attempt by them to distract attention from the real issue, which is their continued non-compliance with their international nuclear obligations," Toner told reporters.

    The United States and other Western countries accuses Iran of using its uranium enrichment program to build nuclear weapons. Iran denies the charges.

    Extra U.S. and European sanctions aimed at Iran's oil and financial sectors are being considered.

    A European Union spokesman said Wednesday the bloc was pressing ahead with those plans regardless of Tehran's threat.

    © Copyright (c) AFP

    Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/Iran+St...#ixzz1hqzyl2SV


    At which time Washington would have made up His Mind, and the current US carrier fleet would begin doing what it gets paid to do.... clean house and mop up. Closing the Strait would be about the last operational activity that the Iranian Navy would ever do, before becoming "extinct". Of course this is only one person's opinion: Mine.

  2. #2
    Back In Black
    ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MalahatTwo7 View Post
    At which time Washington would have made up His Mind, and the current US carrier fleet would begin doing what it gets paid to do.... clean house and mop up. Closing the Strait would be about the last operational activity that the Iranian Navy would ever do, before becoming "extinct". Of course this is only one person's opinion: Mine.
    Fish in a barrel.
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  3. #3
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    Fish in a barrel.
    Good hunt'n, but not sure about the taste......

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    Miller337's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    934

    Default

    Didn't they already try this once?. Really Worked out great for them last time, Reagan beat the crap out of them in a couple of hours. It can be dangerous to be to self confident but even with our current president I don't see this ending well for them. Feel sorry for the people who are already suffering under these idiots, I think their world is about to suck worse.

  5. #5
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    They tried that back in '88 when I was there. Didn't pan out as they expected, I'm sure....
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  6. #6
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SPFDRum View Post
    They tried that back in '88 when I was there. Didn't pan out as they expected, I'm sure....
    Ya well you know the old saying: "That was another Admiral and a different navy. We can and will do things differently." {Well, at least WE think so!"} Ya! Right dude. You keep thinking those thoughts.

    In any case any attempt to put a blockade on the Strait will end poorly for their team for sure.

    Just had a look at their navy list. For a small county, its fairly extensive: couple Kilo class subs and a lot of escort/close in support vessels.

    A bit worriesome is the US and UK built ships that are still on the line. The upside of that I guess is that the weapons onboard are no longer original issue, but then that throws a wild card into the deck.

    Sometimes, however, its not so much the weapons, as the handling of a ship, that kills well. A well trained crew and do more with sling shots and marbles than a sloppy crew with the latest and greatest in EW and offensive tools. Still a harpoon or its Chinese/North Korean equivilant can still ruin your day in a real bad way.
    Last edited by MalahatTwo7; 12-29-2011 at 07:19 AM.

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MalahatTwo7 View Post

    In any case any attempt to put a blockade on the Strait will end poorly for their team for sure.
    An escalation in the Strait will end poorly for everybody. While I think Iran is just blustering, even the threat of closing the Strait can cause the price of oil to jump. Oil speculation is hardly rational to begin with.

    The US can handle almost anything Iran has.. but again if it comes to a shooting war then the damage is already done.

    Also look at how narrow the strait is.. it can practically be closed using land-based assets. The Kilo's won't be very good given the dept of that area but they can be used to lay mines, which is more of a threat.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  8. #8
    Forum Member
    scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,302

    Default

    I wonder if the Iranians believe that Obama isn't willing to use military force. They must either have their intel heavily censored or is not plain not paying attention.
    Politics is like driving. To go forward select "D", to go backward select "R."

  9. #9
    Back In Black
    ChiefKN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    The Nice Part of New Jersey
    Posts
    6,981

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I wonder if the Iranians believe that Obama isn't willing to use military force. They must either have their intel heavily censored or is not plain not paying attention.
    I'm sure this is related to the US pulling out of Iraq.

    Iran is just sabre rattling and trying to extend their influence.
    I am now a past chief and the views, opinions, and comments are mine and mine alone. I do not speak for any department or in any official capacity. Although, they would be smart to listen to me.

    "The last thing I want to do is hurt you. But it's still on the list."

    "When tempted to fight fire with fire, remember that the Fire Department usually uses water."

  10. #10
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChiefKN View Post
    I'm sure this is related to the US pulling out of Iraq.

    Iran is just sabre rattling and trying to extend their influence.
    Could also be a shell game to get the world to look one place while they move on another. Iran is always under a lot of scrutiny but by acting up at the Strait they're drawing the attention away from the Iran/Iraq border. Combine that with the US pullout of Iraq and Iran's increasing political leverage in that country..
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  11. #11
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager9 View Post
    An escalation in the Strait will end poorly for everybody. While I think Iran is just blustering, even the threat of closing the Strait can cause the price of oil to jump. Oil speculation is hardly rational to begin with.

    The US can handle almost anything Iran has.. but again if it comes to a shooting war then the damage is already done.

    Also look at how narrow the strait is.. it can practically be closed using land-based assets. The Kilo's won't be very good given the dept of that area but they can be used to lay mines, which is more of a threat.
    Sigh, ya I know, and agree on all points. The narrowness is very well illistrated, having been there myself and spent all of Christmas Day, 2001 patrolling the entrance, and escorting tanker/frieghter traffic through. Shorebased batteries would make a mess of any shipping through there, as at its maximum, its only about 22 miles side to side. A couple M777's or their Asian equivilants will make a major mess of any shipping.... at least until a couple A10s decided to wake up and get airborne that is. In any case, I think I'll be very happy that its not going to be my balliwick to deal with, this time.

  12. #12
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MalahatTwo7 View Post
    Sigh, ya I know, and agree on all points. The narrowness is very well illistrated, having been there myself and spent all of Christmas Day, 2001 patrolling the entrance, and escorting tanker/frieghter traffic through. Shorebased batteries would make a mess of any shipping through there, as at its maximum, its only about 22 miles side to side. A couple M777's or their Asian equivilants will make a major mess of any shipping.... at least until a couple A10s decided to wake up and get airborne that is. In any case, I think I'll be very happy that its not going to be my balliwick to deal with, this time.
    Ya. It would be nice if the Sauds or UAE stepped up here. They're both in a good position to do something since they border the strait and have fairly significant militaries.. Oh, and since it's also THEIR OIL that Iran is messing with.

    Of course, then you look at who benefits from Iran's tantrum. OPEC.. yup. Russia.. yup. China.. probably.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber
    fallujahff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Eastern Shore, Va.
    Posts
    337

    Default

    Operation Earnest Will

    It didn't work out well last time.
    Last edited by fallujahff; 12-29-2011 at 06:25 PM.
    "When you are safe at home, you wish you were having an adventure-when you're having an adventure, you wish you were safe at home"

    --Thornton Wilder

  14. #14
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Question

    Hmmm... what say you?

    Iran tells departed U.S. carrier not to return: IRNA

    Reuters January 2, 2012

    TEHRAN, Jan 3 (Reuters) - Iran's army chief told the United States that a U.S. aircraft carrier which left the area because of Iranian naval exercises should not return to the Gulf, the state news agency reported on Tuesday.

    "Iran will not repeat its warning ... the enemy’s carrier has been moved to the Sea of Oman because of our drill. I recommend and emphasise to the American carrier not to return to the Persian Gulf," Ataollah Salehi told IRNA.

    © Copyright (c) Reuters

    Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Ir...#ixzz1iPIUd2LU

    ADDITIONAL ARTICLE:
    Iran warning to U.S. warship sends tensions soaring

    Agence France January 3, 2012 5:31 AM

    TEHRAN - Iran's military on Tuesday warned one of the U.S. navy's biggest aircraft carriers to keep away from the Gulf, in an escalating showdown over Tehran's nuclear drive that could pitch into armed confrontation.

    "We advise and insist that this warship not return to its former base in the Persian Gulf," said Brigadier General Ataollah Salehi, Iran's armed forces chief.

    "We don't have the intention of repeating our warning, and we warn only once," he was quoted as saying by the armed forces' official website.

    The ominous message came just after Iran completed 10 days of naval manoeuvres at the entrance to the Gulf to show it could close the strategic oil shipping channel in the Strait of Hormuz if it felt threatened.

    In the climax of the war games on Monday, Iran test-fired three missiles - including a new cruise missile - designed to sink warships.

    The aircraft carrier Salehi was referring to was the USS John C. Stennis, one of the US navy's biggest warships. The massive, nuclear-powered vessel transports up to 90 fighter jets and helicopters and is usually escorted by around five destroyers. It is close to finishing its seven-month deployment at sea.

    The carrier last week passed through the Strait of Hormuz heading east across the Gulf of Oman and through the zone where the Iranian navy was holding its manoeuvres. The US Defence Department called its passage "routine".

    The potential for an Iran-U.S. conflict sent a shiver through oil markets Tuesday, pushing oil prices up around $2 a barrel.

    There was no sign of a let-up in the tensions.

    At the weekend, US President Barack Obama signed into law new sanctions targeting Iran's central bank, which processes most of the Islamic republic's oil export sales.

    The European Union, which is mulling an embargo on Iranian oil, is expected to announce further sanctions of its own at the end of January.

    French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said he was convinced Iran was pursuing nuclear weapons, and he wanted to see "stricter sanctions" applied on Iran.

    The Western sanctions add to four sets of UN sanctions imposed over Iran's nuclear activities.

    The United States and many Western nations believe Iran is developing an atomic arsenal.

    Tehran denies that, saying its nuclear programme is exclusively for energy production and medical isotopes.

    In a statement to underline progress it has made, Iran's atomic energy organisation said on Sunday its scientists had made the country's first nuclear fuel rod from indigenous uranium.

    Iran's armed forces chief-of-staff, General Hassan Firouzabadi, added to the defiance by saying Tuesday that the Revolutionary Guards, an elite military force apart from the regular defence services, would soon hold its own naval manoeuvres in the Gulf.

    Foreign ministry spokesman Ramin Mehmanparast told reporters that "the foreign forces" present in the Gulf - meaning the U.S. Navy - "are against the security of the region."

    He said Iran's war games underlined his country's commitment to ensuring "stability and security in the region."

    Despite the increasingly bellicose stand Iran's military was taking, Tehran suggested it was keeping the door open to negotiating with world powers over its nuclear programme.

    Iran was waiting for EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton to set a date and venue for a meeting to discuss resuming talks that have been stalled for nearly a year, Mehmanparast said.

    But a spokesman for Ashton shot back immediately that Iran "must first respond" to an October letter from Ashton sent proposing renewed talks, "and then we'll take it from there."

    The negotiations were being held with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council - Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States, plus non-permanent member Germany.

    International pressure has already hit Iran's economy by scaring off foreign investors.

    Iran's currency, the rial, went into a nose dive on Monday, losing 12 percent, after Obama put the new US measures into effect.

    It recovered on Tuesday when Iran pumped foreign exchange into the market, according to Commerce Minister Mehdi Ghazanfari, quoted by the IRNA news agency.

    Mehmanparast said the volatility "definitely has nothing to with sanctions."

    "What's happening with the exchange market has its roots elsewhere," such as domestic movements of capital, he said.

    © Copyright (c) AFP

    Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Ir...#ixzz1iPJ3cOay

    Hmm I know the JOHN C. STENNIS well enough - at least for a few hours I was aboard her, anyhow, not counting the months that we followed her around the Gulf back in 2001/02.
    Last edited by MalahatTwo7; 01-03-2012 at 09:56 AM.

  15. #15
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    477

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scfire86 View Post
    I wonder if the Iranians believe that Obama isn't willing to use military force. They must either have their intel heavily censored or is not plain not paying attention.
    Wouldn't this be a REAL war for oil? No other reason to fight over that strait. None.

    I suppose it doesn't matter, Obama already got us involved in another (oil-producing) country for no discernible (slash publicly acknowledged) reason, why not make it 2?

  16. #16
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Ya kinda funny that eh? Km and I were out yesterday and noticed that fuel prices had actually dropped a few cents over the past week. The news has been reporting that the price of a barrel has actually increased..... a disconnect somewhere perhaps? Or setting us up with a false sense of "security"? LOL
    If you don't do it RIGHT today, when will you have time to do it over? (Hall of Fame basketball player/coach John Wooden)

    "I may be slow, but my work is poor." Chief Dave Balding, MVFD

    "Its not Rocket Science. Just use a LITTLE imagination." (Me)

    Get it up. Get it on. Get it done!

    impossible solved cotidie. miracles postulo viginti - quattuor hora animadverto

    IACOJ member: Cheers, Play safe y'all.

  17. #17
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Just what we need: More nukes on the market.

    Den Tandt: Sanctions only real weapon left to prevent nuclear Iran

    By Michael Den Tandt, Postmedia News January 3, 2012

    If it were possible for the United States or Israel to successfully prosecute a surgical, limited war on Iran to cripple or significantly delay its nuclear weapons program, that war would already be under way.

    The fact that war has not yet broken out — despite renewed sabre-rattling in the Persian Gulf — suggests that the key agents in this new cold war have concluded that none of their interests would be served by the conflict going hot now. Regardless of the outcome, they know there would be no winners.

    This is not to say there is not a risk, this year, of the wider regional Middle Eastern conflagration many feared immediately after 9/11, with Iran the crux. But it may just be that resolve in the White House, in Tel Aviv, in Paris and London (with support from Ottawa) and simple self-interest in Tehran, will coalesce to forge, if not peace, then at least an absence of mutually disastrous mass violence.

    Here is what Western public opinion often fails to grasp about Iran's nuclear program: it has massive popular support.

    Iran was the seat of the Persian Empire. It is a geographically large and populous nation of 80 million people, rich in natural wealth, at the epicentre of the world's most strategically vital region. As the standard-bearer for Shia Islam it has many natural enemies, of which Israel and the United States are only two. Saudi Arabia, and Sunni-led regimes generally, are believed to be quietly pushing the U.S. to attack Iran sooner rather than later.

    Moreover, Iranians have seen first-hand what happens to enemies of the U.S. who have no nuclear deterrent, versus those who do.

    Saddam Hussein's nuclear program at Osirak was destroyed by an Israeli bomb strike in 1981. Saddam possessed chemical weapons during the first Gulf War in 1990, but was persuaded not to use them by a quiet U.S. threat to retaliate with nuclear weapons. By the time of the U.S. invasion in 2003, Saddam had neither nukes nor chemical weapons. He was toppled and later hanged.

    Pakistan acquired nukes and achieved an uneasy balance of terror with India. North Korea acquired nukes, albeit in primitive form, but has not been attacked as a result. Moammar Gadhafi had an active WMD program but gave it up in 2004, while penning love songs to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Gadhafi's end is on YouTube for all to see.

    Set against the popular Iranian idea of nuclear manifest destiny, and self-protection, is a rock-steady, deeply-held belief by most Israelis, including the leadership among all parties and in the military, that a nuclear Iran cannot be allowed. Contrary to the caricatures in Western media, this is not driven by a simple belief that, given the power, Iran would drop a nuclear bomb on Tel Aviv. Rather it's about the balance of power, and of fear.

    In the six decades since its founding, the State of Israel has always maintained overwhelming military supremacy as its best defence in a hostile neighbourhood. Israel is believed to have some 200 nuclear warheads, with which it can threaten the existence of any nation that would threaten its existence. Iran's going nuclear, combined with its leaders' professed hatred of Jews and of Israel, would upend that balance. Israel's tiny land mass makes it particularly vulnerable to nuclear attack.

    A nuclear Iran would in a stroke become a dominant regional power — able to offer shelter to other regimes hostile to Israel. Iraq, formerly a Sunni-led counterbalance to Iran, is now Shia-dominated. This raises the prospect of a Shia regional superpower, which Sunni regimes — led by Saudi Arabia — would feel compelled to offset. A regional nuclear arms race likely would ensue.

    Here's why, despite all that, Israel has not already attacked.

    Though Iran's navy and air force are a ramshackle joke set against the might of the U.S. Fifth Fleet, based in Bahrain, or indeed the Israeli Defense Forces, Iran has 450,000 men under arms. It has an arsenal of short-range, Chinese-built anti-ship missiles with which to harry tanker traffic in the Gulf. And it has Hezbollah in Lebanon, where it has been re-arming its rocket brigades since the war of 2006, and from which it can strike northern Israel.

    Iran cannot be invaded and occupied, as Iraq was: it is too big and too populous. And Iran's nuclear sites are dispersed: destroying key facilities at Natanz, Bushehr and Arak would not end the threat. Indeed, a limited strike might simply speed the pace of Iranian nuclear development.

    All of which leads to the latest round of punitive sanctions, signed into law by President Barack Obama on New Year's Eve and set to go into effect in six months. These directly target Iran's oil industry, which accounts for 80 per cent of its exports. Iran's currency, the rial, is in free fall already. Republican presidential aspirant Ron Paul has called the sanctions an "act of war."

    In a way, Paul is right: The sanctions are economic warfare. They are also the last, best chance for peace. The calculation is that harsh economic pressure — combined with the overwhelming air superiority of the U.S. and Israel, likely backed by France and Britain should this degenerate into a shooting war — will persuade the Iranians to reconsider, difficult though that may be for them.

    Their simple self-interest dictates that they should, and will, if the sanctions are given time to bite.

    mdentandt@postmedia.com

    Twitter/mdtmobile

    © Copyright (c) Postmedia News

    Read more: http://www.canada.com/news/Tandt+San...#ixzz1iVMFkDn8


    BTW, a "short, victorious war" usually ISN'T.

  18. #18
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Since the original story "broke" I have been more than a bit puzzled by the lack of any distinctly "Canadian" response in any of the stories and reports about Iran and its proposal to close the Strait of Hormuz. NOW, I think I understand, and my puzzlement has become something of concern, with a sprinkling of "Conflict of Interest". This report comes directly from the DND/CF Public Affairs Office:

    Canada's defence minister tied the knot Wednesday way south of the border. Peter MacKay married Nazanin Afshin-Jam in a private ceremony reported to have taken place in Mexico, according to his website.

    Afshin-Jam is Iranian-born and a former Miss Canada World who has since become a high-profile human rights activist. The trilingual pilot was once named one of the 50 most beautiful people in the world.

    "She is the most important person in my life and over the coming months, Nazanin and I look forward to spending more time at home in Central Nova and sharing our happiness with all of you," MacKay said in a statement on his website.

    "Nazanin and I would like to wish everyone a very Happy New Year and all the best for 2012." On Twitter, Conservative MP Laurie Hawn, MacKay's former parliamentary secretary, congratulated the newlyweds "on tying the knot in Mexico today. Wishing them many happy years together."

    Afshin-Jam became Miss World Canada and runnerup Miss World in 2003. She went on to receive worldwide fame during her successful effort to save from execution a young Iranian woman who at age 17 had stabbed a wouldbe rapist to death. She then co-founded Stop Child Executions, a group dedicated to ending capital punishment of children in Iran.

    Afshin-Jam, who holds international relations and political science degrees from the University of British Columbia, also serves on the board of directors of the Canadian Race Relations Foundation. She previously served as a global youth educator with the Red Cross.

    MacKay's personal life has frequently made headlines in recent years. In a September 2006 article, the New York Times took stock of his "star appeal" and cited rumours that MacKay and former U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice were getting close to each other. The article described the defence minister as "the closest thing to eye candy on the diplomatic circuit."

    The previous year, MacKay and former politician Belinda Stronach went through a public split, during which MacKay described his heart as being "a little banged up."

    In the summer of 2010, MacKay's love life was again front and centre when he ended his engagement with Jana Juginovic, a CTV executive. A senior Conservative has said, "women have tried to mould (MacKay) to suit their needs, but it's just not going to happen.

    "He likes stability, he likes to have someone there, he wants someone to come home to, but he doesn't want to settle down - Peter puts work before women."

    In a 2005 interview, however, MacKay said the fact he has not started a family "weighs heavily" on him. He said if he had to choose between the prospect of leading a political party - or even the country - he would choose family.

    "That's not to say you can't do both," he added at the time.

    Back to Top

    Section: News
    Lead: Parliament Hill's most eligible bachelor has tied the knot with a brilliant Persian beauty queen.
    Headline: MacKay weds Iranian-born beauty
    Page: 7
    Byline: KRIS SIMS, PARLIAMENTARY BUREAU
    Outlet: The Ottawa Sun


    For my US friends, the Minister of National Defence is like your Defence Secretary, and is appointed by the Prime Minister.

  19. #19
    MembersZone Subscriber
    voyager9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern NJ
    Posts
    2,007

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MalahatTwo7 View Post
    Since the original story "broke" I have been more than a bit puzzled by the lack of any distinctly "Canadian" response in any of the stories and reports about Iran and its proposal to close the Strait of Hormuz. NOW, I think I understand, and my puzzlement has become something of concern, with a sprinkling of "Conflict of Interest". This report comes directly from the DND/CF Public Affairs Office:

    [COLOR="#0000CD"]Canada's defence minister tied the knot Wednesday way south of the border. Peter MacKay married Nazanin Afshin-Jam in a private ceremony reported to have taken place in Mexico, according to his website.

    Afshin-Jam is Iranian-born and a former Miss Canada World who has since become a high-profile human rights activist. The trilingual pilot was once named one of the 50 most beautiful people in the world.
    I don't see any conflicting interests.. none at all.
    So you call this your free country
    Tell me why it costs so much to live
    -3dd

  20. #20
    MembersZone Subscriber
    MalahatTwo7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Loco madidus effercio in rutilus effercio.
    Posts
    12,837

    Default

    Trust Da Boyz From New Joizey to work that one out! ahahahhaaaa

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Off duty close calls
    By CaptainMikey in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 06-10-2005, 05:05 PM
  2. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 12-02-2004, 04:28 PM
  3. Firefighter Close Calls LIVE Webcast
    By webteam in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 11-14-2004, 01:12 PM
  4. When to close a thread!?!?
    By gfdtrk4 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-26-2002, 11:18 AM
  5. Close Calls
    By CDeyerle CAPAL123 in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-10-2002, 01:39 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register