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: 4
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 03:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

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.



Bingo! He shows the traits of a Narcissistic dictator. I have noted a trend in the middle east of the people getting fed up up with it. Perhaps they're starting to come of age themselves. Either way this bit with the ships is no biggy.




posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 03:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by MissCoyote

As the Obama administration continues to favour the Iranian regime and that is just sick......link her..........www.huffingtonpost.co.uk...


this might be why they dismissed it.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 03:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by MissCoyote
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 .quarters 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...



Perhaps the U.S government thinks along the lines of better the devil you know. One thing history shows in that region is that when one psycho goes there's a power vacume left behind and the next nutter is usually worse.

The biggest baddest psychopath rules.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 03:12 AM
link   
im sick of my country going crazy..........i want a deserted island.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 03:21 AM
link   
reply to post by MissCoyote
 


You wold think the US should know better on this part -

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.


Because of this -
'Torricelli Principle' ties CIA agents' hands


The article linked is from the Free Republic website since im not able to find the law to post here just yet. It basically stated that the CIA could not do business with any person who had / operated within a criminal element. If the CIA has an informant telling us a nuke was being snuck into the US, and that source is part of a criminal element (organization etc), the CIA could get in trouble for even talking to the person.

This law made as much sense as gun control.....

Yeah.... because criminals follow the law...



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul
 


US active forces are 1.47 million and reserves at 1.45 million as of July. (including Coast Guard)

siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil...

1,226,638 active forces were in CONUS as of June. (not including Coast Guard)

207,674 were OCONUS.

siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil...



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 05:09 AM
link   
Some of the comments here in this thread are insane.

Iran is no threat to America whatsoever, Israel yes, BUT not America, for a start Iran doesn't have the means to orconstraight any kind of attack on America, they are a defensive nation.

Pakistan are America's real concern.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by MissCoyote
 


never under estimate an enemy

kx



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
reply to post by chrisd250
 


Two things to address here:


our country spends way more than double the amount of money china does on defense spending.


China hasn't QE'd their way to a weak currency, and owns roughly 80% of our debt, If we are to believe the MSM and the AMs figures...and ...reverting to the "If we are to believe" statement above, how in pluperfect hell do you "know" what china spends its money on? By watching Fox news? CNN? Al Jazeraa? The RT? MSNBC?

Or are you on the senate subcommittee on international defense intelligence?

Either way, it is healthy to remain skeptical. Try not to factor "logic" in to any possible actions by others. Emotions drive most action, not calculated thought. Kamakazi Pilots were not "logical", nor are radical "suicide" bombers. What they are, is committed, driven, and hopeless. And, when people lose hope, they LOSE IT.

PS...Im not FEARMONGERING, I am simply trying to deny ignorance....

Ignorance is not the issue. The issue is that so many "know" so much that isn't so...



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 06:47 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.
reply to post by EvanJP
 


Evan, thanks for a sane post. As I stated above, regurgitated MSM reports do not pass for an "understanding" of foreign monetary policy, nor do distorted concepts of the "BDT"...(Bigger..D...Theory)

Never underestimate an enemy. Cornwallis learned that from the colonials.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Ummmm NEGATIVE. The US military is MUCH larger, stronger, potent (insert superlative here) than Iran's military and that isnt Frat boy big dick thinking, thats the TRUTH no two ways about it. If you cant handle it or dont like it, then thats your problem but the US military is still the best out there. SOrry.

Coarry on fantasy land bashing......



Originally posted by EvanJP
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.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 08:56 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMaverick
 


Those words are so true.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 09:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Ummmm NEGATIVE. The US military is MUCH larger, stronger, potent (insert superlative here) than Iran's military and that isnt Frat boy big dick thinking, thats the TRUTH no two ways about it. If you cant handle it or dont like it, then thats your problem but the US military is still the best out there. SOrry.

Coarry on fantasy land bashing......



Originally posted by EvanJP
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.



Yes Iran wouldn't stand a chance. However it's not unknown for the nut to crack the sledgehammer.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 09:55 AM
link   
For them to pull this off, they would have to go past India then the Horn of Africa. I am sure there are plenty of ships out there patrolling those waters. And if they got past it, they would have go all the way down the coast of East Africa, where American ships are patrolling, then they would have to back up through the Atlantic where a lot of other ships are patrolling.

Yeah, I could see them pulling this off. (sarcasm). They would have better luck if they just used commercial ships. Remember the Boston Tea Party? Those men dressed like Mohican Indians. Disguise, disguise, disguise. That is what you do if you would otherwise be obvious.
edit on 9/29/2011 by WarminIndy because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 10:08 AM
link   
Just for kicks-lets compare the US to China (much less Iran):

People's Liberation Army Main Battle Tanks:

5,000 Type 59: PLA version of the Soviet T-54/55, 1st gen
200 Type 69/79: Upgraded Type 59s, 1st gen
450 Type 88: Upgraded Type 79, 2nd gen
2,000+ Type 96: (Primary Main Battle Tank), 3rd gen
800 Type 99: Designed after the Gulf War to take on M1 Abrams, 3rd gen

US Main Battle Tanks:

4,796 M1A1 Abrams, they have annihilated Type 59s toType 88s in Iraq and elsewhere, 3rd gen
1,547 M1A2 Abrams, considered one of the top 3 tanks in the world (Challenger 2 and Leopard 2A6 being the other two), 3rd gen

That is 6,343 3rd generation main battle tanks in the US arsenal. The PLA only have 800 tanks that are designed to be able to fight the M1 Abrams. The US would blitz the PLA GF on the battlefield.


People's Liberation Army, Combat Aircraft: (Navy and Air Force combined)

290 Q-5: Based on the Mig-19, 2nd Gen
114 JH-7: Designed to replace the Q-5, compete with the F-111, 3rd gen
220 J-7: Based on the Mig-21, 3rd gen
180 J-8: Designed to compete with the F-105, 3rd gen
69 Su-27(Russian): Designed to compete with the F-15, 4th gen
120 J-11: Based on the Su-27. Designed to compete with F-16s and and F-15s, 4th gen
97 Su-30MKK(Russian): Designed to compete with F-15s, 4th gen
190 J-10: Designed to compete with the Su-27 and Mig-29, 4th gen

US Combat Aircraft:

335 A-10, 3rd gen
1,789 F-16, 4th gen
647 F/A-18 Hornets, 4th gen
391 F/A-18 Super Hornets, 4th gen
734 F-15C/D Eagles, 4th gen
220+ F-15E, 4th gen
173 F-22, 5th gen

We have more F-16s then they have of total combat aircraft. It should be noted that the US has more combat airpower than Russia and China combined, this is intentional in order for the US to have air supremacy in the event we had to fight both nations at the same time.

People's Liberation Army, Strategic Bombers:

110 H-6, Chinese version of the Tu-16, each carries 20,000 lbs of ordnance

US Strategic Bombers:

94 B-52, each carries 70,000 lbs of ordnance
65 B-1B, each can carry 125,000 lbs of ordnance
20 B-2, each can hold 50,000 lbs of ordnance

That combines to almost 16 million lbs. in one sortie. It would take less than 500 sorties to drop the same level of ordnance that allied forces dropped on Europe in World War II from 1939-1945.

I shouldn't even go into the naval aspect since the PLA navy is frankly a complete joke, but for amusement here it is.

PLA Navy Warships:

1 Aircraft Carrier
26 Destroyers
51 Frigates
12 Nuclear Subs
48 Conventional Subs

US Navy Warships:

11 Super Carriers (Note the US is the only nation that uses massive Super Carriers, each with 70 F/A-Hornets.)
10 Amphibious Assault Ships (Similar in size to China's single carrier, each carries thousands of US Marines, amphibious assault vehicles, gunships, etc. )
73 Nuclear Subs
22 Cruisers
61 Destroyers
27 Frigates



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by AnIntellectualRedneck
reply to post by MissCoyote
 


Given what's happened to their neighbors, Iran would have to be crazy enough to eat hats for them to use nukes. Yes, they would do damage, yes they would hurt a lot of people...and then the U.S. would probably commit a small genocide.


Hey hey hey... There is nothing small about turning Iran into the world's largest parking lot!.

I mean I never said Iran was the smartest nation on earth but I doubt they are completely suicidal.... They want to live.... LIVE!!



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by fooks
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.





No need for that. Iran can sail to our coasts, there is nothing wrong with that. International Law gives them the right to stay in international waters, just like it does our vessels. I seriously doubt that Iran has vessels and logistics to even do the trip is my point.

Their Kilo Class subs (3) have a range of 7,500 NM and their Destroyers (3) have a range of 6,500 NM without refueling.Those are really the only ships they would be able to even attempt the trip with. It doesn't appear they have the logistical navy ships to carry out deep water missions, that's the big point. Iran's Navy

Even if they went through the Suez, they would barely have even fuel to make it here. They could not make the trip around the Horn of Africa easily either, if at all. Not too many friendly ports on the way, Syria and Venezuela are the only two I can think of. Their fleet is not a deep water fleet, it's a coastal fleet. And I seriously doubt Iran would take any of the top 6 ships in it's Navy and try the trip with the US 5th Fleet basically off Iran's coast, the US 6th Fleet in the Mediterranean and the US 2nd and 4th Fleets in the Atlantic and Caribbean. I'm sure we would post a couple Carrier Battle Groups off Iran just to make them nervous, in international waters of course. You don't really want to play naval games with the World's undisputed Naval Force.





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

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



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 11:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil

Originally posted by fooks
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.





No need for that. Iran can sail to our coasts, there is nothing wrong with that. International Law gives them the right to stay in international waters, just like it does our vessels. I seriously doubt that Iran has vessels and logistics to even do the trip is my point.

Their Kilo Class subs (3) have a range of 7,500 NM and their Destroyers (3) have a range of 6,500 NM without refueling.Those are really the only ships they would be able to even attempt the trip with. It doesn't appear they have the logistical navy ships to carry out deep water missions, that's the big point. Iran's Navy

Even if they went through the Suez, they would barely have even fuel to make it here. They could not make the trip around the Horn of Africa easily either, if at all. Not too many friendly ports on the way, Syria and Venezuela are the only two I can think of. Their fleet is not a deep water fleet, it's a coastal fleet. And I seriously doubt Iran would take any of the top 6 ships in it's Navy and try the trip with the US 5th Fleet basically off Iran's coast, the US 6th Fleet in the Mediterranean and the US 2nd and 4th Fleets in the Atlantic and Caribbean. I'm sure we would post a couple Carrier Battle Groups off Iran just to make them nervous, in international waters of course. You don't really want to play naval games with the World's undisputed Naval Force.





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

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


Unless they bought subs from the Nazis who have been hiding on their moon base? (ok, sarcasm again).

And don't forget the British Navy is also patrolling out there (not sarcasm).



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


First off, read this, and then talk to family members that you have in Iraq, if any.
www.informationclearinghouse.info...

Our troops don't call shots, if Iran were to strike, the government would not alert the public, we would be duped. Size doesn't matter, our government WANTS a new enemy because our general public wants to see the children that they raised come HOME after fighting a useless war that held no merit to begin with.

US troops at CC cannot even carry loaded firearms... But... Corporately hired mercenaries stationed to "protect" at CC are allowed to? They wear nametags on thier shoulder that will say "Fred147".. Yet most are not even from the US, so yeah... Thinking most mercenaries from Uganda don't have names like Fred and Rick. Let us not forget that the troops coming forward to talk about this only describe how sick and twisted these contractors are. Oh yeah, and no press is allowed what so ever, into Central Command.

All I am saying is that, a large military is useless when used incorrectly, abused, and all around manipulated into a corporate entity that restricts our own soldiers from carrying thier own firearms at central command.

Go a. and talk to some soldiers who have had tours and been stationed at central command, you will hear the same story over and over. Suicides are common, albeit they usually are NOT suicides, our servicewomen are being raped by superiors, we have foreign, corporate mercenaries at USCC in Iraq, and they are the only ones carrying loaded weapons.. Sounds pretty fishy.

Get OVER the LARGE aspect, and look at the facts, generals don't call shots, real soldiers have been ousted from the chain of command, bottom line.

Get your books out, take a few notes, and zip up your pants my friend. You ain't in Kansas no more.



posted on Sep, 29 2011 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Lets not get too far off topic here.

Iran is just doing this to make a point, that if we can go offshore of other countries, so can they, and yes they can. All this speculation about what ifs, and how long will it take our military to destroy them, or what will China and Russia do are very far fetched scenarios.... We will let them visit the Atlantic and that will be it.

Or so we hope anyway.




top topics



 
14
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join