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: 26
58
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.




posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by buddha
Stupid Idiot americans!
you think going in gung ho will save the day.
Like Vietnam? how many bomb did get dropped in the whole war?
7.8 million tons of bombs were dropped during the whole war in Vietnam.

so you think using nuclear bombs will do it now.
stupid then stupid now. only on civilians.
and america is the ONLY one who will do that.


Why doesn't ATS have dislike buttons for comments like this like Youtube has?

I'd assume to bring all our troops home from all hot spots, close all bases down on all foreign soil, close all of our embassies down and leave the world to handle their own problems. We, the people of the United States, will dare anyone to ask for our help in anything. We'll handle our own while the rest of the world handle theirs.

We are not the worlds police and neither are we the worlds baby-sitters. That's what we're doing isn't it? Baby-sitting the entire world? Grow up!


edit on 31/12/11 by Intelearthling because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by RSF77
 


By the by--isn't "truth is treason in the empire of lies" a George Orwell quote?



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:49 PM
link   
And I'm sure this has already been brought up but I strongly doubt that a ten year old war exercise with its own wikipedia page is the final word on what would go down in the Straights of Hormuz in the horrible event of a military conflict.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:50 PM
link   
reply to post by DelMarvel
 


Yea it is, grats your the first person to point that out.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Threads like this amuse me. The OP posts something and then refuses to hear anything that may not fit their agenda, calls people names, insults, etc. and then gets mad when fire is returned. Some of my favorite threads are ones like this.



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Bigger is better? So says the USA, the basic fallacy that the science of war equates to the art of war. Oh how naive are we Americans. Did anyone remember Millennium Challenge 2002?

Well Iran has built its naval arsenal on speedboats with missiles, and here is how it will be played out according to US war games simulation:



en.wikipedia.org...

Red received an ultimatum from Blue, essentially a surrender document, demanding a response within 24 hours. Thus warned of Blue's approach, Red used a fleet of small boats to determine the position of Blue's fleet by the second day of the exercise. In a preemptive strike, Red launched a massive salvo of cruise missiles that overwhelmed the Blue forces' electronic sensors and destroyed sixteen warships. This included one aircraft carrier, ten cruisers and five of six amphibious ships. An equivalent success in a real conflict would have resulted in the deaths of over 20,000 service personnel. Soon after the cruise missile offensive, another significant portion of Blue's navy was "sunk" by an armada of small Red boats, which carried out both conventional and suicide attacks that capitalized on Blue's inability to detect them as well as expected.[1]


Let me get that straight, One aircraft carrier destroyed, ten cruisers, and five amphibious ships? The Red teams commander was told that it doesn't count because the enemy won and they restarted the game with a scripted war and Commander Paul K. Van Riper quit because it was rigged.

It seems to me that there are a lot of war mongers here saying that the US navy is untouchable, let this be a lesson that we may sustain some losses, maybe not a carrier but a few small ships.

Also do we remember the Chinese sub popping up inside a wargame scenario? What a Face palm

This is the Red Teams Commander making a statement:



Was the game rigged? There were accusations that Millennium Challenge was rigged. I can tell you it was not. It started out as a free-play exercise, in which both Red and Blue had the opportunity to win the game. However, about the third or fourth day, when the concepts that the command was testing failed to live up to their expectations, the command then began to script the exercise in order to prove these concepts. This was my critical complaint. You might say, "Well, why didn't these concepts live up to the expectations?" I think they were fundamentally flawed in that they leaned heavily on technology. They leaned heavily on systems analysis of decision-making.


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


I should mention I've participated in everything from war gaming. including counter-psyops to COG exercises. Destroyed? The American Navy? If just a war game, well there have been certain exercises that we're pretty brutal, we assume the worst in such fun and games. As for probability, not fantasy land as to something really hitting the fan? Can you say bull s***? In other words; Very, very unlikely. Oh, certainly the idiots, Iran near the top of the list of what seems like a bunch of crazies on some crystal meth, lsd and just too much caffeine mainlined cocktail, who would take us on, some of whom could cause in certain cases a lot of damage. And I assure you they would regret it, and they would very dearly. In so much the US does not believe in "total obliteration" even of those who would commit genocide or any other monstrous crime. Is it just my interpretation, or are you unusually pissed off at the US for whatever reason? Make NO MISTAKE, I certainly have my issues with certain American actions&policies. But it seems to me you, though others on this site are WAY MORE pissed at the US for whatever reason.

I am so disgusted, sick and tired of repeated Yank bashing, though we all have the right to our opinions. I have noticed on this site it's gotten so rank, and perhaps because of my work were once I damn near died doing my job. No one, not even my Mom knows what happened, and that oddly enough makes it more special. I got a medal, certificate and plaque in a private ceremony. Reward enough, and that I got while spending over a month in the hospital. That was back when cable TV had very little on the tube and mostly watched PBS. That was close to torture and came close to (only in fantasy) to wanting to leap out out the window! But that also would have required my guard to be distracted...That would have been hard to do as he was also and remains a close friend.

So if repeated American bashing pisses me off, baby I'm entitled.









edit on 31/12/2011 by Sauron because: - internal quote tags to external quote tags



posted on Dec, 31 2011 @ 11:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by RSF77
reply to post by DelMarvel
 


Yea it is, grats your the first person to point that out.


Thanks. I wasn't sure if it was Paul re-wording the Orwell quote.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   

edit on 1-1-2012 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by arbiture

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Bigger is better? So says the USA, the basic fallacy that the science of war equates to the art of war. Oh how naive are we Americans. Did anyone remember Millennium Challenge 2002?

Well Iran has built its naval arsenal on speedboats with missiles, and here is how it will be played out according to US war games simulation:



en.wikipedia.org...

Red received an ultimatum from Blue, essentially a surrender document, demanding a response within 24 hours. Thus warned of Blue's approach, Red used a fleet of small boats to determine the position of Blue's fleet by the second day of the exercise. In a preemptive strike, Red launched a massive salvo of cruise missiles that overwhelmed the Blue forces' electronic sensors and destroyed sixteen warships. This included one aircraft carrier, ten cruisers and five of six amphibious ships. An equivalent success in a real conflict would have resulted in the deaths of over 20,000 service personnel. Soon after the cruise missile offensive, another significant portion of Blue's navy was "sunk" by an armada of small Red boats, which carried out both conventional and suicide attacks that capitalized on Blue's inability to detect them as well as expected.[1]


Let me get that straight, One aircraft carrier destroyed, ten cruisers, and five amphibious ships? The Red teams commander was told that it doesn't count because the enemy won and they restarted the game with a scripted war and Commander Paul K. Van Riper quit because it was rigged.

It seems to me that there are a lot of war mongers here saying that the US navy is untouchable, let this be a lesson that we may sustain some losses, maybe not a carrier but a few small ships.

Also do we remember the Chinese sub popping up inside a wargame scenario? What a Face palm

This is the Red Teams Commander making a statement:



Was the game rigged? There were accusations that Millennium Challenge was rigged. I can tell you it was not. It started out as a free-play exercise, in which both Red and Blue had the opportunity to win the game. However, about the third or fourth day, when the concepts that the command was testing failed to live up to their expectations, the command then began to script the exercise in order to prove these concepts. This was my critical complaint. You might say, "Well, why didn't these concepts live up to the expectations?" I think they were fundamentally flawed in that they leaned heavily on technology. They leaned heavily on systems analysis of decision-making.


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


I should mention I've participated in everything from war gaming. including counter-psyops to COG exercises. Destroyed? The American Navy? If just a war game, well there have been certain exercises that we're pretty brutal, we assume the worst in such fun and games. As for probability, not fantasy land as to something really hitting the fan? Can you say bull s***? In other words; Very, very unlikely. Oh, certainly the idiots, Iran near the top of the list of what seems like a bunch of crazies on some crystal meth, lsd and just too much caffeine mainlined cocktail, who would take us on, some of whom could cause in certain cases a lot of damage. And I assure you they would regret it, and they would very dearly. In so much the US does not believe in "total obliteration" even of those who would commit genocide or any other monstrous crime. Is it just my interpretation, or are you unusually pissed off at the US for whatever reason? Make NO MISTAKE, I certainly have my issues with certain American actions&policies. But it seems to me you, though others on this site are WAY MORE pissed at the US for whatever reason.

I am so disgusted, sick and tired of repeated Yank bashing, though we all have the right to our opinions. I have noticed on this site it's gotten so rank, and perhaps because of my work were once I damn near died doing my job. No one, not even my Mom knows what happened, and that oddly enough makes it more special. I got a medal, certificate and plaque in a private ceremony. Reward enough, and that I got while spending over a month in the hospital. That was back when cable TV had very little on the tube and mostly watched PBS. That was close to torture and came close to (only in fantasy) to wanting to leap out out the window! But that also would have required my guard to be distracted...That would have been hard to do as he was also and remains a close friend.

So if repeated American bashing pisses me off, baby I'm entitled.

Hey, by the way Happy and a safe&good New Year!!









edit on 31/12/2011 by Sauron because: - internal quote tags to external quote tags



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by kawika
reply to post by buni11687
 


I predict there are new weapons that no one knows about. Some on our side, some on the Russians side, and even the Chinese claim to have some kind of new carrier killer missile. It may be possible to fire these weapons without exposing the responsible party. If the Rooskies send one sub with that special torpedo, and sink our carrier just to test it, how will we know who did it?

Most recent Naval battle was 2008.
Black Sea Battle
edit on 31-12-2011 by kawika because: just cause


Very interesting thread.... How would the US know who did it? Doesn't matter, they'd blame Iran and then nuke Tehran.

Plus the supposed deal to sell missiles and other assorted goodies to the UAE is just a way to beef up the US arsenal in the region prior to the big showdown without having to stockpile it in Israel. You know, you don't store all your eggs in the same basket so to speak......


(WASHINGTON) — The United States has reached a deal to sell $3.48 billion worth of missiles and related technology to the United Arab Emirates, a close Mideast ally, as part of a massive buildup of defense technology among friendly Mideast nations near Iran.

Read more: www.time.com...



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ludwigvonmises003
 


The sad part is they would rather go to war then spend money to save their country from finanicial ruin, typical global domination and the satisfaction of slaughter and obtainment of oil, look how upset the US got and immediately threatend iran if it blocks the oil supply. thousands of years on and they still all act like cavemen.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by apodictic
 


Beautiful picture and my new desktop. Thanks



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:28 AM
link   
id say the biggest threat is Super cavitating torpedos.

U dont think that surface to air missles have any use now aganst the new tech. With radar absorbing and deflecting paint many targets are now incapable of getting locked on to.

Not only that but any dumb fired missles will be taken down by computer assisted machine gun fire.

There is absolutly no threat to the US navy from IRAN other than super cavitiating torpedos. You cant dodge or defeat something going mach 3 through the water.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by arbiture
 


Why quote so much and then add nothing to the discussion. Very annoying.

You should learn to just use the reply feature and assume your talking to people not so stupid as to need WALLS of text to read over and over again.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   
So where are Iran's threats now? Their regime takes the same tactic as North Korea where they threaten just for a few scraps of leftovers. What happened to all their chest-beating about making retaliations. They can't even economically handle cutting off their oil.

Iran re-opens nuclear talks



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by area6
 


Why would the US destroy Iran if they lost the carriers fair and square? If the US loses its carriers it would be unable to destroy iran. The carrier is what is used for destroying places and once you destroy the carrier, the US would be impotent. Think about that for a second. Also I said it will destroy the US Navy in Hormuz, I did not say elsewhere.




It does equal 600,000 square miles of Iranian glass.



Do you have a war game scenario that can provide backup evidence for this statement?
edit on 30-12-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)





Think it's worth it?


You think its worth it losing a carrier group for a supposed nuclear weapon that you have no proof of?
edit on 30-12-2011 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)


No Offense intended in any way, shape, or form, but you, Sir, remind me of a large number of the various high ranking Black Belts in the martial arts, like Commercial American Kenpo. They have a large number of techniques that they teach for defense against individual attacks. Each of these techniques are engineered against engineered attacks, so that surprise attacks, surprise no one. This does often tend to lead to the types of posts you appear to make. Much the same as the Commercial Masters.

One can sit around for hours, days and weeks working and pushing on the fashionably computer rigged, and/or the solipsistic views that seem to roll out here based on the game... Reality can often be a more stern and less forgiving teacher. One shouldn't become to self assured regarding gaming possibilities. Sometimes the game gets broken with the slightest bend of the tiniest rule, and that really is the war we are talking about.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by bluemirage5
 


Their navy's 3rd rate. they have no hope get over it. the middle east has 3rd rate military's. theres no hope they'll burn like Iraq. This is nothing but extended war games for us. Realize it.



posted on Jan, 1 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   

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)


The carrier is designed to take damage from the sides and the top so no your missile attack would not take out a carrier...eventually they would cripple the ship where nobody could do anything but wouldnt be able to sink it without a submarine, for the way its designed. The weak spot of a carrier is beneath the water. Why do you think the japs used torpedos?
edit on 1-1-2012 by Evanzsayz because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join