It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
-The Senate is processing a resolution (#580) which calls for a number of sanctions on Iran and urges the president to blockade Iran for the purpose of preventing that country from receiving any shipments of refined petroleum. Because of its limited refining capacity, Iran must import 40% of the oil it consumes. The situation echoes memories of the U.S. blockade of Japan over 67 years ago which prevented that country from receiving the oil it needed and which is now considered to have been a factor in Japan's decision to attack Pearl Harbor.
-49 Senators have signed on as co-sponsors of Resolution 580.
-The House of Representatives is processing a resolution (#362) similar to the Senate's, but one that also urges the president to set up a blockade to inspect all people and items entering or leaving Iran and prohibiting Iranian officials from traveling outside the country except for the purpose of nuclear negotiations. In a bulletin published last month, Ron Paul described it as a "virtual war resolution."
-261 Congressmen have signed on as co-sponsors of Resolution 362.
-Three weeks ago, major elements of the U.S. Navy and several other nations including the United Kingdom and France, concluded a naval exercise in the Atlantic, called Brimstone, and described as a dress rehearsal for a blockade of Iran.
-Since then, the following naval assets have been reported to be heading for the Persian Gulf and the other waters abutting Iran:
-the aircraft carrier USS Theodore Roosevelt, with French Naval Rafale fighter jets on board, and her battle group,
-the aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan and her battle group,
-the USS Iwo Jima, an amphibious assault ship,
-the United Kingdom's aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and her battle group,
-and the French nuclear attack submarine Amethyste along with other French ships.
-This armada is joining up with the existing elements of the Fifth Fleet already in the Gulf and its vicinity, which include:
-the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln and her battle group,
-the USS Peleliu and her battle group,
-at least one nuclear attack submarine and a variety of other U.S. ships.
-It has been widely reported in the foreign press that this is the largest naval buildup in the Gulf area since the inception of the war in Iraq.
-Russia recently conducted a naval exercise in the Mediterranean involving at least 11 warships, an unknown number of submarines, the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsoy and the heavy missile cruiser, Moskva, described as the flagship of its Black Sea Fleet. The exercise was conducted out of and supplied by the Russian facilities at the Syrian port of Tartous.....
Originally posted by mr-lizard
Why are we allowing this to happen?
Originally posted by mr-lizard
Yet us the 'little people' are the ones who will suffer one way or another as the demented generals, safe in their bunkers issue the commands that will be responsible for the innumerable, uncountable horrors that humankind will have to face.
When Russian tanks bullied their way into Georgia, debate broke out about what the United States should do.
But what could America do?
Can the U.S. military, so consumed with small wars against terror and insurgencies abroad, wage a big war against a sizable adversary?
Those questions are drawing keen attention seven years after the Sept. 11 attacks, time that has seen America preoccupied with Iraq and Afghanistan. The Army and Marine Corps are retooling on the fly to fight a war on terror.
Those changes come, some worry, at the expense of the capability for full-blown, army-on-army war.
Images of Georgian infantry moving under fire and Russian tanks on the attack show that the days of like armies fighting one another on battlefields are far from over.
What does this mean for the US Army? As it considers its role after Iraq, should it be restructured for war and conflict along the lines of counterinsurgency and nation-building, or toward conventional fighting as represented by the Georgian war?
Armies trained to fight conventional warfare can quickly and effectively shift to counterinsurgency and nation-building. Contrary to popular belief, the US Army proved this in Iraq.