Iran launches assault boats with warning

reply to post by crustas


I believe that if the US has to squash Iran that a deal will be made with Russia and China to keep them on the sidelines. Not really certain what the deal is but it will be far more attractive than a global nuclear war. No winners there. Iranian leadership changes after a short bloody war and new Iranian leaders pickup the pieces.

Originally posted by whywhynot
reply to post by ressiv

 

Lets see, the system was designed to shoot down incoming missiles and aircraft doing better than 500 knots, oh sure a speedboat doing 55 knots will be a great challenge while the system spits out a 1,000 rounds in 20 seconds. You bet.

:-) right missiles and airplains...........but boats? elevation?.blind corner...ect..1000 rounds a second...nice..if they all will hit...
do not forgett that they have to deal with both on the same time...wat will be there priorety the incoming missiles ore the boat...

[edit on 24-8-2010 by ressiv]

reply to post by ressiv


PLEASEEEEE, give me a break. Obviously you can't be convinced by logic or facts. So why even discuss it. I've made my point and you make yourself look silly.

reply to post by Mobius1974


A carrier is protected by a shield of 6 Aegis destroyers and nuclear attack submarines. An Aegis destroyer has an AN/SPY-1 high-capacity radar system that can track more than 100 targets at the same time. An Aegis can fire about 20 anti-missile missiles at the same time. Thus, a career force can track a total of 600 targets at a time and fire 120 anti-missile missiles at the same time. The anti-missile missiles have about 50% success under ideal conditions. In actual battle situations, the hit rate will be much lower and the best estimate is that the Aegis shield can intercept at most 55 incoming missiles. Therefore, a volley of about 60 missiles and rockets will penetrate the Aegis shield and hit the career

to whywhynot...
lolll the worst anemy of the best tank is a single man... by comparismant

BTW the Phalanx is an fully automatic defence system...for fast targets !
it wont even react on an target of at most 55 Mph..





[edit on 24-8-2010 by ressiv]

[edit on 24-8-2010 by ressiv]

[edit on 24-8-2010 by ressiv]

reply to post by whywhynot


I would put all my eggs on a deal between China, Russia and the US.

Both Russia and China are important economic partners with Iran, they will loose if something happens in Iran.

Remember Russia and China are both helping Iran nuclear development!

Those two countries desire that the influence of US in middle east has to decrease.

It is just a matter of time until everything is sorted out.

Just a little note for all you uS Uber Alles video jockies...

The U.S. neoconservative agenda to Sacrifice the Fifth Fleet - The New Pearl Harbor
by Michael E. Salla, M.A., Ph.D.The Bush administration has covered up and ignored dissenting Pentagon war games analysis that suggests an attack on Iran's nuclear or military facilities will lead directly to the annihilation of the Navy's Fifth Fleet now stationed in the Persian Gulf. Lt. General Paul Van Riper led a hypothetical Persian Gulf state in the 2002 Millennium Challenge war games that resulted in the destruction of the Fifth Fleet. His experience and conclusions regarding the vulnerability of the Fifth Fleet to an asymmetrical military conflict and the implications for a war against Iran have been ignored. Neoconservatives within the Bush administration are currently aggressively promoting a range of military actions against Iran that will culminate in it attacking the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet with sophisticated cruise anti-ship missiles. They are ignoring Van Riper's experiences in the Millennium Challenge and how it applies to the current nuclear conflict with Iran.

www.agoracosmopolitan.com...

In other words the profesional opinin is that you would get your @$$ handed to you on a plate.
so much for your opinion.

here's something alittle more recent

What if Iran's hardline leadership emerges from the current confrontations at home strengthened and emboldened? If so, the nuclear issue will be back with a vengeance. And three recent war games focused on the Iranian nuclear weapons issue suggest that the prospects for halting the regime's progress toward nuclear weapons are not good.

The games -- conducted by highly respected Western think tanks -- explored various strategies for preventing the Iranian nuclear threat from becoming real. The results, unfortunately, were uniformly negative. Given that these were serious games played by serious people, officials who deal with the nuclear problem as a matter of real policy would be wise to seriously consider their implications

www.realclearworld.com...

Additionally: In the US military war games scenarios, the great big US couldn't beat little wee Iran without going nuclear.
Just like Vietnam, where the great big Us got thrown out of Vietneam...
Remember all those films of the refugees trying to jump on the fleeing US helicopters on the roof of the US embassy?

oh you thought Rambo won that war...


PS of course all this ignores the fact that Carter and Brzezinski installed the Khomeini when the shaw had outlived his usefulness...just like the Zionists and the CIA installed Bush and then their man Obama

[edit on 24-8-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 24-8-2010 by Danbones]

reply to post by crustas


Iran isn't even on the list:

Table 7: China's Top Trade Partners 2009 ($ billion)
Source: PRC General Administration of Customs, China's Customs Statistics
Rank Country/region Volume % change over 2008
1 United States 298.3 -10.6
2 Japan 228.9 -14.2
3 Hong Kong 174.9 -14.1
4 South Korea 156.2 -16.0
5 Taiwan 106.2 -17.8
6 Germany 105.7 -8.1
7 Australia 60.1 0.7
8 Malaysia 52.0 -3.0
9 Singapore 47.9 -8.8
10 India 43.4 -16.3

Iran is expendable. And don't forget that China already owns about half of the US so don't look for them to destroy themselves.

reply to post by Danbones


You are living in a world of delusion. Your references are not authoritative and are biased. Do you really believe that the true results of a valid and timely war-game would be anything less than Top Secret?

I can see that you have the typical anti US hate theme going so just a waste of time discussing it with you. You are wrong and as a Canadian in the minority of your fellow countrymen.

reply to post by ressiv


Ok using that logic.

200 Little persian speed boats (I cant stop laughing when I say or think this)

Lets say 100 of them actually make it to firing range. (To assume any more would be irresponsible)

These 100 boats will be under extreme fire and bouncing everywhere.
Maybe MAYBE 50 shots fired accuratly..... Our anti missle systems have that # covered...

Now do you really think that 200 boats are possible with advanced weapon systems?

Do you really believe that 100 of them will get into firing range? Or get past our Planes and Helos?

This is such a laughable scenario......Next thing you know... they will be taking on tanks with go karts.

I wonder why no other Govt. has decided to do this with speed boats??
I am lying, I dont wonder... I KNOW!!! this is the single dumbest idea ever... But what is to be expected by a bunch of religious, unevolved
group of ruling idiots!!!!

Wackmadinijihad has heard from his wife "Honey size doesn't matter" So he really really believes this will work... Idiot!

Ever heard of a Phalynx? Those little boats wouldnt stand a chance. Their best bet would be to dump lots of money into land based ship killing missles. China just devloped one that has a 1240 mile range and can cover that distance in 12 minutes. Those little fast boats would be nothing but cannon fodder

reply to post by Danbones


Danbones.... I am not normally bothered by all of your anti USA speeches and jabs... But I must point out, on this one, you ARE dilusional...

Just because you hope that America loses, that does not mean that your hopes are opinions are facts.

I searched your post on google and found a ton of conflicting reports and opinions.

IMVIO Iran would beg for us to stop after less than a week.

I want all out war over there.. Israel/Lebanon/Syria/Turkey/Iran I hope they fight until the death.. That entire area is filled with hate and violence..Everyone is right, they have been fighting for thousands of years, they will still be fighting 1000 years from now..

Lets just get it over with. It is my belief that WW3 needs to take place on a MASSIVE scale, for there to ever be peace in the middle east. Who knows.... There might never be peace... Maybe once we look at religion as dilusional (Because it is) maybe then people will stop fighting over what land god gave them... Or the 12th imam... Or how his religion is better than yours..How rediculous and unevolved! "My god is better than yours"
I subscribe to the god named P.O.T

I understand I am sick and twisted when it comes to WW3 ... I hope it happens...Ill get a big bag of...... no not that.... sour cream and cheddar ruffles and a 1/2 barrel of budlight...I will have a ww3 party at my place.

reply to post by inbound


Oh so you are saying they go 6K mph really? really?
Want to rethink that?

reply to post by ressiv


You my friend, are wrong.. I couldn't find your spin on the Phalanx anywhere... Every thing I found contradicted what you wrote 100%

The Phalanx would smoke those boats in quick fashion!!!!

Block 1B Phalanx Surface Mode (PSUM) incorporates a side mounted Forward Looking Infrared Radar (FLIR) which enables CIWS to engage low slow or hovering aircraft and surface craft. Additionally, the FLIR assists the radar in engaging some ASCM’s bringing a greater chance of ship survivability. Block 1B uses a thermal imager Automatic Acquisition Video Tracker (AAVT) and stablilization system that provide surface mode and electro-optic (EO) angle track. These Block 1B enhancements will allow day/night detection capability and enable the CIWS to engage small surface targets, slow-moving air targets, and helicopters.

Checkmate!!!!

[edit on 24-8-2010 by Mobius1974]

There certainly are some extremely confident people in the audience tonight. Amazing how quickly the lessons of the recent past are forgotten. I know the main point of discussion is the Iranian fast boats, and yes, I also believe they wouldn't last long, but to say that Iran would be begging for mercy after a week is foolish in the extreme. No war has ever, ever been won without a comprehensive land campaign and I just don't think the U.S. can handle that at the moment. To those who want an all-out, hands-untied war, forget it. How much more do you think the American public can stand? Do you really want WWIII? Do you really want 5000 young men and women dying every day? That's a conservative estimate for deaths per day during WWI.

reply to post by moffandrew


Of course the US will need a "comprehensive land campaign" in order to make any headway in a war with Iran, but the trouble isn't going to come from the Iranian Armed Forces proper but afterward from insurgency and guerrilla style tactics, which is an entire different discussion.

The Iranian Army can not stand a fighting chance against the US forces. Remember Iraq in 2003 with their "elite" Republican Guard? Several weeks and we were rolling into Baghdad tearing down the military and government (worst idea ever BTW). The fact is that Iranian forces haven't fought a standing army since the Iran-Iraq War and have since only had to deal with incursions of Kurdish rebels who are not exactly a comparable force to the US.

These "debuts" of Iranian military advancement I see as sad last ditch efforts by the Iranian government to try and show the world that they have "something" to use against any invading forces. They know Israel is pissed about the reactor and any strike by them is going to bring the US en masse behind them. You know as a country that your up to your neck in [snip] if you have to show your hand because you know any invasion would be devastating.

Originally posted by whywhynot
reply to post by crustas

 

Iranian leadership changes after a short bloody war and new Iranian leaders pickup the pieces.

Yep, because that strategy worked really well last time and created a stable, peaceful Iran, right?

While there's not much point debating the issue with people that have already made up their minds, I couldn't help but pitching in with a few thoughts.

Of course the US could defeat Iran's military in a war, but as we've seen in Iraq and Afghanistan, the initial conflict is just the first act. People from these cultures have a much longer collective memory than westerners in general. Their political leaders also tend to have much longer views.

In the case of Afghanistan, they know we will tire of having our young men and women killed and maimed for years on end, and, in the end, the Taliban will return.

I could only see that a conflict with Iran would be like Afghanistan and Iraq combined on steroids. Yes, the US will defeat Iran's military, but does the United States have the cultural stomach to occupy the area for 100 years? Does the US even have the cash?

Lots of questions - I really don't know the answers, but I tend to feel that America's undying support for Israel will wane as time goes on - if not through lack of will, then lack of funds.

Originally posted by mistafaz
reply to post by moffandrew

 

Of course the US will need a "comprehensive land campaign" in order to make any headway in a war with Iran, but the trouble isn't going to come from the Iranian Armed Forces proper but afterward from insurgency and guerrilla style tactics, which is an entire different discussion.

The Iranian Army can not stand a fighting chance against the US forces. Remember Iraq in 2003 with their "elite" Republican Guard? Several weeks and we were rolling into Baghdad tearing down the military and government (worst idea ever BTW). The fact is that Iranian forces haven't fought a standing army since the Iran-Iraq War and have since only had to deal with incursions of Kurdish rebels who are not exactly a comparable force to the US.

These "debuts" of Iranian military advancement I see as sad last ditch efforts by the Iranian government to try and show the world that they have "something" to use against any invading forces. They know Israel is pissed about the reactor and any strike by them is going to bring the US en masse behind them. You know as a country that your up to your neck in [snip] if you have to show your hand because you know any invasion would be devastating.

You've confidently forgotten the Iraq Army laid down their Guns and took off their Iraq uniforms and went back to their abode. This all happened during the early days of the war, Saddam had no army or weaponry of any calibre that could seriously curtail the American Army from advancing into the heart of Baghdad. That is why the movement was so quick and swift not because the American Army was so sophisticated in their actions.

Mate, America tried to wins war by technology in the past, but failed miserably in Vietnam (frequently ye got your asses kicked) and also Korea again the most advanced military in the fifties could not subdue a poorly equipped Chinese force.

What war as a country fighting alone have you won not including the American war of independence or local conflicts with Indians in the 1800's?
Every fight since the 1900's involving your Country as a a nation you were helped by another nation from Europe or elsewhere, and those nations that helped you has been playing war long than your country has been a country!!

American Army, Navy are not some amazing fighting force that Hollywood portrays often. Frequently i think the American Army is over rated and far from exceptional "maybe that is just me? Put your military in the trenches without the technology, see what happens buddy!!

Iran has been fighting wars for 4,000 years and frequently the Iraq army was a spent force after 1990 war. The Iranians will be more stubborn and will not go quietly into the wind. Of course American could stop playing nice and just use your nuclear arsenal and # up the world for the rest of us Europeans.

An Iran and United states or Israel war is not something I want to observe in my lifetime. Anyway who does and wants a war must have a #ty routine and daily life. Think about a nuclear Bomb going off were you are, would you like it? Stop warmongering it silly.

Iran has never attacked another nation in 2,000 years that is an actual historical fact not something you see being reported on Fox News of course!! How many nations has American attacked for their own agenda and masked those real intentions behind a veil of secrecy. There is no freedom or liberty being exported to other countries here Folks

People do have to ask themselves is American since the 1950's become the Fourth Reich? If you don't see it then your just as ignorant as was the German people in the 1920's and 30' Don't drag the rest of us down American Fight among yourself's If that is what you want. Later!!

reply to post by Snappahead


Don't care if its stable and it will be peaceful because all of their armed forces, command and control, and weapons will be gutted. Sure in 5 years they will rebuild and probably need more schooling. Iraq was done crazy wrong. If you go to war you vanquish the enemy.

reply to post by kieran1


You have an interesting memory of WW2.

Just more jealous hate of the good ole' USA.

reply to post by kieran1


No [snip] the Iraqi forces cut and ran when they knew we were coming up against them. They had a taste of our shock and awe back in the 1st Gulf War. It was because of our technology and advance military might that Saddam had no army to fight for him thus our ease in toppling that government. The Iranian military haven't tasted the power of an Air Force's swift boot up their ass. You can be on that!

You seem to be under the impression that WWI and WWII were "America's" wars. Definitely not so since during WWI we went over and kicked ass in the final years of the war because Britain and France weren't exactly capable of holding their own. The in WWII, again... The US came in, with a terrible military compared to the one at the end of the war mind you, and had to come to the help of the the Allies who were failing at the time on all fronts. We ended up completely nuking a country into submission.
And after that? Well, that's different seeing as the enemy was over in their own country sending troops and supplies over the border. And we weren't going into them without pissing off the bigger enemy and starting a new war the same way the last one ended...

Iran's been fighting for over 4,000 years?? Well your gonna have to find me those people that have been fighting for that long cuz they would be OLD! Fighting wars over periods of time mean nothing to how their current military is.

Ethnicity doesn't come with a racial bonus...

And Lord knows Ireland's been "fighting" the same enemy for the past 800+ years and they haven't seen a bonus...

BTW, your ignorance is showing when saying things like:

"maybe that is just me? Put your military in the trenches without the technology, see what happens buddy!!

Technology is the way of warfare. It's the reason why a modern military force doesn't have to fight in the trenches.