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.

 

Third US carrier, 4,000 Marines augment US armada opposite Iran

page: 11
43
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solace
I see that you seem to have a fixation about submarines...


And you seem to have a fixation on Zion/Zionists/Zionism... Most of your posts in this thread mention it at least once. Did you get beat up by a Jewish kid in grade school or something?




posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by CommandoJoe

Originally posted by Solace
I see that you seem to have a fixation about submarines...


And you seem to have a fixation on Zion/Zionists/Zionism... Most of your posts in this thread mention it at least once. Did you get beat up by a Jewish kid in grade school or something?


Well, I know the IDF is tough, and the Israeli military is ruthless, but here in the US, if you mention getting beat up by a Jewish kid it is worse than getting beat up by a girl! I can't begin to imagine a US Jewish kid beating up anything but themselves?



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready

Originally posted by CommandoJoe

Originally posted by Solace
I see that you seem to have a fixation about submarines...


And you seem to have a fixation on Zion/Zionists/Zionism... Most of your posts in this thread mention it at least once. Did you get beat up by a Jewish kid in grade school or something?


Well, I know the IDF is tough, and the Israeli military is ruthless, but here in the US, if you mention getting beat up by a Jewish kid it is worse than getting beat up by a girl! I can't begin to imagine a US Jewish kid beating up anything but themselves?


LOL - It must have been a Jewish girl that beat him up then...
That's why he has such a problem with Zion..



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by memarf1
 


It sounds to me like you are an American. And have watched to much discovery channel.

Iran will go ballistic as soon as they pick up the massive coordinated assault. Iran is not hiding while the US fleet is present.

Iran will target the fleet with everything they got. Iran does know where the fleet is, and have without doubt plotted the locations into their systems. Iran at this stage is probably more prepared to strike the US fleet than the US is ready to strike Iran. Iran have being preparing for this event for the last 7 years.

The US fleet is more important to Iran than any US ground troops stationed anywhere else. Without Air support the US ground troops are fair game for Iran. If the fleet is damaged to the degree that it cant sustain a fighting capability. It would take the US at least a week or two to ship a new fleet the to Gulf. Iran's location on the map makes it very hard for the US to resupply efficiently. Unless they scale up massively.



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by dbates
 


lol THANK YOU FOR POSTINGNG THAT PIC AND NAME OF THAT GUY i rember watching cnn coverage of the war with iraq but i seem to rember they claimed killing him 4 diffrent times it was priceless thank you again this thread needed a good laugh



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Solace
 


ok IF we take your post as true which i personally don't believe is the case ok they can detect the b1 but can they hit it? no they don't have the range(show me one weapon they have that can hit targets that high) and ok they have ICBMs....they MAYBE get one or at most TWO major us citys yes this is bad but then that would probably be the only situation in which we would probably turn there country into glass or more likely the us would go back to carpet bombing ww2 style and do it conventionally to show them OK you nuked us we don't even need to nuke you back we can level you conventionally and IF they did nuke is with an ICBM any and all sympathy for them would go right out the window and then America gets a free hand i mean come on is that what u want a valid excuse to use nuclear weapons against Iran? if they nuke it will be the last act of the that country i PERSONALLY believe that the next country to use nukes will be the last just my own two cents



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Solace
 


more along the lines that people just got tired of u not citeing anything and just blabering your nonsense and fyi i woudlnt be suprised if those dolphins could tow away the mines im ok with you underestimateing us thats fine but dont underestimate one of the smartest creatures in the sea i dont think two many people will be too sad that you wont be posting maby it will calm things down and we can get some real information not disinformation

sorry for feeding the troll but it was getting old he prolay just created just a new user name allready

[edit on 1-7-2010 by KilrathiLG]



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 


Well, I am an American and I do watch the discovery channel but I have done lots and lots of reading on this topic as well. You are right, Iran does know our troops are there and they do know the locations of our fleets and ships, however it does not matter. As I stated above and posted with sources, our ships will be far out of range for them. Our ground troops may be fair game but it is pretty naive to think they don't already have air support. Plus, if you read any of the additional above comments, mine or others, you would see that the Iranian AF is no match for the assets we already have in the region.

Additionally, someone already talked about Iran preparing for this fight, although they claimed 25 years not the merely 7 you claim. You must realize we have been preparing for war for 70 years and our soldiers have been war hardened for the past 20. Iran hasn't been in a fight since the early 1980's. They are out of practice and don't have the necessary equipment to sustain any kind of a threat to our assets.

It is also true that Iran has ICBM's but they do not have Nuclear war.s and they do not have a great range. Their ICBM's are only medium ranged and they wouldn't launch them at our ships. Those types of missiles are large, expensive, and cumbersome and not even close to ideal for the precise aim it would require to hit a ship. Using those missles would be a huge waist of their resources as we would simply shoot them down.

Please, read the past several pages of posts and I won't need to repeat this sort of response again. haha. Thank you for the post though.

[edit on 1-7-2010 by memarf1]



posted on Jul, 1 2010 @ 11:48 PM
link   


Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates last week said in a speech that the U.S. Navy is facing asymmetric warfare threats and questioned whether naval forces that are very expensive should be pared back.





Gates told the Navy League on May 3 that U.S. enemies are “investing in weapons designed to neutralize U.S. advantages, to deny our military freedom of action while potentially threatening America's primary means of projecting power: our bases, sea and air assets, and the networks that support them.”


Src:www.worldtribune.com...

Nothing to worry about, our carriers are indestructible. All you ATS experts should debate Gates about this. Straight from the horses mouth admits that our carriers are becoming obsolete.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 12:59 AM
link   
well that is what we did in ww2 "old war horses need to go out in the blaze of glory" "what better way than to put them up as bait," "2 birds with one stone" "out with the old in with the new" i wonder if any new "big ships" are completed, cvn 78-81? i know the last ones cvn 76 Ronald Reagan cvn 77 George hw Bush are at sea or should be, but are they combat ready? if they are then that would explain a lot as well.no news on new air craft, navy or air force, but i think there going to be eye openers, and what is the "word" on the "stealth" ship has it gone "op" ?



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 03:27 AM
link   
i know its allready a thread but www.abovetopsecret.com... this thread shows what the real threat to iran is and what were probably realy gonna hit iran with if we do like that earlier poster said yeah you can launch missiles but u cant kill what u cant find and u cant kill subs with missiles! torpedoes mines etc but not missiles!

[edit on 2-7-2010 by KilrathiLG]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Maybe slightly off topic, sorry, but is there any way you can develop / use Nukes without the silly radiation?

Surely they can combine something together to make the big bang without the aftermath?

Just wondered why you supposedly get so much bad stuff afterwards?



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by spy66
 



Without Air support the US ground troops are fair game for Iran. If the fleet is damaged to the degree that it cant sustain a fighting capability. It would take the US at least a week or two to ship a new fleet the to Gulf.


What we launch from aircraft carriers is close air support, and small target sorties. It is really a quick, first-strike capability, a dog fighting capability, and troop support capability.

The vast majority of our air based firepower never sets down on anything other than US soil. They launch from inside the US, the refuel in air, they hit their targets, and they fly home.

There is no way that Iran can do significant damage to a Carrier Battle Group, but even if they did, it would not effect our Air Superiority. The heavy weapons come from the US Mainland, and we have land-based air support in Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Italy, Germany, and others. Our Air Bases are everywhere!

This whole discussion is a lot to do about nothing.
1. It is silly to debate whether or not the US military might would prevail, that is a given.
2. It has been shown by numerous folks that we in fact DO NOT have 3 CG in the area.
3. The US has been using Israel as an attack dog for decades. Any attack would originate there, and the US would only defend Israel, not mount an offensive.
4. IF, big IF, but IF we chose to attack Iran, and we amassed troops and hardware somewhere, you can bet your last dollar that the attack would originate from somewhere else. Look at both Iraq invasions, read Sun Tsu, read any of Petraeus' stuff. You don't telegraph you movements a. of time. You draw the defenses to a known point....you force them to defend a certain vulnerable area, then you attack where they are not defended, you use the few to overwhelm the many, you cause misdirection and create chaos, then you attack with order. You take the whole, you don't decimate the resources.

Iran last fought Iraq to a draw in the 80's. Since that time, the US defeated Iraq'a military in 2 weeks, (twice!) they defeated and uprooted the Taliban in Afghanistan in 3 weeks, we have written and re-written the books on Urban Warefare, we have advanced 3 or 4 generations of weaponry while imposing sanctions on everyone else and preventing advances. We have unveiled extremely advanced high-tech stealth technology, which means we have 6th and 7th generation already operational, else we would never have released specs on our 5th generation. We have space based weapons, body armor....

hell Israel has FORCEFIELDS for God's sake!!
elderofziyon.blogspot.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.gopusa.com...



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 08:36 AM
link   
If the USN wants to defeat the IRI Navy in the Strait of Hormuz and keep it from being blockaded, they would have to take out the following:


  1. Coastal missile batteries
  2. Fast attack craft
  3. Enemy fighters


And at night, to maximize the odds, because the USN has the night fighting capability. Superbugs could drop PGMs or fire Harpoons onto Iranian fast attack craft and sink them, and protect the CBGs from Iranian air attack.




posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by memarf1

You give far too much credit to the plans of our enemies. It is true we were caught off guard in 9/11 but I think these complex plans are simply too cumbersome.

[edit on 1-7-2010 by memarf1]




The west has been led to believe they are facing off with just another Moslem country in the middle east...

Behind the Ayatollahs, and Mullahs... is the Koran... but behind the decision to use the Koran to maintain an orderly society are the Sufi. The descendants and beneficiaries of the secret orders of ancient Babylon. The keepers of the wisdom behind the Persian Empire.

They were who the Mujaddein (spelling?) in Afghanistan would goto for counsel when THEY had a problem in Afghanistan against the Russians that they could not solve.

There was a Russian tank commander that had a knack, a gift, if you will, to guess, correctly which valley of hundreds the Afghani troops were refitting and resupplying in. He managed to catch the Mujaddein with their pants down once too many times. So they went to a big time Sufi and asked him for help.

That same tank commander was being interviewed before being relieved of duty by the new guy sent because they thought he was losing it... and while he was railing about the power of the mind, and was adamant that 'someone' was trying to 'kill him' with their mind.... he collapsed with a massive heart attack, dead as a stone


The definition of the Sufi The sufi is one who is a lover of Truth, who by means of love and devotion moves towards the Truth, towards the perfection which all are truly seeking. As necessitated by love's jealousy, the sufi is taken away from all except the Truth.
LINK


[edit on 2-7-2010 by seataka]

[edit on 2-7-2010 by seataka]



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 03:47 PM
link   
reply to post by seataka
 


Have you not seen "The Men Who Stare At Goats"? We have magic people too! hahaha.

I'm really not concerned over these people with mystical mind powers since we have F-35's and B-2 bombers supported by Supercarriers and many other countless other military equipment. I have not heard of any cleric that has been able to stop a good old fashioned American Made missile, bomb, or bullet.

They can ask for all the advice in the world from ancient Persian sources but you must remember that our soldiers have 20 years experience in constant fighting, our commanders have 40 years experience in the art of war, and all of our military and many of our regular citizens have read the same ancient books with the same worn out tactics and strategies that you claim would assist Iran with defeating us. The difference is that after reading those books our commanders and generals have written and tested numerous NEW tactics and strategies on numerous battlefields.

Excellent points GetReadyAlready, this argument makes no sense. Many times in this thread these arguments have already been made and soundly defeated, and you are also correct that its a HUGE IF for us attacking Iran. Not even to mention, AGAIN, that there is only 1 carrier group in the area that is relieved every 6 months when all this discussion will once AGAIN be restarted.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by minkey53
 
a year or so ago the air force did just it was off the coast of Florida if i remember one big TNT bomb looked like a nuke though, have not sen any info on it other than what was on the web.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by minkey53
 
a year or so ago the air force did just it was off the coast of Florida if i remember one big TNT bomb looked like a nuke though, have not sen any info on it other than what was on the web.



One giant TNT bomb, like the MOAB is still not a nuke.

The answer is no. With our current technology the only way to create a nuclear explosion results in a lot of radiation. Now, radiation is not as scary as it seems. It mostly gets washed and blown away and absorbed into the ground within 2 weeks, much quicker with rains. You can go outside in a couple of days as long as you are covered and avoid breathing the dust.

Nothing in Physics says that we can't eventually learn how to make a nuclear explosion (it is actually an "implosion" first, then it creates the chain-reaction "explosion"), without radiation. We may figure it out at some point. We may even master Fusion and make the Fission bombs obsolete.

IMHO, large scale explosions are a thing of the past. We are now on to more and more precision surgical attacks, stealth, electronic warfare, and economic warfare. There is really no need to blow the living hell out of you enemy, because you create global political chaos, and you lose the spoils of the country you were attacking. Plus, most of us now realize that the governments are evil, not the population, so why kill the population?



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 05:47 PM
link   
There is a defense against the tomahawk. It is the Pantsir S-1, I believe Iran has like 19 of those..it is designed specifically for precision guided munitions, its main purpose is to stop the Jdams and cruise missles. Whereas the s400 designed to attack the aircraft dropping the bombs/missles..

But I still think that Iran will lose because their are simply so many tomahawks and a saturation attack might take place unless the russians supplied the iranians with more pantysirs than I know about, or have them configured in weird arrangements to defend against tomahawks.

This is the same type of attack that the Iranians can use to sink a carrier.



posted on Jul, 2 2010 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


We would need a different kind of fission or fusion to make it non-radioactive because most of the destruction comes from neutrons being released and those are what are left behind as radiation. I don't know of a way in Physics that would make it possible to not have radiation left over but I suppose it isn't impossible.

Just an FYI though, we have been using Fusion bombs, not Fission bombs, since 1951. Here is a wikipedia link, but there is a ton of this on the net to find:
en.wikipedia.org...

The major destruction still comes from a lot of fission but we fuse hydrogen to get it. Don't forget though, we have even more powerful things out there now:
en.wikipedia.org...

Neutron bombs are very powerful and scary things! There are talks of 3rd generation nuclear bombs but they are mostly rumors and most of the nuclear treaties around the world prohibit the research. (not that that makes us stop though)




top topics



 
43
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join