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.


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

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:23 AM
This definitely crazy i got a buddy in the military and is waiting until September to get his new orders.... they may be pushing that up... good thing he is a tech and not a grunt.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:28 AM

Originally posted by BigDaveJr
reply to post by Vitchilo

I'm against Royalty also,It's an outmoded concept. The Royal family has been a huge drag on the British economy with all the money Parliament has to shell out to those leeches.

I beg to differ. The Queen has been very good for England economically. Other than the obvious tourism gambit, there is the deeper roots that extend across the whole world. The investment that comes here and the reasons behind it run far deeper than many would guess.

Whether you like the Queen or not, you have to look at the cold hard facts. England would be a weaker place without her.


posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 08:35 AM

Originally posted by tomdham

Originally posted by edgecrusher2199
I would just like to point out that the Eisenhower is coming home within the next of my best friend's launches planes off the carrier.


My Wife's son is on a DDG that is part of the "Ike Strike" group coming home on normal rotation....unless???

I really hope nothing happens, I live right on the water in Abu Dhabi directly across the Gulf from Iran!!
And you think the GoM states have problems with a bit of oil?

I let you guys know (if I can) when I see the mushroom clouds from my bedroom window!


Hi Tom

When do you go on air and on what band / frequency?

I am a Ham too and would like to chat about things over there if they kick off.

Usually I am on 20M, 14.000MHz from 9am to 12pm UK time with Yaesu and Icom HF rigs.

Keep us posted if you see anything interesting!


posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:15 AM
I'm starting to agree with other posters - I think this is more for reinforcing the part of the UN sanctions that allows for cargo inspections. Of course the US will be hoping that Iran "bites" but I don't think this is a fleet designed for an attack on Iran.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:16 AM
reply to post by Curio

Do you think Iran's patients will break and they will lash out when We start boarding their supply ships?

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:22 AM
Seems like there is no end to the global tyranny and terrorism perpetrated by Israels USofA.

Anyone left supporting troops of murder and genocide are no better than them.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:24 AM

Originally posted by BigDaveJr
reply to post by Curio

Do you think Iran's patients will break and they will lash out when We start boarding their supply ships?

I don't know. Iran knows that it would be playing right into US hands if they did something like that. Why would they give the US the excuse they need? Of course, that doesn't rule out the possibility of a situation getting out of would be a tense situation with itchy trigger fingers on both sides.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 09:53 AM
Did you guys see the Castro letter?

It states exactly what is being discussed here. We stop an Iranian ship as part of the embargo and Iran makes good on its threat by sending missiles toward our fleet, the mutual barrage continues and inevitably the conflict turns nuclear very quickly!

There is another thread out today with Castro's "reflections" on the situation.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 10:41 AM
Won't be long now. Looks like they're really gearing up for another war we cant afford against a country where we'd have to kill every one to actually "win"

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:02 AM
Apologies if this has already been posted here is a map that does a fairly good job of summing up recent naval movements.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:36 AM
This is just a battle group change out, nothing more. Everyone is making mountains out of molehills. Fleet changes groups every few months in order to bring in fresh sailors/pilots/marines. The same group can't stay in the gulf for years on end, when they do change it's simply alot of boats in the water until they complete. 2 weeks, their will only be one carrier group in the gulf.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:41 AM
It is scary, when you factor in all that is happening. North Korea, Israel/Gaza, Russian spies in the US caught recently, Russian wargames on the border with China, Royal Navy in Norfolk, naval fleet movements to the Middle East, etc.

Who knows what is normal maneuvering, what is a precursor to military action, and what is the puppet master having fun?

It is actually quite refreshing to see Russia reverse it's acceptance of Iran not complying with normal inspections. Honestly, in a perfect world where you don't factor in insane politicians, the idea of Iran having nuclear reactors to aid in the power management of that country is not a big deal. They should have complied, though. If all they want is energy, then just let people come in and take a look with how you are handling things. Nuclear energy has the potential to affect other countries, besides the one that it is built in...that is why there are inspections. If you aren't committing a crime, then you shouldn't care if someone want's to stop by to take a look at what you are doing.

I just hope to God that war doesn't break out. If Iran is utilizing these reactors simply to get fissionable material for nuclear weapons against any country, Israel or whomever they wish to attack, then something needs to be done. In a perfect world it would be done by a joint US-EU-Russia-China operation, but that will never, ever happen with the current leadership/governments in each country.

So, if an attack occurs, the only way I see total war not starting from an escalation would be that a joint US/Israeli strike was pre-approved by Russia and China. Russia wants to see a strong Iran, but they also do not want a rogue nuclear state near them, which would allow former Soviet satellite states to get hold of nuclear material (which might come to Moscow in one form or the other). China has a bargaining chip in all of this due to it's proximity to the mess going on in North Korea. They will demand to be listened to, and honestly it is a good idea to placate them.

War never solves anything, though, and this will only cause further hatred and terror in the Middle East.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:44 AM
if they are gonna do anything it's gonna have to be in the next four or five days....

according to that article, the nassau will be in the mediterranean sea on the fourth....
giving weight that what we are seeing is just normal troop rotations.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:49 AM

Originally posted by Vitchilo

Originally posted by palg1
reply to post by Vitchilo

No need for name calling. Your post is offensive.

What do you mean? What post? My post about the queen? SCREW THE QUEEN.

The simple concept of ``royalty`` goes against EVERYTHING a freeman stands for.


Thanks again. I do not laugh a lot by these BP times. And by the way, I also think like you.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 11:56 AM

Originally posted by Sm0kinGuns
Won't be long now. Looks like they're really gearing up for another war we cant afford against a country where we'd have to kill every one to actually "win"

That's 70 million of them, and most of them a fighting age and not obese.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:00 PM
Amazing how nobody really cares that the OP article is completely false and the Nassau isn't near the middle east or even scheduled to go there. But meh,


posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:06 PM
reply to post by METACOMET

I've had goggle translate a few of the foreign stories about this....
and the one's that I have translated have put the nassau, off the coast of Iran....
the red sea isn't anywhere near the coast of iran really, saudi arabia, egypt, but well, not iran.

seems someone needs geography lessons or something.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:11 PM
This is a Embargo force,to enforce the economic sanctions imposed on IRAN
Of course the countries involved expect IRAN to contest the blockade with force.
If Iran does that ,then the multi-national blockade force will destroy any and all Iranian military forces along with the nuclear enrichment facilities and the production reactor.
Since a Iran with nuclear weapons guarantees a nuclear war(Iran vs Israel) in the middle east from which most countries get their oil(US included) .
It is better to force the issue now rather than wait for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. and as for the North Koreans they cannot take a crap without China giving them a OK.

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:14 PM

A few minutes ago the Navy has confirmed that the Nassau is indeed joining the 5th fleet.

Release Date: 10/30/2009 2:54:00 PM From USS Nassau Public Affairs

USS NASSAU, At Sea (NNS) -- As part of its Composite Unit Training Exercise (COMPTUEX) 10-2 from Oct. 23-Nov. 17, the Nassau Amphibious Ready Group (NAS ARG), comprised of three ships and the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit, have been hard at work training Sailors and Marines for its upcoming deployment. Planned scenarios will test the group's ability to perform Maritime Security operations (MSO), such as counterpiracy operations, and Maritime Interdiction Operations (MIO), which will enhance both global and theater maritime security. Additionally, ships will simulate strait transits and conduct real world operations such as replenishments at sea and boardings.

The Nassau is trained and equipped for maritime interdiction operations and "strait transits". Adds some credence to those who are claiming the US is going to be boarding and inspecting Iranian ships.

[edit on 29-6-2010 by METACOMET]

posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 12:14 PM

Originally posted by one4all

And as Canadians we support the Queen in every way.

And you dont hear anyone on these forums referring to the President or the Prime Minister in those terms,so this indicates that this individual is also a coward who prefers to insult women of power,sounds like the person had an overbearing parent.

Speak for yourself bud - not all Canadians (in fact most people I know hate those royal Pricks) support the queen as you so formally stated. In fact as far as I'm concerned she and her brood of retards can kiss our collective asses.

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in