Crew on board the aircraft carrier USS Eisenhower are on alert in the Arabian Sea

IF they attack, it will be AN AIR ATTACK. No invasion, no nothing. And that, the US CAN DO IT. The people will be VERY angry, but you'll need a false-flag operation to have support, IF they care about having one, which they don't seem to with Iraq.

Nobody speaking of an invasion, it depends if they pull a big false-flag in the US with biological or nuclear attack... if so, they won't need a draft, a lot of americans will get in the military to go in Iran without whinning.

The point is that if this is only a show of force, it's not working, Iran won't back down until the US let the iranians enrich uranium on their own soil, and that is very unlikely with Bush in power.

On the other hand, you have all this for an attack on Iran. Maybe Israël will start it, then Iran retaliate, then US attacks.

Sorry, but I don't believe criminals liars, so I'll go with the attack option. You don't put there 4 strikes groups, with all the support for just a showdown. And airtankers arrived in the region this week for supplying... yeah right.

Sixth aircraft carrier now in striking distance of Iran and Syria

The USS Abraham Lincoln arrived in the Arabian Sea on the weekend, putting a sixth US aircraft carrier battle group within striking distance of Iraq and Syria, military officials said today.

northcoast.mindsay.com...

Bush Fooled Us with the same Monkey talk to go into IRAQ
Are we going to sit back and let him do it again?
Or
Is it really to late and by the time the lawyers
in Washington get done arguing
IF he has the power, The Iran War will be in full swing??

Perhaps its finally getting ready to go off, it might as well since the play clock for Bush is running down. At this point I would be more interested in where our nuclear capable submarines are than surface ships, those are the show piece, the scary stuff is what probably is near some coast and ready to make launch depth to fire of a few birds.

I really fail to see why everybody has such a problem with the US stance of not letting Iran build a nuclear program; every time some news filters out of Tehran it seems to be about how either the US is evil or how they want to blow Israel off the map, so whats wrong with putting boot to arse to save the lives of a bunch of Israelis? Is it because people have some problem with the Jews, or is it because its just popular to act like the US is the big bully on the block pushing poor little Iran around?

Any other time the US sits on its hands about some terrible situation like Dafur, etc we get slapped around in the world media for not doing anything, so now theres a nut job who probably is giving serious consideration to nuking Israel and we have a shot at helping them neutralize this threat before it gets any worse and everybody thinks its a bad thing? People need to make up their mind if they want to save lives or let them die, but this pick and choose nonsense isn't doing anybody any favors.

While the idea of adding another carrier to the mix, it could just be that the Eisenhower is relieving one of the other carrier groups. That has happened before. While most of the time it happens where the one carrier starts steaming back to the US, the other one waits for it to come back. I have seen in my military career a time when one boat started steaming to the gulf to relieve another. It possible that its there as some show of force to Iran as well. But we've been touting that muscle for year to the irainians.
So although it looks fishy, it could very well be one carrier giving another a break.

-Aza

Originally posted by Helig

Any other time the US sits on its hands about some terrible situation like Dafur, etc we get slapped around in the world media for not doing anything, so now theres a nut job who probably is giving serious consideration to nuking Israel and we have a shot at helping them neutralize this threat before it gets any worse and everybody thinks its a bad thing? People need to make up their mind if they want to save lives or let them die, but this pick and choose nonsense isn't doing anybody any favors.

Thats some pretty convoluted logic right there. Pick and choose nonsense..? You choose the option where the bad guy is making speeches and leave the one where half a million people have died.

Darfur is tragic no doubt, but a nuclear exchange and regional nightmare in the Middle East, is on a global scale far less appealing. You really don't want to see Russia, China, etc.. getting involved militarily. That could be WWIII.

Mod Edit: Quoting Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 27-3-2007 by sanctum]

Just found this on CNN.com. I'm sure it's just sabre rattling, but seems we're hearing more and more about Iran these days. Weapons coming from Iran, British troops kidnapped. Got a lot of things like these before we did anything about Bosnia, Afganistan, or before we actually invaded Iraq or Afganistan. Might be only a matter of time now.

__________

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) -- The U.S. Navy on Tuesday began its largest demonstration of force in the Persian Gulf since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, led by a pair of aircraft carriers and backed by warplanes flying simulated attack maneuvers off the coast of Iran.

The maneuvers bring together two strike groups of U.S. warships and more than 100 U.S. warplanes to conduct simulated air warfare in the crowded Gulf shipping lanes.

The U.S. exercises come just four days after Iran's capture of 15 British sailors and marines who Iran said had strayed into Iranian waters near the Gulf. Britain and the U.S. Navy have insisted the British sailors were operating in Iraqi waters...continues cnn.com

Mod Edit: Quoting Etiquette – Please Review This Link.

mod edit to add "ex" tags
Quote Reference.

Also inserted link.

[edit on 27-3-2007 by sanctum]

is it possible to update your site or take away the old information. The USS Eisenhower is currently on deployment and some of the Navy Moms saw this site and kind of freaked out not realizing the comments were from 2007. Thank You

Another 2+ year old thread brought front and center!

Has anything happened in the region as yet to bring the thread to the front?

Would be nice to have a thread start date within the title area of these threads, as they are becoming more prevalent. And no, I did not search this thread out, but looked into it as first glance it looked interesting for current events...but neither interesting, nor current.

First off, since 2003, all of you ATSers have always been saying "somethings going to happen" in so-and-so and at this time. It has never, I repeat NEVER, materialized.

Why? Because we don't live in a simple, conspiratorial world. Even the neocon Bush administration, hell-bent on changing the world, couldn't bring themselves to do it and they even prevented Israel from doing so. It never happened because TPTB know that any "limited attack" (which, in the context of Iran, is an oxymoron) will open a can of cobra snakes. Imagine Vietnam and the results of "escalation." Imagine the consequences of Vietnam, but 100 times worse. Even if a "limited" attack is successful, it will ultimately be nullified by the Hell we'll bring upon America and our allies, which will then eventually force us to head back into Iran... you get the picture.

Most experts do not see military force as a viable option. Most importantly, if the Bush administration couldn't bring themselves to do it, Obama will most definitely not do it. It would be the undoing of America.

To inject some reality into this thread, take a look at the links below:

Experts Speak: No Good Military Options in Iran

And this article, written in 2006, probably says it the best:

What Would War Look Like?

When you look at the facts and only the facts, a war with Iran seems not only very unlikely, but farther down the list of concerns as well. I would be worried about Afghanistan, Pakistan, and North Korea 10 times more than Iran or even the Middle East.

Looks like you'll be waiting for ever, as there's no justification whatsoever for attacking Iran and if the axis of evil; American, British & Israeli governments step over that line, then they are in breach of international law and I sincerely hope they get their just rewards if they do attack Iran.

Iran to host nuclear disarmament conference as new sanctions loom

www.guardian.co.uk...

Classic, I love it, stick two fingers up at the western goverments. I would do exactly the same. Somehow I bet Israel won't be attending, as they don't believe in nuclear disarmament, as they continue to build their nukes in secrecy.

www.nti.org...

The F-22 has recently entered service, I believe. I think it'd be interesting to see what a squadron of those could do to the Iranian Air Force, even if they did have working F-14s and working AIM-54s. While we have the ability to completely wipe out their conventional military and installations, it stops there. We do not have anywhere near enough man power to occupy even half the country, and if we attack them, i'm sure the calls for Jihads in the Middle East will fall upon less and less deaf ears. Our troops, once inside their cities, would probably see an onslaught we have not yet seen in Iraq. The attacks in Iraq would also worsen, and who knows how Syria and Israel would react, or China/Russia should we tamper with the oil there.

Decimation and complete air superiority. Those things are amazing. I know there are some pretty impressive demonstration vids out there.

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

Just a few for you guys. Instant air superiority as soon as a squadron lifts off. Simply amazing machine. I remember down at Patrick AFB in Florida when I saw my first F-117 flyby...I was sitting in traffic to get in the gates.

So between the F-22, F-117, B-1 and B-2 if anything goes down with Iran I think they will be bombed back to the stone age. Quite a shame too, since they just emerged from the stone age, only to go back so soon.

This is why you don't make predictions, people. Cause, despite what you might want to happen, there's no way of knowing the future.

Even if it seems obvious that A leads to B leads to C, you can not say that because A has occurred, C is right around the corner.



We could all learn something from this thread -- stick to the facts. Leave the crystal ball to the mediums.

Try researching the term"stone age". Also study up on Persia for a while. I really enjoy posts that judge countries sophistication based on their weaponry.

Originally posted by Acid_Burn2009

So between the F-22, F-117, B-1 and B-2 if anything goes down with Iran I think they will be bombed back to the stone age. Quite a shame too, since they just emerged from the stone age, only to go back so soon.

I would have prefered to have just left the stone age when I still have knowledge of how to survive, because when a first world collapses, its people have forgotten how to survive and first thing they will do is turn on themselves like animals.
Will the US citizens know how to survive when the price of oil reaches over $500 dollars a barrel?
you can bet that China will win the bidding war for what ever oil is on the market after shipping becomes almost impossible due to suicide attacks on tankers as well as shipping lanes being closed.