It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Iran broadcasts spyplane footage of US fleet in Gulf

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 12:28 PM

Originally posted by dbates
Iran has every reason to be spying on and checking up on a fleet that's powerful enough to destroy much of their country. Not to mention the fact that it's parked in their backyard. I'd be checking up on it too.

I don't think their right to spy on the fleet was ever in question with me. I was just amazed that they could pull it off. I wonder what kind of spy footage the US could broadcast of Iran's clandestine nuclear activities? Oh, sorry. There IS none.
Besides, even if we did have it, the Bush administration would rather watch us squirm and play CT'ers than give the world any real evidence and justification for having an entire carrier battle group parked on the other side of the planet.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 02:39 PM

Correct the US probably has tech to shoot down a missle coming toward a carrier.
But what about 30 missles?

They wont send them in one at a time..

If I was against the US Fleet..
I would prepare a launch of hundereds, if not THOUSANDS of missles...
make it a major exercies..

at dawn, on a day never expected.. absoltuley saturate them with missles...

in one fowl swoop you could obliterate the entire fleet.

Here the first thing you have to look is is the fact that you need huge logistical preparation for conducting such a strike. Fuel has to shipped, missile batteries have to be bought in position and the armed forces (all branches) have to be mobilized to not only operate these batteries but also to prepare for retaliatory strikes. All these will show up on recon satellites and Iran being a partcularly sensitive area of operations for the US, rest assured there will be 24 hours of coverage.

And I don`t think a dawn strike would be such a good idea because the relative temprature of a missile launch would be easily detected due to large differences between it and the ambient temprature around the launch site.

Plus, having thousands of missiles isn`t possible, both pratically and logistically for an economy of Iran`s size, its oil income not withstanding. And by missiles I mean high quality ones. Anyone can buy a thousand scuds and then get them blown away in war.

Further more, in a hypothetical situation where there are a thousand missiles flying around, some are bound to hit vessels from other countries which will not only alienate the Iranians, but may also result in strategic and tactical gains for the US forces.

Second, is the fact that an actual attack culminating from an exercise isn`t a terribly new idea. In fact the Soviet Union had adopted this strategy during the 60s until NATO analysts became aware of it and had their own forces ready to counteract any soviet aggression. Plus the strait of Hormuz being such a difficult choke point, do you really think that the US forces would deploy in terrain that holds them at a disadvantage in event of such an exercise.

Btw, TrueAmerican, thanks for the welcome
I`ll later try to shed light on some of the critical questions you raised in your post.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 02:52 PM
Don't just simply think Iran is a backward country armed with sticks and stones. (OLD)

They've come a long way in ten years. And With alot of help from Russia. I can't imagine what they have that isn't on the books. You know they're hiding some of their stuff.

It's going to be a bad day when the two sides go to war. Sure America's power will be destructive aswell but they'll take hits. Nobody gets out of this scenario unscathed.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 03:11 PM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

It occurs to me that a US ship of the line operating in waters anywhere near a potential adversary, or taking part in any kind of preparedness excercise, would not have aircraft lined up on the deck as shown in this shot. This seems more like a deck configuation appropriate for return to port etc.

I've never seen a carrier shooting or recovering aircraft with other aircraft lined up along the catapult or arresting lanes.

Any Navy guys out there who might be able to comment?

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 03:16 PM
Is that a Naval Ship ... Getting battered is not winning a war ... ... these days it would not even be considered winning a Battle ... Maybe a fair attack at MOST ... Besides all of that ... As far as we know ... This is from a picture that we took and they ran across ....

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 03:17 PM
Did anyone else notice the little ship out beside the bigger ship in the top left corner that has an ICON or something covering it up !?!?!

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 03:21 PM
For those that have not seen it, the full video in question has been posted to video google:

Iran Spy Plane Video

Thanks to Jedi Master for that

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 04:01 PM
Elven Sniper, you rock!!

Thank you for bringing a sensible post to counter all the hate filled "I hope some Americans die to Iranians" ones.

You have voted Elven Sniper for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

Pokey Oats

P.s. You're not going to kill our Skadi_the_evil_elf are you? (I wouldn't she's really cute).

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 04:03 PM
Pfft! This is dumb, the pic is outdated! A dumb ploy by the ayotollah to rally the gullible!

And here they are making a fuss!

The pic is of the carrier in Feb of this year, when it wasnt there in the Gulf.

Can you not see?

[edit on 13-11-2006 by IAF101]

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 04:20 PM
Hey, he's right, if you look really close you can see that the water says "this is not the gulf, PS it's feb".

I'm not closed to the idea IAF, but a little backup might be nice... you know, given the source.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 05:10 PM
I've heard from some different knowledgeable intelligence sources from both within and outside the ATS community that the US military possesses flying craft that is 40-50 years more advanced than what is currently known. The same with electronic technologies. I'm opposed to US intervention in the Middle East in support of supposedly strategic economic resources. The $1 trillion dollar spent in the last 16 years defending access to oil reserves would have been better spent on developing alternative energy sources and creating American jobs. IMHO Globalism is nothing more than economic fascism where the ultra-wealthy are deciding who gets what and how much.
The Iraqi's had lots of both American and Russian technology but never mastered its use in a meaningful way. I suspect the same is true of the Iranians. I'm not saying the Iranian could inflict serious damage to the US Navy in the Persian Gulf but if they did engage the US forces in the region, the gloves would come off and Iran's already weak economy would suffer for it.
The US made a huge strategic mistake by invading Iraq. After the 9/11/01 attack, they should have gone after the Wahabiists the same way that you'd treat in other criminal organization with police and paramilitary forces not by invading Iraq.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 05:12 PM

Originally posted by ShooterSix
Well, I see a few possible options here:

1. Does the United States want to show its actual radar effectiveness by scrambling fighters to the scene, or even its response time?

They did respond though. The responded after it have overflown the carrier too.

It appears that the iranians have the ability to overfly our ships w/o detection.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 05:31 PM
Whoopie!!! Iran now knows what a US Aircraft Carrier looks like. That'll help them win. Plus they now know that those light colored blobs on the deck of the boat are in actuallity aircraft. If this is the best recon they can do then I'm going to betray my country right now and help Iran out....IRAN go to wikipedia or google and get real pictures of our fighters. There I just helped their recon capabilities 1000 fold. Wow. don't rat me to the feds. You could get more practivle info on our carrier by watching topgun then by staring atthat crappy video.

Seriously how could that video footage help them in any real way. They can fly over our carriers with tiny RC planes that at best could carry a 25 pound dummy bomb. What are they going to do blow a hole through the deck with one of those? I'm sure the catapult system puts more physical stress on the carrier than that little plane could.

They probably couldn't find the carrier if it weren't heading through some strait. Besides take out the carrier. We still have subs. that can launch missiles from underwater where your drones can't see. and they can obliterate your country in a few hours with enough coordination. I doubt that even anti-cruise missile defenses would protect against stealth cruise missiles which we already have or any cruise missile really. We could also take out with enough coordination their air fleet before it even gets to the runway.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 06:00 PM

Originally posted by carnival_of_souls2047
Anybody who thinks Iran has a weapons system that could take out a state-of-the-art U.S. Naval Vessel is simply living in LA-LA Land. Give me a break.

Being state-of-the-art (which it isn't) doesn't make it harder to destroy. Wait until the Iranians deploy a gotland-esque sub and torpedo the hell out of the US fleet. Loss of life is tragic, but that's a realistic scenario when you examine all the facts.

The US can destroy Iran a thousand times over in total war, but that technical and resource superiority does NOT mean safety. Thinking so would be a flaw in your understanding.

Lastly, I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but don't forget the squadron of upgraded Tomcats they have. The combat range of those is incredibly far even by today's standards.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 06:13 PM

Originally posted by SteveRLastly, I know I'm going to get flamed for this, but don't forget the squadron of upgraded Tomcats they have. The combat range of those is incredibly far even by today's standards.

Without adequate supply or maintenance their range is incredibly short, even by Iranian standards. No flames necessary.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 08:15 PM
Sigh. It seems we're all armchair military analysts, flight engineers, political theorists and scientists at the same time.

Well, I'm none of those, and fairly uneducated. But here's what I can deduce folks:

* FACT: Iran has drones. Welcome to the world we live in where a country can buy things from other countries. Think: Russia, Pakistan, China, ad infinauseum.

* FACT: The Straight of Hormuz is the most constricted part of the Persian Gulf and in fact is the point at which Iran would be closest to any ships in the area, including US or other ships.

* FACT: We have carrier battle groups in the Persian Gulf, all of the time, at any given time are traveling through, past and at the Straight of Hormuz.

* THEORY: Iran has a drone. They flew the drone from a military installation or Bandar Abbass International Airport (where military facilities may also exist) and it flew to the edge of accepted Iranian Airspace and took photos of the CBG.

Now, what's exciting here? This is standard practice.

Why didn't we shoot it down? Maybe it was over IRANIAN airspace. Haven't we learned our lessons already?

What if we did shoot it down? Ah, the magic of radio transmissions. Video is converted to information which is transmitted over radio frequencies to a receiving station and is then converted back into video. Shoot it down if you wish, Iran still has the video.


posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 09:18 PM
Pretty good post.. actually!

'You have voted NextLevel for the Way Above Top Secret award.'

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 09:56 PM
I still don't know if this is genuine footage or not.

What a/c are on that carrier?
What carriers are in the gulf?
At what height was that photo taken?
What is the size of the UAV?
Since it was daytime, it is possible that the UAV was observable and audible as well.
It could NOT have been in Iranian waters if that pic is true, because it needed to have been almost over the carrier to take that pic/footage, and that would mean the entire carrier would have to be in Iranian waters..

I can beleive that the russians were capable of pulling off such things but with Iran one needs to observe a bit of caution.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 10:52 PM
Well, judjing from what the guys who have been there said in this thread, this is nothing compared to what really goes on, and is just par for the course.

posted on Nov, 13 2006 @ 11:13 PM
Its called testing the waters my friend..

They probably knew that there weren't any overwhelming coalition forces there, and decided to probe..

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in