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.

 

Report: U.S., Israeli warships cross Suez Canal toward Red Sea

page: 4
21
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by thebulldog
reply to post by CommandoJoe
 


This was a well reasoned and thoughtful post and though I have nothing to add to the discussion I thought a little recognition of a diplomatic post was warranted.

Cheers


Thanks. I generally avoid posting in most anti-Israel threads because it seems that if anyone supports Israel they are assumed to be working for the "Megaphone" and it becomes a never ending & exhausting argument. But every once and a while I try to throw my unique perspective out there...




posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Ben81
 

don't they usually travel with a variety of those ships as a group???
if there are 12 us ships traveling together, I would bet that there are many types in there....

12 battleships sounds like it would be just too redundant.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 08:20 PM
link   
The U.S.A and Allies are setting up there missle defence systems.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by CommandoJoe
 


No, of course not. Nor would I allow them to bulldoze my homes and land. As for using crude weapons? You use what you have when you feel threatened enough. And as for using people, I believe it was the Israelis who first used human shields. It was taught to the others. At any rate, I don't take either side. No one is wise enough to untangle this mess. Israel needs to stay out of Gaza, whether they feel threatened by their crude rockets or not. Then maybe they'll have the upper hand. Right now, they do not. Not by a long stretch.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
You, my friend are EXACTLY right. Nothing to see here-this is routine....like my man says, if you see 3 carrier groups then its time to start paying attention.




Originally posted by schuyler
No Big Deal. Really. This happens every six months or so like clockwork. The Harry S Truman, CVN-75 and its entire strike group, about a dozen ships is headed for the 5th fleet area of operations to relieve the Dwight D Eisenhower, CVN-69.

There is ALWAYS, repeat, ALWAYS a Carrier Strike Group and an Amphibious Ready Group/Marine Expeditionary Group (MEG) on station near the Red Sea. They need relieved every few months. East Coast based carriers nearly always traverse the Suez Canal to go on station. West Coast carriers usually come from the other direction.

A Carrier Strike Group is composed on a carrier plus several support ships including several Arleigh-Burke class destroyers, at least one Cruiser (which these days is really just a slightly larger destroyer), a fast combat support ship for supplies, and a fast attack submarine. This configuration uses the coordinated Aegis defense system basically to protect the carrier.

MEG is basically Marines with helicopters and and amphibious vessels based on an LHA or LHD, which is basically a carrier for choppers. They are a little smaller than the CVNs (60,000 or so tons instead of 100,000) They are capable of making a ground assault like on Iwo Jima. Once again, there is always one of these with support ships in the Fifth Fleet Area of Responsibility (AOR).

Just wait. In a few days the Eisenhower will be headed home. The only time you need to be concerned about this kind of ship movement is if three carrier strike groups are in the same place at the same time. That is significant and worth your consideration.

This is not.



posted on Jun, 19 2010 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by SquirrelNutz

Originally posted by Marrr



REPORT : 12 U.S Battleships & 1 Israeli Vessel Cross Suez Canal Towards Red Sea


12Battleships????
We haven't had any Battleships on active duty for well over a decade.


Not true...

U.S deploys battleships ahead of controversial North Korean long-range missile test
[3 months ago]



I read the daily mail article you cited, and I'm sorry to say that you are wrong good sir. The media has a way of exaggerating things to increase the flair of their articles. MSM sources always use terms that will stir some kind of emotional response in the readers. Terms like "battleship," when referring to any navy ship, or in terms of gun control, they use the term "assault rifle," for any firearm used in a crime when it actually isn't.

There's a picture in that article you cited of one of the Navy ships, and it's listed as the guided-missile destroyer U.S.S. John S. McCain. Even though it is technically a ship of battle, it is't a battle ship. It's just a destroyer with anti-air capabilities. That's like saying an apple is the same thing as a watermelon just because they are both frutis.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 12:28 AM
link   
This appears to me to be a strategic deployment of battle assets ahead of a strike. If you go back a few days (or week er so) you might remember that Saudi Arabia green lighted the passage of Israeli aircraft over it's territory for use in an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. This is likely part of that same strategic deployment.

Edit: It is likely a group of cruiser(s), destroyers and frigates. The cruiser holds the basic function of what battleships used to, but is smaller and focuses on battle domination through advanced technology / weaponry instead of brute size and armament.

I don't think this has anything to do with the Gaza naval blockade.

They are positioning battle assets for a strike on Iranian nuclear facilities (and the likely military retaliation by Iran).

[edit on 20-6-2010 by pirhanna]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 04:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by cosmicpixie

...Interesting timing with the Iranian ships having just set sail . I can't find any other articles about it on google news yet but this is only just coming out I gather . Can we try and find out the name of these ships, when they set sail, where they were stationed before making their way here - what is this all about, is America flexing its muscles here ?


I am hearing the drums.....


I've been hearing drums since this Iran WMD ploy hit the media some years ago now and the game plan has progressed along the same lines as the Iraq one since then. However, I'm now fairly convinced that the master plan includes a depression with WW3 chaser (or is it the other way around!)

I'm truly impressed by Damon Vrabel's Renaissance 2.0 series of lectures starting with YouTube - Renaissance 2.0: Lesson 1 - Revisiting American History - Financial Empire

The extremely interesting bits start at Lesson 5 where Damon explains that war is on the cards as part of the overall scheme.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
You, my friend are EXACTLY right. Nothing to see here-this is routine....like my man says, if you see 3 carrier groups then its time to start paying attention.


Yeah, just moving the chess pieces around the board. Nothing to see here.

I believe the last of the big US battleships was the USS Missouri, which was taken out of active service in 1998, and is now permanently moored in Hawaii.

[edit on 20/6/2010 by Silver Shadow]



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Maybe they're joing the rest of the international armada in the Gulf of Aden where there are Iranian warships as well. If anybody remembers the Somali pirate fiasco that went on then became suddenly quiet a few moths ago. Something fishy was going on in Yemen with tha electro magnetic anomoly. I doubt the reason for all the ships in Aden was for the Somali pirates. I also bet this is where these ships are heading. I've been wrong many times in my life though.


Just a thought.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Violater1
 


Actually closer to cruise liners with ski boat speed.
Oh yeah and lots u armament.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by pirhanna
you might remember that Saudi Arabia green lighted the passage of Israeli aircraft over it's territory for use in an attack on Iranian nuclear facilities. This is likely part of that same strategic deployment.


Yes like you i read that one but look again and i think you will find it's a lie.

I don't think i would want to be on the ship from iserail if trouble breaks out but it's more than likly going to be bait and none of gods chosen few are going to be aboard.

Remember who is attacking who here and forget to ask were did iserail get it's nukess from.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Marrr
 


they call them battleships because that's the arabic translation. Probably just cruisers.



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by disfugured
 


some of those ships are due to come home soon. it's quite possible that these ships (at least the american ones are those that will relieve the ones there.
although, have no idea why there would be on lonely isreali ship amoung them...

maybe they were just tagging along for the extra security, or hoping no one would notice it...



posted on Jun, 20 2010 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Israel will never be the man that the US is is. It will always be a little pu$$y getting dad to do the work for it. Always starting trouble so dad can come in and fix the problem. We need to kick israel out of the house its grown up enough, let it handle its own situation, tired of fighting its battles and seeing fellow americans die.

Israel is nothing without the US and they know it.



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 10:44 AM
link   
this is just a standard carrier and support group , what is the big fuss, I srael has used the canal for at least 20 years , how else to you think there ships get from tel aviv for example to eilat?,,,fly?

A military escort is standard along the canal for a ship or group of this type ....ostensibly to stop terrorist attack....



[edit on 21-6-2010 by gambon]



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by SquirrelNutz
 


Hmmph.

A battleship is a class of ship not generic term for a mixed bag of ships within a fleet. The US no longer sails "Battleships". The article you provided clearly identifies the ships deployed as guided missile cruisers and other mid sized ships.

Here are a few different classes of ships by size aircraft carrier... battleship... destroyer... cruiser... friggit... corvette, etc....



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by LieBuster
 


Do you just say things just to say them? Your one of those people that ASSUME the states gave them their nukes... I know I know.. It doesn't fit the anti USA and anti Israel mumbo jumbo that some fools like to claim as fact! I am going to give you some info, so you can sound somewhat intillegent next time you speak of Israel nukes.

On 3 October 1957, France and Israel signed a revised agreement calling for France to build a 24 MWt reactor (although the cooling systems and waste facilities were designed to handle three times that power) and, in protocols that were not committed to paper, a chemical reprocessing plant. This complex was constructed in secret, and outside the IAEA inspection regime, by French and Israeli technicians at Dimona, in the Negev desert under the leadership of Col. Manes Pratt of the IDF Ordinance Corps.

Both the scale of the project and the secrecy involved made the construction of Dimona a massive undertaking. A new intelligence agency, the Office of Science Liasons,(LEKEM) was created to provide security and intelligence for the project. At the height construction, some 1,500 Israelis some French workers were employed building Dimona. To maintain secrecy, French customs officials were told that the largest of the reactor components, such as the reactor tank, were part of a desalinization plant bound for Latin America. In addition, after buying heavy water from Norway on the condition that it not be transferred to a third country, the French Air Force secretly flew as much as four tons of the substance to Israel.



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by brisk002
 

What a bad headline. Aside from that, all it really says is that it was a drill or an exercise. War on Iran has been imminent for a long time, at least a decade now...no longer...since sometime in the Clinton years. Then sly-as-a-fox Ahmadinejad will make a lot of noise and call world attention it again and Israel and the U.S. will back off again for a while again. And then they'll repeat that cycle. They've been playing this game forever. When it finally happens, it'll be like...oh...no shock.



[edit on 21-6-2010 by ~Lucidity]




top topics



 
21
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join