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.

 

Why the US Navy will be destroyed in Hormuz

page: 12
58
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   
dblpost
edit on 31-12-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Wish he called me that I love the Hippy chicks



But I just read that Iran (from a last poster) has asked for talks, this is great news lets all be adults about it and use words to sort it out not guns and bombs



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:24 PM
link   
I think before anything ever was within sight of breaking out on the water, that the US will initiate a huge air bombardment, ie neutralize their command and control and naval facilities. This could be facilitated from missile carriers in the Indian ocean out of range of the Iranian forces. To be sure they could respond with all kinds of things on carriers. The scary thing is that any action by either side represents a dangerous escalation that could drag Russia and China into the mix. Few people realize what a short hop it could be from that to an accidental missile launch at the US or Russia, and then we could see a full scale nuclear war that could escalate on the scale of a few minutes. TPTB on both sides are playing Russian Roulette with the world. The last time we were in straits as dire as this was the Cuban missile crisis, and we were lucky to get out of that, this time we might not be, At any rate, the crowd that is advocating turning Iran into a sea of glass isn't stopping to think of the amount of radiation that would release into the atmosphere. Thousands of firestorms would be created, most of the smoke and particulates would be radioactive and the winds would carry it everywhere. All the sudden Asia's food supply is contaminated and you have a billion Chinese with compromised agriculture. And I am sure Iran would bomb the snot out of the Saudi oilfields, so there goes our gasoline. Get ready for 25 dollar a gallon gasoline if you can even get it. Imagine all the truckers parking their rigs because they no longer can afford to run them, then we have food shortages, and pretty soon we are in some deep you know what. I wish people would REALLY think about this, its not going to be pretty for the whole world.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:25 PM
link   
reply to post by boymonkey74
 


Yes that is good, but the warmongers and war profiteers and zionists absolutely do not want any talks. Haliburton certainly does not want any talks, neither do the major contractors.

PS: I'll send some hippy chicks your way lol.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:28 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Redheaded ones please.
Oh and Ron Swanson is a dude
I think that turkey leg wrapped in bacon looks yummy



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


I'm with you 100% on that subject! EVERY cocky nation who says they are "the biggest and best" have been defeated over time.....Pride comes before a fall!! Look at the story of David and Goliath, little shepherd boy with a sling and a stone.......Giant Philistine with sword, shield and armored head to toe (well, except the forhead! haha).....and we know the rest of that story!! 'Nough Said



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   
You are aware that Iran has what is considered a "green water Navy," made up of archaic ships from a multitude of different nations, including the U.S.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Double-post.

To add while I'm here, they don't even have a green water Navy, it's between a brown/green water Navy, meaning they're only capable of barely supporting their own ports.
edit on 31-12-2011 by DocEmrick because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Can we stop arguing with this troll....I mean the OP. He has never served in the military, he gets all his info for the internet, he knows nothing of battle strategy and if those of us that are in the military did have info to prove him wrong can't and wouldn't post anything here because of OPSEC. If Iran was attacked Russia WILL NOT do a damn thing physically to try and stop us. They would probably supply Iran but they would shoot a single shot them selves. Do the people of Russia want a war with the US? No is a simple answer. Now the OP is going to ask me for proof and probably act like a child when he responds but that's what he does. You ask for proof, I say go get a clearance and look it up for yourself.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
I think there is a chance that the Iranians could pull off a successful strike on a carrier group using a massed missile attack of some sort.It was pointed out, however, that the USN would probably strike first and that would imply the traditional shock and awe using airpower and missile strikes on the command structure and important targets, including shore based launch sites and the larger ships of the Iranian navy. The existence of USN PT boats was also pointed out, and these could prevent short range ASM attacks. If the Iranian Navy does in fact have long range ASMs like the Exocets that can be put onto their missile boats, and a significant quantity of these boats survive an American retaliation after they close the strait, a well timed David Weber scale massive missile attack could potentially overwhelm the battle-group's point defense system and get some hits in. Odds are with the USN, though



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by OptimusSubprime
 


Iranian coastline is lined with thousands of missiles. The Strait of Hormuz is only 34 miles wide. Any US ships in the gulf are sitting ducks. Iran doesn't even have to use speed boats. They can just launch 100 missiles at your aircraft carrier and the carrier will be toast. The aircraft carrier can now stop every single incoming missile? Wow. I remember a single speedboat loaded with explosives took out the USS Cole with no trouble at all. What do you think a swarm of speed boats armed with missiles will do? Carrier defense systems are about as good as US defenses on 9/11, they are weak. Once Iran launches 100 missiles at a carrier using a combination of land based missiles & speed boats, that carrier is finished. Read the Millenium 2000 report.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
The u.s.military may defeat Iran in the strait of hormuz but it will show the world who the real aggressors are, Russia and China's support for Iran will be stronger and it'll cost the u.s. another trillion in debt, so even if military victory was guaranteed there will still be negative repercussions for america.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:39 PM
link   
The ability of a nations military to wage war on the sea is contingent on its ability to maintain a navy and also aircraft/missles. This means not only airfields..but dock facilities as well as replenishment for the same.

This leaves the army or land forces mostly out of this role or scenerio except as horsepower to replenish the air force and navy.


Suggest some of you research a Iranian port called Bandar Abbas. It is a very interesting base or port adjacent to an island called Qushm Island. I do not know exactly how many ports of call the Iranians have but the key here is also ports of call with extensive dockside repair facilities.

If I can find this so too can the US Navy as well as other intelligence gathering groups. Also where and how do they receive their replenishment supplies?? How do the Iranians transport and warehouse them??

Do you people think our military...air force as well as navy..even the army has not thought this through..looked up this information's.
I can guarantee you that if we have looked it up the Israelis most certainly have.

How is the nations electricity generated..including the nuclear plant which just went on line in a city or district called Helyelah on Google Earth...though it is called the Bousheher nuclear plant. You can see it clearly from the satellite.

As to the carriers top speed..I can tell you that the USS Enterprise is the fastest of the carriers. Ironically she is also the oldest of the nuclear boats. For she was designed to transit the Panama Canal...therefore she is more narrow across the width than are the Nimitz class. Not as much water resistance. But none of them are slow..by a long shot.

Remember what happened to the USS Nimitz in the 1980s when an aircraft crash landed on the flight deck during night operations. Some fourteen men were killed in this accident. It happened about 1am in the morning.
Give an hour or two to get the situation under control...the ship then turned around and made a bee line back to her port in Norfolk, Virginia. This accident took place down off the coast of Florida..at night. By 1pm/2pm the next day ..she was tying up at Norfolk. Wow!!! How fast was the ship capable of running?? Mind you now..she does not make this transit close to shore with such a huge wake. Furthermore...when coming into this harbor, though she was given immediate clearance, she still had to slow down when entering this harbor due to her significant wake.
This history told me that these carriers can move out much much faster than we are ever told. Fast enough to do rooster tails in the manner of Miss Budweiser.

How long driving the speed limit would it take you on interstate 95 to drive from Virginia down to the middle of Florida??? Think it through!! And back in those days the speed limit was 55MPH. I think to day it is mostly 65MPH.

Just some additional information's.

Some of you do know the escort ships in a carrier battle fleet are carrying cruise missiles..yes?? So too with some of the Submarine escorts...yes??

I don't worry about our Navy so much. I worry more about our leadership. Most of it of late has been in the pits. Literally!! No leadership..mostly drama queens. They are dividers..not uniters.
I do not believe our current crop of leadership would go to defend the loss of an aircraft carrier and crew.
They seem to be more worried about home grown terrorism/dissent than external threats.

Also bear this in mind..much of our top military leadership are political appointees..not necessarily military leaders first. We tend to find this out quickly when we go to war. Unfortunately at the expense of our finest blood before we pull our heads out of our backsides and finally appoint shooters to leadership positions instead of politicians. When the wars are over ..we get rid of the shooters and put in politicians again and the cycle repeats.

This Marine General gives me the impression of a shooter first. I was not totally aware until reading the article that he was on the OP FOR.

I am the type of person who believes Pearl Harbor was known ahead of time and allowed to occur.
That certain events are allowed and encouraged in order to achieve certain objectives. I do not believe in the random roll of the dice history. But that is just me...none of you have to buy into that.

If we have to lose a carrier to achieve our objectives of our bought and purchased government...so it will be.
The question in my mind is which one will it be?? And how many Americans will catch on this time around?? Or will we once again jump on the emotional bandwagon without thinking...just like after 9/11.

Think folks..don't emote and wave flags...think.

Orangetom



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   
Naval warfare is up for grabs. Technology is just so advanced its hard to doge or hide from anything. Submarines will be the key.

The president would be stupid to engage with a Task Force (Carrier Fleet) with any other fleet.

Strike Force (Cruisers / Destroyers) should be the ones to engage. Most of those would probably end up dead.

The true power of the US arsenal are the submarines.
edit on 04/30/2011 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Having done 6 deployments to the Persian Gulf, all on carriers, I can assure you that Iran's speed boats are no match for the 25 .50 cal mounts, the minimum of 4 SH-60 Seahawk Helicopters with .50 cal, GAU-17 miniguns and Hellfire missiles, the destroyers with the same weapons capability, Tomahawks, Harpoons, and torpedoes. If I had a dime for every time an Iranian speedboat made a run at my ship I would be a rich man. It is almost impossible to sink a Nimitz class carrier. Bottom line is that Iran is no match for the U.S. Navy. Oh, I almost forgot... an aircraft carrier, as a last resort, can outrun a speedboat. A Nimitz Class carrier can reach speeds in excess of 70 mph with no problem. Also, if I had a dime for every time Iran threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz I would be very rich. This is nothing new... in fact this news story made me yawn, and so does the "analysis" provided in the OP.


THANK YOU!!! I used to work with a man who served as a jet mechanic on nuclear carriers. He explained that if the control rods are pulled out, there is more heat and more steam. No upper limit, he said. He would not tell me what the top speed of a nuclear carrier was, but he did say crew were not allowed on the flight deck while the ship was underway at speed. I guessed 90 mph, and he did not contracict me. Now I feel vindicated.

However, if said carrier reaches 70 - 90 mph to outrun a speedboat, it will NOT outrun said speedboat's missile. US Navy loses. Think it through.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:44 PM
link   

edit on 31-12-2011 by yamammasamonkey because: Answered wrong thread



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by randomname
 


I was the number 1 attack team leader for the Flying Squad aboard the Ex USS Kitty Hawk. The flying squad is the ships fire department, carriers can eat several cruise missiles she'll more than likely get gutted but not sink. Torpedo's are the carriers nemesis and I won't be able to go deeper into that.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
I`m getting a creppy feeling we're going to see a repeat of the USS Libery incident , God I prey not



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by NoClue206
 


Noclue , Russia would most likely not get involved in the Iran war. It WILL get involved if we intercede in Syria. It may not be Total War , but Russia and the US will collide either through Naval power , or air power.

Limited Warfare.

Both sides know Nukes are a very last resort and will not be launched fullishly. It would take more than the US and Russia blowing up a Carrier to cause Nuclear / Biological warfare. At least we hope.
edit on 04/30/2011 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join