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: 18
58
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
reply to post by popsmayhem
 



Make an effort mate.

Are you an American or a Klingon ? by the way, it's just hard to tell with your smash smash rhetoric.

Failure to recognize your chosen enemy is defending their homeland is seriously underestimating their capacity for tenacity.

Cosmic..

Worry about yourself.

You can't do a damn thing about this situation.

Were citizens on here, were not estimating jack crap!
tenacity my ass, what capacity is your American hating at?
FULL OF IT?

Iran is not my enemy
and defending a straight in international waters
IS NOT THERE HOMELAND.

Arm chair general these days..

If Iran's insane leader attacks America
there will be no homeland for them to defend.
That is common sense.
edit on 31-12-2011 by popsmayhem because: (no reason given)




~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Admin Edit/Note: Please Focus On The Topic And NOT Each Other's Character Or Person

Thank You
edit on 12/31/2011 by 12m8keall2c because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel


During the Falklands war, Argentina had 4, count em, 4 Exocet missiles and managed to sink or severely damage 3 ships, the HMS Sheffield, Atlantic Conveyor and HMS Glamorgan. Interesting sidebar: while the US was providing the British with the latest Sidewinder infrared anti-air missiles,


Argentina launched 5 air-launched Exocets during the Falkands. Only two found a target - HMS Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor. The other three failed to hit anything. HMS Glamorgan was hit by a surface-to-surface Exocet. It was the same type as some of the Royal Navy warships deployed in the conflict. The Argentines removed some of their ship mounted Exocets and rigged the launchers on trailers on the Falklands.

Trailer mounted Exocet captured in the Falklands





posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by mantisfortress
 

Just want to say that although destroyers are designed for ASW, they are fully capable of engaging surface craft. Some of them have 5"-38's in a turret fwd. You only shoot surfaced subs with a deck gun. If the sub is on the surface nowadays, you've already got them.

And any vessel having the Phalanx CIWS installed is capable of engaging surface craft, as the Phalanx has been upgraded to include that task.

edit on 31-12-2011 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   
So again, to prove that the premise of this thread is predicated on a falsehood; there is NO WAY THE ENTIRE US NAVY WOULD EVEN BE IN THE STRAIGHT!!!!!!!!!!

[ill-mannered commentary removed]

edit on 12/31/2011 by 12m8keall2c because: [ill-mannered commentary removed]



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:07 PM
link   
oops
edit on 31-12-2011 by apodictic because: screwed up



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:08 PM
link   
Exactly....these things can get to hot spots mighty quick if need be........


Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by jhn7537
 


What was your job and rank? "Official" speeds are "30+ knots", but 'actual' carrier speeds are on a need to know basis. It isn't public knowledge.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by apodictic
reply to post by jhn7537
 


What was your job and rank? "Official" speeds are "30+ knots", but 'actual' carrier speeds are on a need to know basis. It isn't public knowledge.


I never said i was in the military? I asked a question about carriers, that was all...



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:09 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Many times, coming to this board is like going to an American hate site.

As far as this thread goes, this isn't a wargame. It's more than just ships. And attacking the fleet is basically declaring war on the United States. Iran is not so stupid as to do this. So this entire thread is ludicrous.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
The Iranians aren't stupid, or so we hope... Closing the straits of Hormuz would be, in this time of heightened paranoia, tantamount to a declaration of war against a great portion of the world...

In putting a carrier group in the Persian Gulf, and transiting the strait, the United States is merely putting Iran on notice that any such thing is playing a very dangerous game...one that they can't hope to win.

If Iran is foolish, or suicidal, enough to instigate a conflict in the process of attempting to close the straits, they're going to get what they deserve.

Militarily, Iran is, at best, a full generation behind the United States in technology...the conflict, should one escalate to shooting, would be Hobbsian in nature...nasty, brutish, and short. To think otherwise is simply to deny the very real expertise, and unfortunately, the vast experience the US military has in waging war.

Add to that, the rest of the Gulf nations wouldn't exactly be thrilled with Iran, either. Nor the Israelis... I would find it amusingly ironic, if such a situation were to foment an alliance between the Gulf States, and Israel...

No, Iran has no earthly way of winning this confrontation, should they be so foolish as to force one.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
Yeah that and the fact that entire US navy wouldnt even fit in the striahgt of Hormuz. Other than that, great topic. LMAO!!!!



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mantisfortress
 


What was your job and rank? "Official" speeds are "30+ knots", but 'actual' carrier speeds are on a need to know basis. It isn't public knowledge.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by fleabit
Many times, coming to this board is like going to an American hate site.

As far as this thread goes, this isn't a wargame. It's more than just ships. And attacking the fleet is basically declaring war on the United States. Iran is not so stupid as to do this. So this entire thread is ludicrous.


The OP wrote that if we attack Iran that Russia would nuke DC and NYC.... I dont understand where some people get this stuff....



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by tommyjo

Originally posted by Nicolas Flamel


During the Falklands war, Argentina had 4, count em, 4 Exocet missiles and managed to sink or severely damage 3 ships, the HMS Sheffield, Atlantic Conveyor and HMS Glamorgan. Interesting sidebar: while the US was providing the British with the latest Sidewinder infrared anti-air missiles,


Argentina launched 5 air-launched Exocets during the Falkands. Only two found a target - HMS Sheffield and Atlantic Conveyor. The other three failed to hit anything. HMS Glamorgan was hit by a surface-to-surface Exocet. It was the same type as some of the Royal Navy warships deployed in the conflict. The Argentines removed some of their ship mounted Exocets and rigged the launchers on trailers on the Falklands.

Trailer mounted Exocet captured in the Falklands






You're right, they had five Exocets. But 3 ships were still hit by Exocets. I shudder to think what they could have done with 50.

en.wikipedia.org...

According to the wiki linked (I know), 5 Exocets were fired, 1 hit the HMS Sheffield, 2 hit the Atlantic Conveyor and 1 hit the HMS Glamorgan. So that's 4 hits, 1 miss.

I remember watching a show where the pilot of one of the Super Étendards said they were targeting one of the British carriers but hit the Atlantic Conveyor (twice) instead.

How did the Argentinians know where the UK carriers where? Easy, he said they watched their radar and when the Sea Harriers popped up after launch and appeared on their radar, then the carriers were probably there.

It just goes to show when war starts, anything can happen. This should be dealt with diplomatically. But the thought of a oppressive and hostile nation ("we will wipe Israel off the map") having nukes turns my stomach.
edit on 31-12-2011 by Nicolas Flamel because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by OptimusSubprime
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


A Nimitz Class carrier can reach speeds in excess of 70 mph with no problem.


70mph doesnt seem possible, you say youve been on it but a statement like that seems to prove otherwise

wikipedia states "Speed: 30+ knots (56+ km/h; 35+ mph)" obviously its underrated but by half?

secure.wikimedia.org...



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   
The opening post was not saying the entire US Navy would be destroyed...or even inferring that. I submit that it was a bit of hyperbole meant to attract attention, as any good title should.



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join