It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Eisenhower aircraft carrier to depart ahead of schedule for Iran...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 12:35 PM
link   
PDO's Prepare to Deploy Orders have been sent out across the Navy.

Octobers Surprise might just come true,

I guess Amadidajob or how what ever his name is must have pissed off W with his rant at the UN this past week!



As reports circulate of a sharp debate within the White House over possible US military action against Iran and its nuclear enrichment facilities, The Nation has learned that the Bush Administration and the Pentagon have issued orders for a major "strike group" of ships, including the nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower as well as a cruiser, destroyer, frigate, submarine escort and supply ship, to head for the Persian Gulf, just off Iran's western coast. This information follows a report in the current issue of Time magazine, both online and in print, that a group of ships capable of mining harbors has received orders to be ready to sail for the Persian Gulf by October 1.

So what is the White House planning?

On Monday President Bush addressed the UN General Assembly at its opening session, and while studiously avoiding even physically meeting Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who was also addressing the body, he offered a two-pronged message. Bush told the "people of Iran" that "we're working toward a diplomatic solution to this crisis" and that he looked forward "to the day when you can live in freedom." But he also warned that Iran's leaders were using the nation's resources "to fund terrorism and fuel extremism and pursue nuclear weapons." Given the President's assertion that the nation is fighting a "global war on terror" and that he is Commander in Chief of that "war," his prominent linking of the Iran regime with terror has to be seen as a deliberate effort to claim his right to carry the fight there. Bush has repeatedly insisted that the 2001 Congressional Authorization for the Use of Force that preceded the invasion of Afghanistan was also an authorization for an unending "war on terror."


Deployment orders

With allegations of a plan in place and contingency scenarios in play, several military and intelligence experts see this as proof of a secret White House order to proceed with military action.

Last week, a military intelligence official described to this reporter the movement of Naval submarines and a deployment order sent out to Naval assets of strategic import, such as minesweepers, that could indicate contingency planning is already under way to secure oil transport routes and supplies.

On Sunday, Time Magazine confirmed much of what the military intelligence source had described.

"The first message was routine enough: a 'Prepare to Deploy Order' sent through Naval communications channels to a submarine, an Aegis-class cruiser, two minesweepers and two mine hunters," Time's Michael Duffy wrote. "The orders didn't actually command the ships out of port; they just said be ready to move by October 1. A deployment of minesweepers to the east coast of Iran would seem to suggest that a much discussed, but until now largely theoretical, prospect has become real."

www.thenation.com...





[edit on 22-9-2006 by SIRR1]




posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   
Great find.

Others ships currently in that specific area the Arabian Sea/Persian Gulf (more than there have ever been the last few months):

Carriers:
USS Enterprise (CVN 65) - Arabian Sea

IJ ESG:
Iwo Jima Expeditionary Strike Group (ESG):
USS Iwo Jima (LHD 7) - North Arabian Sea
USS Nashville (LPD 13) - North Arabian Sea
USS Whidbey Island ('___' 41) - North Arabian Sea

AWS:
USS Saipan (LHA 2) - Persian Gulf


Could be there within weeks:
USS Wasp (LHD 1) - Mediterranean Sea

I am trying to figure out whether there are any British and/or French carriers over there.



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 02:52 PM
link   
The British press hasn't said much recently about Royal Navy deployments, however these links might be of interest and will probably give the facts on ship locations.

www.royalnavy.mod.uk...

Also see link about an exercise in progress.

www.royal-navy.mod.uk...



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 03:31 PM
link   

www.thenation.com...

McGovern, who had first told a group of anti-Iraq War activists Sunday on the National Mall in Washington, DC, during an ongoing action called "Camp Democracy," about his being alerted to the strike group deployment, warned, "We have about seven weeks to try and stop this next war from happening."


That sounds about right. Three weeks to move them into position, a few more weeks to pretend to give diplomacy that last ditch effort, then stage an attack on the strike group and turn Iran into a smoking ruin in response. That should put us within a few days of the mid-term elections and who all is going to vote against the sitting government in the middle of a war?

You're either with us or you're with the terrorists!



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Is Bush playing one giant game of Texas hold'em or are all the pieces starting to fall into place?


The official, who is close to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the highest ranking officials of each branch of the US military, says the Chiefs have started what is called "branches and sequels" contingency planning."The JCS has accepted the inevitable," the intelligence official said, "and is engaged in serious contingency planning to deal with the worst case scenarios that the intelligence community has been painting. A second military official, although unfamiliar with these latest scenarios, said there is a difference between contingency planning -- which he described as "what if, then what" planning -- and "branches and sequels," which takes place after an initial plan has been decided upon."
link



posted on Sep, 22 2006 @ 06:50 PM
link   
I would say this is significant IF the Enterprise and at least one of the amphibous groups doesn't return when Ike gets on station. Otherwise they may just be getting out early to releive the big E group.

I just posted in another thread, the US has kept a carrier battle group in the Med and in the IO/Arabian Sea constantly for more then the past 35 years and often one in the gulf since 90. So the Ike going to sea (even early) in and of itself isn't nessecarily a tip off to anything. The other news though is interesting.

We will have to watch.



posted on Sep, 24 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by etshrtslr
Is Bush playing one giant game of Texas hold'em or are all the pieces starting to fall into place?




Sending a show of force, in this case to Iran, is playing a game -- of political poker. In an effort to get Iran to comply with International demands for an open and transparent examination of Iran's nuclear program and for cessation of activities which have been deemed as being "inappropriate" in the development of a "peaceful" nuclear program, the US must consider this action as vital.

The Iranians have laid their cards on the table for all to see. They are saying one thing; that their nuclear intentions are peaceful but, as we all know, "cards talk" The cards that the Iranians have on the table are clearly provocative.

Now the question that Iran must ask is whether the cards that the Americans are now playing -- a fleet heading for their waters -- are part of a bluff or whether the US is "suited and connected" and ready to go "All In"



posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 03:35 AM
link   
very, very bad. branches of sequels? the seven heads rise out of the ocean (the gulf) this is bible folks, here we go, ive been saying it here on ats. see, i was right. the gulf. the deployment, the oil prices, transportation and so on. its going to be a mean one folks, other countries will come into this and i think N korea is another one of them. whats cubas stance on this? someone get a link up on this, cuba intensions. they for sure will be there in the gulf with that hitler reencarnate from iran. domminos are going to fall, whatch em part and see whos on whos side. this oil thing, bible prophecy, the seven sequels, they are the seven heads that rise out of the ocean. maybe im psychic. im glad i told my nephew not to join. sorry to say tho the draft will be comming. 3 months from now you will see on tv the iranians vs. u.s.a.



posted on Oct, 6 2006 @ 08:37 AM
link   


The Iranians have laid their cards on the table for all to see. They are saying one thing; that their nuclear intentions are peaceful but, as we all know, "cards talk" The cards that the Iranians have on the table are clearly provocative. Now the question that Iran must ask is whether the cards that the Americans are now playing -- a fleet heading for their waters -- are part of a bluff or whether the US is "suited and connected" and ready to go "All In"


Lol nice post benevolent tyrant.


The difference between poker and the real life scenario of war with Iran is that the US keeps a royal flush in spades on hand, and it can drop at any time.
We are always 'All In' and we never fold.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.



[edit on 6-10-2006 by super70]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join