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.

 

White House, experts dismiss Iran naval threat to U.S. coast

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 28 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
After reading the article, the question should be could they pull it off. Consider this, the logistics of moving a military ship across a large distance is something that has to be carefully planned.

Beyond having the manpower and the actual vessel to make the journey, they would have to worry about feeding and then keeping said vessel fueled. Then they have to get into position and all the while, maintaining vigilence, as the US would be watching, and monitoring there movements.

Even during the cold war, the US and the Soviets were playing a game of chess out in the open waters, shadowing the other and seeing what and where they could go.

It would be interesting to see if they could pull it off, and then the answer as to who their allies are in the area would definately be answered.




posted on Sep, 28 2011 @ 11:22 PM
link   
They tell you not to worry when they come from the sea but that you should panic at the airport checkpoints. So are the TSA the real terrorists?

I say we load the TSA onto the Iranian boats to scan/radiate them.
edit on 28/9/2011 by Planet teleX because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 28 2011 @ 11:58 PM
link   
reply to post by MissCoyote
 


Nah.. Iran doesn't have nukes. No worries.



posted on Sep, 28 2011 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by sdcigarpig
After reading the article, the question should be could they pull it off. Consider this, the logistics of moving a military ship across a large distance is something that has to be carefully planned.

Beyond having the manpower and the actual vessel to make the journey, they would have to worry about feeding and then keeping said vessel fueled. Then they have to get into position and all the while, maintaining vigilence, as the US would be watching, and monitoring there movements.

Even during the cold war, the US and the Soviets were playing a game of chess out in the open waters, shadowing the other and seeing what and where they could go.

It would be interesting to see if they could pull it off, and then the answer as to who their allies are in the area would definately be answered.


If you think that every single military entity hasn't planned, war gamed, and think tanked anything you can come up with you're crazy.

Of course Iran has a plan to survive in the open waters, and aside from all that, I believe that plan is (like I said at least but most likely) China. Russia has an interest, at least as much interest as it does for any other country. Why would Russia not sit back and wage petroleum and economic warfare off the cuff? It's not the first time a nation was 'neutral' only to later be found the opposite. I'm sure everyone saw right through them then too? Right?




posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 12:34 AM
link   
I want to say one thing, and then a few more;

People need to stop thinking in terms of "our military is larger, they shouldn't mess with us"
This is frat boy "my dick is bigger so obviously I am a better #" mentality.
Also, this just sounds ignorant considering two facts, first off, you are on ATS, online, and sitting at a computer. Don't even try and act like you are a part of the fighting force.

In the end, you remind me of the people already in charge, insane people that think justification accrues with a larger stick.

Get serious about this. Iran obviously fears the threat of invasion, hence setting up a naval presence off of U.S. shores. In doing so they would be able to launch an attack on U.S. soil in an instant response, it makes sense to me. Not killing innocent civilians, that doesn't make sense, but I can see this being the shadow-puppet scenario happening in the background.

And yes, if the White House tells me that it isn't a big deal, then it most likely is.
edit on 29-9-2011 by EvanJP because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 01:19 AM
link   
iran confirmed to have weapons, 14 miles from the coast is as far as they can come, they have absolutely no problem with suicidal missions, and they are working on bigger better diggs yes we truthfully need to stop playing MC. HAMMERS Can't touch this song in the background. its giant size bs



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by MissCoyote


Ummmmmmmmmmm........doesn't Iran have nukes and you mean to tell me your not even the lease bit worried. We freaked at planes flying into our buildings. But your not afraid of the little guy has the U.S. never heard the phrase the BIGGER THEY ARE THE HARDER THEY FALL! hello I am sorry but that would have me shaking in my boots. oh wait we have all our troops over there so the enemy can scope out the diggs since we left the door unlocked. and with all the additional links i have you really can't tell me your even a little scared. or maybe its just a friendly propaganda ploy brought to you by our wonderful U.S. government fear mongering tactics.

www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)


our country spends way more than double the amount of money china does on defense spending. we have 300 million people, china has 1.2 billion people...knowing these facts, do you REALLY think that iran, whose defense budget is propbably a drop in the bucket compared to ours, really stands much if any chance at all in making it close to us? i dont know about you, but im pretty sure trillions of dollars a year probably makes you the baddest mofo on the block when it comes to defense...this is why i am not worried.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 01:26 AM
link   
reply to post by chrisd250
 


or it makes you the biggest terrorist threat on the block.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Calex1987

Originally posted by sbctinfantry
So what are you all going to say if Iran's navy gets blown out of the water, and China and Russia step in?

That's what's going to happen if we fire a shot, Washington knows this. Iran knows this. The Pentagon surely knows this by now.


china would go bankrupt without your spending and would never get there trillion back so they wont even look at you they may beat there chest but withen the best interest is to leave you alone and well russia...they wouldnt risk there skin for iran. even germany wants a piece of iran....


I agree. China and Russia will give lip service to Iran but that is all. In the really big picture our relationships with each of those countries is worth far more than Iran.

Personally, I would think it would be a huge stretch for Iran's coastal navy to make all the way over to the U.S. Seaboard. I just don't think they have the ships and the logistics to do it. Not too many ports they will be able to refuel at on the way over.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:14 AM
link   
Hmm.. well I don't think Iran would try anything honestly, but wasn't there a near simultaneous announcement that they had new cruise missiles that were able to sink warships?

Also..USS Cole?



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


yeah thats what spawned my female alarm system, but i was accused of fear mongering a scare tactics when that wasn't the case its called being a girl



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:20 AM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 


yes and our coast guard and national guard could take care of them.


no need for the navy. although it would be a lot quicker and less humiliating for the iranians.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:30 AM
link   
Here's some critical thought.

Perhaps Iran is sending ships to display power, however crazy it is, for the benefit of its own people rather than to put fear into the people of the U.S.

As for nuclear Iran does have a program. And the world does need to worry simply because the MAD aspect which has stopped any nuclear attack in the past most likely would mean nothing to a middle eastern country purely because alot of those countries find it acceptable to wipe themsleves out in order to destroy an enemy because thay believe that their own people will be myrterd.

It's dangerous for us if we apply western psychology to an irrational enemy.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Planet teleX
They tell you not to worry when they come from the sea but that you should panic at the airport checkpoints. So are the TSA the real terrorists?

I say we load the TSA onto the Iranian boats to scan/radiate them.
edit on 28/9/2011 by Planet teleX because: (no reason given)


There is a distinct difference in coming through the airport and coming ashore from a foreign military naval vessel. One of those actions is going to be an overt act of war.

reply to post by steveknows
 


Thats a possibility however Ahmadenijad is facing increasing pressure from the Iranian people because of decisions like that. When Ahmadenijad plowed forward with the nuke program, resulting in sanctions and other issues, it affected the Iranian people.

I think we are seeing a distinct divide occuring in Iran -
The government and what they want -
The Iranian people and whats pissing them off.
edit on 29-9-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-9-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


stars for you and steve im getting some real thoughts on this instead of a testostrone hose down.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Planet teleX
They tell you not to worry when they come from the sea but that you should panic at the airport checkpoints. So are the TSA the real terrorists?

I say we load the TSA onto the Iranian boats to scan/radiate them.
edit on 28/9/2011 by Planet teleX because: (no reason given)


There is a distinct difference in coming through the airport and coming ashor from a foreign military naval vessel. One of those actions is going to be an overt act of war.

reply to post by steveknows
 


Thats a possibility however Ahmadenijad is facing increasing pressure from the Iranian people because of decisions like that. When Ahmadenijad plowed forward with the nuke program, resulting in sanctions and other issues, it affected the Iranian people.

I think we are seeing a distinct divide occuring in Iran -
The government and what they want -
The Iranian people and whats pissing them off.
edit on 29-9-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



It's true what you say and this is why I think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is sending a message to his own people rather than to the U.S. If I can send war ships to the U.S what can I do to you?

Mind you they wouldn't even need to get near the U.S. All they'd need is a picture of U.S ships approaching their navy on the way and it would show Iran that they had the nuts to do it.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:49 AM
link   
fear mongering the iranians



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by steveknows
It's true what you say and this is why I think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is sending a message to his own people rather than to the U.S. If I can send war ships to the U.S what can I do to you?

Mind you they wouldn't even need to get near the U.S. All they'd need is a picture of U.S ships approaching their navy on the way and it would show Iran that they had the nuts to do it.


Good point.. A propoganda win would go a lot farther than an actual military encounter. If Iran wishes to take to the high seas maybe we should invite them into some of the naval exercises the US and Allied countries hold. Their navy is considered a brown water navy (close to shore - territorial projection of force) and even though they are attempting to upgrade it, they are still behind the curve.

Even the propoganda picture, with everything going on over their, would most likely not be well received. Again their domestic issues are pretty stressed right now, and it could be viewed by the people as why confront the US over there when we are having energy / food / infrastructure issues here.

Sending the navy to the US, at least to me, appears to be nothing more than a vanity exercise on the part of Ahmadenijad. He, imo, sees the world game of political chess as personal instead of national. Everything he does appears to revolve around his image and not Irans.

Add that to the issues between Ahmadenijad and the Ayatollah, and we come back to a foreign distraction for the Iranian people to concentrate on. Any time the pressure is turned on Ahmadenijad, something on the international front seems to make its way into his news cycle.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 03:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


and i'm sure they will go under protest.


"you want us to go where?!!!

"are you crazy!!!"


"whose friggin idea was that?!!"


edit on 29-9-2011 by fooks because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Severe reporting restrictions on all foreign media means journalists are relying more than ever on the public to find out what's going on across Iran.

Most of the memorable footage from Iran was shot by the public on mobile phones.

At the peak of the crisis the BBC was receiving more than five videos every minute from Iran.

But the number of people contacting us has now dwindled dramatically after reports of intimidation and concern about the authorities tapping phones and tracing IP addresses of internet users.

Threats to citizen journalists

Some Iranians who've been in contact with the BBC are now afraid to use telephones after an automated message was left on answer-machines warning them they were breaking Islamic law if they had any contact with foreign media.

But despite threats people are still uploading videos onto sites such as YouTube - which is more difficult to trace. Others have already paid the price of being in touch with the media. A long-standing contact in Tehran had been keeping us across events in the capital since the election.

But this week she wrote to say: "I've been fired from work. I can't give you any more info right now. They have been going into our computers at work and found out that I'd emailed you. Wish me luck."

Struggle for information

Many have turned to instant messaging as a safer alternative to emails and telephones. We spoke to someone who told us they'd been arrested, held overnight and beaten for carrying a camcorder on the street.

With the international media locked out of Iran - it's down to the citizen-journalists to keep the rest of the world in the picture.

As authorities take a harder line it's going to be much more difficult to get these images out of Iran.



news.bbc.co.uk...

As the Obama administration continues to favour the Iranian regime of the ayatollahs, over the Iranian people, one has to question how in command of the reality of the situation, the President of the USA is. .

For some years, the Iranian freedom movement has been asking America to stop hindering its progress with backroom deals with, and appeasement of, the Iranian regime. There are certain sanctions against the regime, as opposed to of the people, which could help the movement, but apart from that they do not want assistance from America for what Iranians view as their internal struggle. One of the ways in which America is, knowingly, hindering the whole freedom movement in Iran, is in its listing of the key group, the MEK/PMOI (Mojahedin-e-Khalq), as a terrorist organisation! Furthermore this listing was only imposed as recently as 1997 and at the behest of the Iranian regime, as one of the bargaining chips in the USA's soft, and ineffective, approach to dealing with the Ayatollah led government in Tehran. Furthermore, Iran even persuaded the USA in 2003 to bomb the MEK headquarters that was located a safe distance inside Iraq!

Had the USA supported the MEK, then with this stronger lever in their hands they would have been able to apply more effective pressure on Iran, instead of which the USA has rendered itself almost impotent in its dealings with the mullahs. Change is always ultimately from within to be successful. It is probably fair to say that, worldwide there are strong reservations about American interventions which are often perceived as imperialistic and mis-managed.

and that is just sick......link her..........www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...




top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join