Why the US Navy will be destroyed in Hormuz

Is it just my imagination or are a lot of people thirsty for WW3? Or some major conflict...

Are we hardwired to love war?

reply to post by Wide-Eyes


Im just going to be honest here. WW3 WILL happen. I am just ready to get it over with before technology gets to far ahead.

Originally posted by orangetom1999
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.

The Enterprise has a beam of 132 feet at the waterline, the Panama Canal locks are 110 feet wide, not to mention it exceeds the length of the locks. It will not be able to fit through the Canal even when the Third Lock Project is completed later this decade raising the width limit to 180 feet as their superstructures are too wide.

Every (most, many, quite a few - at least) teenage boy thinks he discovered sex.

Every (most, many, quite a few - at least) young soldier thinks his army is different, his war is new, his country is not like the countries others read about in history.

Smart old soldiers know that is not true. They know war is war and the tools are different but human flesh is the same as it was three million years ago when the first man ape hit the second man ape in the head with a rock.

The day "they" decided US troops should fight in Korea after WWII they did not, and I am talking about the politicians, young soldiers and even some old soldiers, think that there would be...

36,940 US dead
92,134 US wounded
3,737 US MIA
4,439 US POW

At the end.

Wiki - Korean War

Were they "serving" their country? No!
Did they win anything? No!
Was it worth even a skinned knee? No?

If you are not old enough to know anything about the Korean war and how badly the strategists were at figuring out what was going to happen then you better read about it before you sign-up or worse sign-on someone else to fire even a single shot near Iran.

I am not saying Iran can defeat the US Navy or that Iran would not come out way worse but Korea was supposed to be a cake walk and it was until the other side (including China decided to actually fight) then it was not. Vietnam was a disaster and so is / was Iraq.

I have to remind you - just like the illegal invasion of Iraq - it is Israel that wants this war and the Israel lobby is conning the American public into it.

These threads are always interesting, and it's good to hear from people who take genuine interest in this sort of thing. Unfortunately, as always seems to be the case, the thread is ruined by brainwashed Yanks who think they can beat the world with 1 carrier.

Navy ships and the subs that escort them carry nuclear warheads.

The last war the US decisively won, was ended by Nukes. That was also the last war where nations targeted population centers instead of containing them to military and strategic targets. The US didn't either 'win' or finish the Korean war, the Vietnam war, the Iraqi war, or any war since WWII. There was no victory parade for the military returning from Iraq since it was an early withdrawal.

If there was an overwhelming attack on the US Navy, the world would be shocked at repeatedly played news clips of Nuclear explosions in Iran.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


The Chinese sub surfaced in the Kitty Hawk battle group. By that point in time she was missing a blade from one of the screws and had a hole in the port side large enough to drive a Blazer through without scratching the paint. The guys on our 688's had said they could detect us easily outside of 40,000 yards. In short we were the loudest ship in the fleet and that was when flight op's weren't going on. Not to mention are tracks in the water are pretty well worn, all the sub had to do was sit in our path until we passed over, just like Germany did in WW1.

I'm not saying we're invulnerable for one you can see the Silkworm launchers when you pass through the straits. They look like little black boxes so if we did invade Iran we would hit that area with TLAMS and airstrikes. I'm not for any of the wars we've been having and planning to have.

reply to post by JessopJessopJessop


We cannot. Britian is a valuable ally. France can be valuable some times.

America cannot defeat the entire middle east by itself. Nor can its navy. America needs its allies.

American soldiers die just as easy as everyone else ... so do our ships. Wake up people ... flesh is just that .. flesh. It breaks and it breaks quick and easy ... and brings pain with it.

America hasnt had its very existance threatened as of late. I love my country .. but boy are people going to be pissed when they find out 50000 military men are dead in 6 months of fighting along with 300,000 casualties. Along with rationed resources.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by NoClue206

 

The only clearance level you hold is the one that allows access to your mothers laptop.

And what credentials do you carry to come here and state that the U.S.Navy would be destroyed in the Hormuz? Are you a military strateigist in the pentagon? You have just as much credentials here as anyone else, even less compared to the actual people in this thread who have served on carriers or other ships in the U.S. Navy.

The comment you made earlier "If you don't have a higher rank than the red commander then I'm not listening" is probably one the most ignorant comment I've seen here, and you were serious.

Originally posted by Fitch303

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by Fitch303

 

LMAO, two are in dry dock under going refuling and many others supporting other missions. The US Navy in the strait would undergo heavy losses. I am talking about the one in the strait, not worldwide dude. Do you have evidence to counter my claim other than "uh no it wont"

Well then fix your title because it's misleading. You're evidence that the US navy in that area will be destroyed is a battle simulation??? LMAO. So a computer game is evidence lol gtfo.

Operation Praying Mantis.......

Well, computers are one thing i don't put alot of stock in because men can be pretty unpredictable. Computers do not take into account each individual's personal experiences in life or their frame of mind when the battle begins. Computers run on logic and while men can be logical at the same time we can be just as illogical.

any of you ill-informers heard of the "SeaWizz"? I don't necessarily agree with it because of the destructive nature on the environment however I'd like to see this R2D2 looking thing against these Iranian Seadoos.

The operator uses it inside of the ship by simply pressing a button and it fires 50-75 Armor-piercing tungsten penetrator rounds a second.

The US Navy began implementing this kind of technology in 1984, to just give you an understanding of how much we've progressed on a modern warfare ship today. One of my fellow bos'n mates saw this baby in action and a seagull happen to fly in front of it.... nothing was left of that bird but a reddish mist.... no feathers... no nothing but a mist.

Now I'm not sure how much of these "missiles" these guys are going to be firing but having a pair of R2D2's to counter 50 thousand missiles did someone mention? I'm sure you can do the math... we've got 1 gun that can counter everything they got and this is while everyone's in the galley eating.... 'wait til they all get in station :O

Noclue , Russia would most likely not get involved in the Iran war.

reply to post by milkyway12


The Iran War? Has it already started? Did I miss that?

A single CIWS gun would be enough to halt any incoming cruise missiles. I know, because I was a Phalanx FC in the Navy before switching to SWCC.

reply to post by OrphenFire


Here's an example of a CIWS in action.



Yeah...

If there is a massive assault on a carrier group then welcome World War 3.

reply to post by MikhailBakunin


Not all CWIS units can track surface targets and by the time they'll hit the missile it'll be less than a mile away which is way to close for comfort. I remember them testing the system on our aircraft, we'd see the aircraft come bearing down on the ship the gun fire, the system had a better chance of downing the aircraft AFTER it passed over than before. It's a vicious system though if the operator doesn't reign it in it will engage all the shrapnel then try to down it's own outgoing rounds. I'd put more faith in ECM/ECCM than the CWIS.

Just to add fuel too the fire Iran CAN shut down the straits very easily. CMon people start thinking and stop shouting. Who in there right mind is going to send tankers through a potential warzone. The minute a missile test is confirmed traffic will halt as its a very narrow stretch of water.

At no point did Iran say they would do this through direct attack. What happens if Iran tells the world that it has dropped a load of mines. Straits would have to be cleared before traffic resumes. Tanker gets hit, Iran claims foul play by US to escalate conflict, say a DRONE strike.

As soon as Straits close oil goes sky high and Russia/China are badly affected as it would be difficult for Iran to maintain supplies to them therefore forcing them to come to Irans aid or pay opec prices. Its a chess game.

Happy New Year

Originally posted by JessopJessopJessop
These threads are always interesting, and it's good to hear from people who take genuine interest in this sort of thing. Unfortunately, as always seems to be the case, the thread is ruined by brainwashed Yanks who think they can beat the world with 1 carrier.

Because of comms 1 carrier = the whole US military .... in the US Navy it's not 1 carrier... just like 1 bullet fired... that 1 bullet must be accounted for or it's captain's mast... and the captain will probably hold that whole department accountable... not just 1 sailor. You have to take a look at the real picture here.

And a ship is broken into compartments that are air-tightly sealed. The only way a ship will sink is if those aboard were not paying attention during drills.

Originally posted by randomname
no aircraft carrier can withstand a missile assault. the truth is aircraft carriers haven't been tested seriously in war since ww2, when anti-ship missile technology didn't exist.

edit on 30-12-2011 by randomname because: (no reason given)

Yes they have!
Try The Falklands War!
There were missles flying left right and centre during that one!
Mind you the exocets were disabled after the Sheffield got hit, so it could of been worse...