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: 21
58
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Really I am not getting this. How many people expressing admiration for US military might are not getting a basic fact. Your poor troops have suffered greatly all over this arena in recent years. Go back a few more and a certain country begining with V springs to mind.

Reason- you are fighting people who are willing to die or have nothing left to loose. Cant sink a carrier. Come ON. A stricken fishing boat filled with explosive. A commandeered oil tanker. Just two that spring to mind.

I re-iterate unless you kill all combatants (impossible as the more you kill the more you create) it will not go well. Guess what its not meant to. Grow up and realise the only reason your military is rated so great in your own country is it has never been challenged by anybody that has even 10% your assets.

PS this is not a dig against your military per say. This a dig against idiots that say no one can touch us were awesome. I mean seriously, Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world against the richest and now your considering putting the very people you were fighting into government on their terms.

Reality check people read some history.




posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Ummm no-the title of the thread is "Why the US navy will be destroyed in Hormuz".

The USS John Stennis is NOT the US navy. It is indeed a PART of the Navy, but is not the US Navy. OP needs to change the title then if this is not what is meant but they have failed to do so after being called out numerous times so we can only infer that his title stands as to his belief.



Originally posted by Cosmic4life
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


Er no, the OP is talking about the Stennis Carrier group and possibly one other.

One or two other posters then exaggerated this into the whole US Navy, which of course is physically impossible.

And my comment about the Nimitz and Ford class Carriers is on topic.

Cosmic..


Well maybe he should've said Part of the US Navy will be destroyed in Hormuz to make it easier for you to understand, if you had read the whole thread from start to finish you would know, it's been commented on and clarified several times.

Cosmic..



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by murch
 
No worries,.
we wont loose..
I will bet my American freedom on that.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Darkrunner
So the basis for this is a computer game?

Alrighty then.


A computer simulation with 2 land commanders deploying and fighting a naval force.

Doesnt make much sense.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
realize one thing folks, the USA has not fought a military campaign, all out, since WW2.

We have fought "political"wars.

We will clear the strait of Hormuz if needed, and possibly be attacked. then the USA will respond.

we may lose a few assets, but we wont lose the war.

the Navy (most likely) wants to lose a Carrier, think of the Awesomeness of it's replacement.

Iran would not be very smart to plant mines, it would look bad for them if a transport ship was damaged, then the UN would have an excuse to "Lybia" them.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:45 PM
link   
No, i understand propaganda and what the OP did was no different that the much maligned MSM does by printing news articles with catchy headlines that are false. Keep it real. Im starting to see that ATS is no better than the MSM with misleading info.



Originally posted by Cosmic4life

Originally posted by princeofpeace
Ummm no-the title of the thread is "Why the US navy will be destroyed in Hormuz".

The USS John Stennis is NOT the US navy. It is indeed a PART of the Navy, but is not the US Navy. OP needs to change the title then if this is not what is meant but they have failed to do so after being called out numerous times so we can only infer that his title stands as to his belief.



Originally posted by Cosmic4life
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


Er no, the OP is talking about the Stennis Carrier group and possibly one other.

One or two other posters then exaggerated this into the whole US Navy, which of course is physically impossible.

And my comment about the Nimitz and Ford class Carriers is on topic.

Cosmic..


Well maybe he should've said Part of the US Navy will be destroyed in Hormuz to make it easier for you to understand, if you had read the whole thread from start to finish you would know, it's been commented on and clarified several times.

Cosmic..

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



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
We've invested a lot into our air craft carriers and protecting them but this simulation shows how technology can change a battle. Iran can close the strait at their convenience. They may pay a hefty price for that but any attempt to interfere will only cause a heft price for their enemy.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by murch
 


If the more you kill the more it creates argument were valid, then the Taliban and Al Queida would have no reason what so ever to seek diplomatic talks to ends hostilities. The same goes for Hamas / Hezbullah / Palestinians.

I think you mistake resolve of a group of people while ignoring the fact they dont have quite the popular support of the people. As far as US forces go I think you also underestimate the fact our military is volunteer and not forced, which contrary to popular belief does make a difference.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by jhn7537

Becasue we arent allies with them and to be honest, we have a crappy relationship with them, so obviously they would keep tabs on what they're doing...If my enemy was building nuclear weapons id be worried too.... The United States is in a position to tell other countries what they can and cant do, if someone wants to try and stop them, they are more than welcome to try...


Iran is NOTa threat to the United States of America!

Iran can ONLY be a threat to the middle east and israel in particular.

On the otherhand, we should really worry about not ticking off china and especially russia, since THEY CAN get even with "us" really quick.

It seems some people do not understand geo-political relationships thoroughly enough. You REALLY THINK iran or north korea can develop ICBMS capable of reaching europe or usa? And even if they could buy/develop such a delivery system ronald reagan with STAR WARS spend trillions on their interception.

Clearly iran posses no threat to europe or the usa. Only to israel, but israel is a coward and wants everyone else to do its dirty work for it.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Lil Drummerboy
 


Jesus christ. Are you seriously that messed up. This is not a sport event. This is peoples lives you are commenting on. Again GROW UP. Stop thinking you need to prove you are the best. READ HISTORY. All that ever happens to the best is that they either retire gracefully or lose in the end.

Cant see you retiring gracefully. Maybe when your forces are really stretched and occupied elsewhere some one will look and say "Ah nows the time". Bring the troops home and let the rest of the world worry about there own problems (cant believe I just wrote that but hey ho, never gonna happen when military based companies run your economy)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 
When i started reading your post I had a hard time beliveing the statements made,then i read this post,this is almost child like.I am thinking this is all some sort of game to you and not real at all...................right?



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Yeah you quote the test that will allow the Pentagon to seek more money and you think its accurate. You call yourself a professional but what are you a professional in?

The Carrier battle group with its Aegis defense system was made to take barrage after barrage of Soviet cruise missile and torpedo attacks so your whole theory is utter nonsense.

So also by your theory the U.S. should have sunk the Chicom sub or shot down the Russian bombers and started a war? Go enlist in the U.S. Navy Mr. professional and then let me know how weak our fleet defenses are!

Your nothing but an armchair quarterback with no Naval experience or common sense on how our fleet defenses work but your Anti-American stance is popular here at ATS so you have lots of stars from the Ignorance crowd.

This is the Deny Ignorance site yet all you do is promote Ignorance with these threads.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by jhn7537
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Ill agree that they are likely getting annoyed, but I wont agree with the OP when he suggested that if a conflict started between the US and Iran, Russia would get involved and nuke DC and NYC.... I just dont understand where people get this stuff at... It doesnt make any sense...


You are kidding right? Why does europe and the usa care so much about iran?

I only hear iran and "the west" threatning each other.

Why doesn't anyone else in the region make a ruckus about iran?

At least during the first gulf war most dictators/kings supported the war effort.

It seems to be a religious crusade of christianity, islam and judaism going at it.

A display of hypocrisy and ignorance at its best!

Russia and china WILL eventually attack if they get cornered enough. I don't think they can afford to lose many more allies in trade. It is starting to become very dangerous for all sides involved. We need more diplomacy and less threats.


Iran gets along with almost no one. Every nation in the region other than Syria has been pressuring the West to do something about Iran for along time. Even Russia works with US to contain Iran even though it trades with them. After a long history of assasinations, coup attempts and terror attacks in almost every muslim nation on Earth you will find that Iran is less popular in the Islamic world then even in the west.


Really? I watch the news quite often and have to disagree with you here. I do NOT hear ANY LEADER of ANY MUSLIM NATION make a big deal about iran to the point of wanting to destroy it or remove ahjmenidad. They may dislike and/or fear him, but europe and america are way outspoken in this regard.

It is like someone robbing your house and instead of you screaming for help, someone two blocks down the street is doing it for you.

Clearly the logic is flawed if you think about it!



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


As a veteran who's spent over a year navigating in circles on the persian gulf in aircraft carriers on 3 different westpac cruises, my response is - horse feathers! They're constantly drilling and preparing for any contingancy, and there's been a constant presence there since 1980, that's 31 years, ... we own that place. After all, big guns make good neighbors, right. The effort to exaggerate the threat, and cause fear in the hearts of the sheeple, continues.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Vulcan Phalanx anyone?

That's all that has to be said. That gun can rip apart an entire line of speedboats.

Minigun bullet speed > miniboat.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 06:02 PM
link   
First if the iranians fire 100 missiles the US Navy will not have to shoot down 100 missiles because 95% will never get a lock on a navy ship that is why the navy has high power jammers and other electronics to spoof the missile radars for.
That leaves around 5 missiles to be taken out with ships weapons systems.
a 1000 missiles would leave 50 to be taken out and that is still doable for a CBG

This is only the first wave of missiles then the navy aircraft will salvo every The AGM-88 HARM (High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile) they can lock on Iranian missile sites. there would be a lot less Iranian missiles in the next wave.

The first ships through Hormuz will be the Subs the first one running passive sonar to look for Iranian subs.
the second will be a sub running full active sonar to look for sea mines.

Once that sweep is made the next ships will likely be two -2 Anti Submarine Destroyers or Frigates.

Then a Aegis guided missile cruiser

Then the carrier and support ships, the support ships will likely run between the carrier and Iran to act as decoys for missiles followed by another Aegis guided missile cruiser and then 2 Anti Submarine Destroyers or Frigates.

The numbers of Aegis guided missile cruisers Destroyers or Frigates likely would be augmented by others that have been working in the indian ocean on anti pirate duties or other free units in the area.

So you could have 3 times the number of subs, missile cruisers, Destroyers or Frigates then would be normaly attached to a CBG

Then to top it off since NATO would be hurt by Hormuz.being closed the US will likely have a number of NATO ships helping.
And likely you might have British ships and they have the goalkeeper CIWS gun system that is even better then the Phalanx CIWS the goalkeeper gun is the US GAU-8/A Avenger 30 mm used by the A-10 Thunderbolt II (Warthog.)
en.wikipedia.org...

Then there is the Arab states that will not like Hormuz closed and likely would send there own ships.

Its unlikely to be a US Iran battle and more likely it would be a Iran against everyone else battle.

And i have not added the US Airforce or Marines that would likely join the party to get there shot in.
or NATO aircraft.

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



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

Originally posted by sweetnlow
The US navy could just retool the Wisconsin with phalyanx systems and load nukes in the cruise missile pods and nuke warheads for the guns and by itself retire IRAN

Carriers and support ships have Phalyanx. It's a last line of defense but it looks pretty effective. Ive seen it in action and video's of it taking out super-sonic surface missiles. It would be ugly for sure but those carriers are awfully big. It would probably take more than one missile and the ship that fired it would be gone probably before the missile every hit the carrier.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by murch
 


If the more you kill the more it creates argument were valid, then the Taliban and Al Queida would have no reason what so ever to seek diplomatic talks to ends hostilities. The same goes for Hamas / Hezbullah / Palestinians.

I think you mistake resolve of a group of people while ignoring the fact they dont have quite the popular support of the people. As far as US forces go I think you also underestimate the fact our military is volunteer and not forced, which contrary to popular belief does make a difference.


Sorry on a bit of a rant here.

1st- Suits Taliban to have talks. They know that troops will be gone by 2014 or current president will be lambasted by opposition.
2nd- Keep Palestinians out of this. Of all groups they have legitimate reasons for opposition and need to use any means at there disposal including political. Anybody disputing this, please dont, most Israelis on the street agree 3rd- Good point. The Iran regime is opposed by majority but unless action taken targets minority ruling targets you then alienate majority populace creating more enemies.
4th- Minority of military is forced as it would be unsustainable mathematically. Voluntary forces are weak unless fighting for a cause they believe in. Who would die in a country so far away it seems alien leaving family behind knowing the only reason you cared is what is happening to your comrades.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 06:07 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, OptimusSubprime, for a lucid post from someone who has actually been there, done that, not some armchair quarterback who really has no knowledge of the situation. I find myself talking to deaf ears on these boards when I discuss naval capabilities, but, of course, few people have been on deck and fewer still have seen the rooster tail taller than the flight deck at the back of a CVN at flank speed. I don't think we should be complacent, but the idea that a rag tag group of inflatables can somehow overwhelm a Carrier Strike Group is absurd. Yes, the idea HAS been war gamed. Does that tell anyone anything? Does the fact that some people actually have first hand knowledge of this make them automatically "warmongers"?

You DID notice Iran "takes it all back," didn't you?


TEHRAN, Iran – Iran backed down Saturday from its earlier threats to block the strategic oil route through the Strait of Hormuz, apparently confirming U.S. assertions that such threats packed more "bluster" than bite.

Talk of blocking the strategic oil route through the Strait of Hormuz is a discussion of the past, a commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guard said Saturday, but he said Iran had other, unspecified strategies for reacting to any Western aggression.

"Discourse about closing the Strait of Hormuz belongs to five years ago. Today's debate in the Islamic Republic of Iran contains new layers and the time has not come to raise it," Gen. Masoud Jazayeri said in comments posted Saturday on the Guard's website, sepahnews.com.


Source

For the record, there are or shortly will be two Carrier Strike Groups in the region. The USS Lincoln is on its way or already there by now. This is completely NORMAL behavior for the US, which has two Carrier Strike Groups in the area 75% of the time.



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 18  19  20    22  23  24 >>

log in

join