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: 34
58
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic4life
 

Iran is trying to become more independent with respect to its military equipment. They usually reverse engineer and copy equipment from North Korea, China, and Russia. Only the less sophisticated equipment is of Irani design and manufacture. They will improve with time if they are permitted to do so by their theocratic government. Generally, they buy and rename the equipment. Their patrol craft, save for the smaller types, are Chinese The favored islamic guard IRGCN units seem to be more fanatical than professional and the skilled warriors of the IRIN seem to be less fanatic. Perhaps the IRIN sees suicide speedboats as just a ploy for the Irani government to avoid paying retirement benefits.
Their three Kilo class submarines will soon need refits but those are still capable boats and would probably be used in the Gulf of Oman. The four Yono and one Nahang are more modern. The Vosper corvettes are old and would likely face the same fate as that of the Sahand. While the swarms of minimissile boats and the North Korean semisubmersible GAHJAE- and KAJAMI-class craft would be problematic, it is my opinion that mines would be the actual threat to transit through the straits. Along with the Kilo class boats came a batch of sea mines. These are replicable for the most part by Iran and they likley have several thousand stockpiled. Mining or even the show of mining will close the straits until they are swept and modern sea mines make sweeping difficult.

All this discussion is just that. There is no reason for Iran to shut the straits and politically, it would not be a good idea for them to do so without agreement by the other countries bordering the Persian Gulf. There is no reason for the US to do anything other than to ensure that the freedom of the seas is not restricted by anyone. The US takes this seriously and has no intention of acquiescing to such a closure. The threat of doing so helps convince the world that Iran, under the present leadership that claims to know the mind of God, should not be permitted to have nuclear weapons lest interpretations of ancient scriptures tell the leaders that God wants them to nuke some infidels somewhere and bring an end to the world. If they can send out their children as suicide bombers, they are capable of anything.

ETA: It would be interesting to see a reference to your claimed thermate artillery rounds. They really have no reason to exist, as hitting a target with an HE round would be far more effective and much faster. Of course, thermite/ate grenades exist for disabling artillery pieces by infantry actions. A thermite grenade in a closed breech will end the usefulness of the gun.

edit on 1/2/2012 by pteridine because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
As a point of info to those responding to tpg65, he has been banned and will need a new alias to start posting again. Likely, he was merely trolling for his own entertainment.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


You seem very knowledgable about Iran's navy capabilities. Are you allowed to share how you aquired it? Just curious good post.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Cosmic4life
 

Iran is trying to become more independent with respect to its military equipment. They usually reverse engineer and copy equipment from North Korea, China, and Russia. Only the less sophisticated equipment is of Irani design and manufacture. They will improve with time if they are permitted to do so by their theocratic government. Generally, they buy and rename the equipment. Their patrol craft, save for the smaller types, are Chinese The favored islamic guard IRGCN units seem to be more fanatical than professional and the skilled warriors of the IRIN seem to be less fanatic. Perhaps the IRIN sees suicide speedboats as just a ploy for the Irani government to avoid paying retirement benefits.
Their three Kilo class submarines will soon need refits but those are still capable boats and would probably be used in the Gulf of Oman. The four Yono and one Nahang are more modern. The Vosper corvettes are old and would likely face the same fate as that of the Sahand. While the swarms of minimissile boats and the North Korean semisubmersible GAHJAE- and KAJAMI-class craft would be problematic, it is my opinion that mines would be the actual threat to transit through the straits. Along with the Kilo class boats came a batch of sea mines. These are replicable for the most part by Iran and they likley have several thousand stockpiled. Mining or even the show of mining will close the straits until they are swept and modern sea mines make sweeping difficult.

All this discussion is just that. There is no reason for Iran to shut the straits and politically, it would not be a good idea for them to do so without agreement by the other countries bordering the Persian Gulf. There is no reason for the US to do anything other than to ensure that the freedom of the seas is not restricted by anyone. The US takes this seriously and has no intention of acquiescing to such a closure. The threat of doing so helps convince the world that Iran, under the present leadership that claims to know the mind of God, should not be permitted to have nuclear weapons lest interpretations of ancient scriptures tell the leaders that God wants them to nuke some infidels somewhere and bring an end to the world. If they can send out their children as suicide bombers, they are capable of anything.

ETA: It would be interesting to see a reference to your claimed thermate artillery rounds. They really have no reason to exist, as hitting a target with an HE round would be far more effective and much faster. Of course, thermite/ate grenades exist for disabling artillery pieces by infantry actions. A thermite grenade in a closed breech will end the usefulness of the gun.

edit on 1/2/2012 by pteridine because: (no reason given)


This has been an excellent dialogue pteridine, it makes a pleasant change to the usual banter, you are well informed and i look forward to future discussions with you.

And as you say, in all likelihood this scenario will not play out, that is as long as common sense prevails.
It would be detrimental to all parties, there would no winners and a whole world of losers at the economic level.

There are a few issues which i think we will agree to dis-agree.
I do not believe anyone has the right to dictate who can have nukes and who cannot.
As regards Iran, the doctrine of MAD would apply as it does to any other nuclear power.
I know Thermate shells exist as i served in the Royal Artillery during the cold war, they have their tactical uses and would be used alongside other shells to make the Soviet advance erm...hellish.
And lastly Iranian law prohibits the recruitment of those under 16, the Iranian boy in question lied about his age to join the fight, his name is Muhammad Husayn Fahmida, his story deserves attention.

Cosmic..



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   
wow this thread has gone completely off topic.....I dont even want to pour through the 34 pages of nonsense..its hard to find people trying to speak to the OP.....but damn....there is some hate here
edit on 2-1-2012 by newyorkee because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Sharpenmycleats
 


All of it is open sourced and nothing I used is unavailable to the public. Iran wants to become independent of other countries and is trying to build a military-industrial complex. As part of the development, they buy equipment and reverse engineer it. Their breadth of capability is limited so while they may be able to make rocket motors and warheads, they still need external help for guidance systems.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic4life

This has been an excellent dialogue pteridine, it makes a pleasant change to the usual banter, you are well informed and i look forward to future discussions with you.

And as you say, in all likelihood this scenario will not play out, that is as long as common sense prevails.
It would be detrimental to all parties, there would no winners and a whole world of losers at the economic level.

There are a few issues which i think we will agree to dis-agree.
I do not believe anyone has the right to dictate who can have nukes and who cannot.
As regards Iran, the doctrine of MAD would apply as it does to any other nuclear power.
I know Thermate shells exist as i served in the Royal Artillery during the cold war, they have their tactical uses and would be used alongside other shells to make the Soviet advance erm...hellish.
And lastly Iranian law prohibits the recruitment of those under 16, the Iranian boy in question lied about his age to join the fight, his name is Muhammad Husayn Fahmida, his story deserves attention.

Cosmic..


The doctrine of MAD, mad as it is, assumes that both parties wish to survive. Aging egomaniacal Mullas may decide that with the end of their lives, there is no need for the world to continue. Given their sway with the Revolutionary guard, scenarios where the button is pressed because Allah told them to press it and no one questions the action, are possible. Your opinion that all should be able to acquire nukes and my opinions are not of consequence in the scheme of things. Mullas that think they talk to God and live in the 7th century shouldn't have nukes to play with, according to the countries of the world.
As to the thermate shells, I have never heard of them and can't find any public references to them. There were some shells with plutonium in them that would have made things really hellish but these are well known.
Firing conventional artillery at the Soviets would have been a shoot-and-scoot game of survival as their artillery greatly outnumbered the allies artillery and attack in depth with artillery support was part of their order of battle. Most of their strategic plan was more of a defense in depth with counterattack when possible. This was as a result of WW2. Any army wanting to get to Mother Russia had to first fight through client states with local cannon fodder slowing them down before meeting up with the first line troops. After they were nicely depleted on foreign soil, they could then fight Ivan at Kursk and Stalingrad. Not a good plan for invaders and, unbeknownst to the Soviets, no reason to invade as Lebensraum was passe.
No western army would attempt an invasion of Russia after having seen what happened to the armies of Napoleon and Hitler. It is my opinion that we should be glad that Soviet paranoia didn't include a preemptive strike option.
Sending children or anyone else on suicide missions is merely a perversion, as intentional suicide is contrary to Islam, and should be condemned. Reports of Irani children charging Iraqi Republican Guard units while waving the Koran were in the world press at the time. As they were slaughtered, how many Mullas stood in front of their defenseless children to protect them?



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


As i said before which you clearly decided to overlook, the boy in question.

1. lied about his age to join as Iranian law prohibits those under 16.

2.he was not ordered to do anything, he took it upon himself.

We were having a factual debate until you slid into anti-Iranian mode, your last paragraph makes it abundantly clear.

I do not know what particular beef you have with Iran but it is clear to me that it is affecting your objectivity.

We were discussing Iran's potential to counter the Carrier group in which the tenacity of the homeland defender becomes an asset, this led me to tell the story of the boy in question.

This thread is not about the Mullahs or Islam or your particular opinion of the current Iranian governing bodies.

Cosmic..



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Sunburn and Silkworm anti-ship missiles will eventually hit their target despite Carrier defensive weapons. Just overwhelm the system. Don't discount China. Look at the proximity of China to Iran versus the proximity of the USA to Iran. If China AND Russia get involved AND if a Carrier is sunk and USA goes nuclear... life as you know it will cease.

Any attack on Iran will turn the ME into a flaming inferno. A inferno that will not leave the USA unscathed.

P.S. It WILL be the USA that starts WWIII. Wave your flag to that.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 07:11 PM
link   
The Iranian navy will not be able to manage the US navy if it becomes a fight in the Straits. I can guarantee you that the aircraft carrier task force is not within direct striking range of those Iranian ships. If the Iranians launch missiles at our forces, then the ships will steam away using anti missile missiles, chaff, and finally radar guided gattling guns to shoot down the cruise missiles. Our response would be deadly. We would have the accompanying USS Seawolf launch ADCAP Mark 48 torpedoes at the 16 most valuable targets in the gulf. The Iranian surface forces would be decimated. Next, US land based and carrier based F-18 Super Hornets would create havoc with all of the smaller vessels. Our satellite space recon would provide targets galore. Finally, we would use hundreds of Harpoon and Tomohawk missiles to destroy their command and control, refueling facilities and ports. Iran would be on fire in the gulf. Iran is well aware of this and is playing to the media. Our naval forces would be like fighting aliens for them. We are 20 years ahead of them technologically, and each one of our ships cost more then their entire navy.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
reply to post by pteridine
 


As i said before which you clearly decided to overlook, the boy in question.

1. lied about his age to join as Iranian law prohibits those under 16.

2.he was not ordered to do anything, he took it upon himself.

We were having a factual debate until you slid into anti-Iranian mode, your last paragraph makes it abundantly clear.

I do not know what particular beef you have with Iran but it is clear to me that it is affecting your objectivity.

We were discussing Iran's potential to counter the Carrier group in which the tenacity of the homeland defender becomes an asset, this led me to tell the story of the boy in question.

This thread is not about the Mullahs or Islam or your particular opinion of the current Iranian governing bodies.

Cosmic..


You seem to be defending the actions of Iran. You brought up your belief that Iran should not be prevented from possessing nuclear weapons. World opinion of the idea is based on the knowledge of how Iran might behave. The world believes that durng the Iran-Iraq war, Khomeini sent children to clear mines by walking through minefields. These were part of his Basiji army and he sacrificed them without regret. Perhaps the world worries about a culture that could march children through minefields to clear them and the fact that Iranian President Ahmadinejad is strongly linked to the Basiji.

Here is an excerpt from www.matthiaskuentzel.de...

“In the past,” wrote the semi-official Iranian daily Ettelaat as the war raged on, “we had child-volunteers: 14-, 15-, and 16-year-olds. They went into the minefields. Their eyes saw nothing. Their ears heard nothing. And then, a few moments later, one saw clouds of dust. When the dust had settled again, there was nothing more to be seen of them. Somewhere, widely scattered in the landscape, there lay scraps of burnt flesh and pieces of bone.” Such scenes would henceforth be avoided, Ettelaat assured its readers. “Before entering the minefields, the children [now] wrap themselves in blankets and they roll on the ground, so that their body parts stay together after the explosion of the mines and one can carry them to the graves.”

These children who rolled to their deaths were part of the Basiji, a mass movement created by Khomeini in 1979 and militarized after the war started in order to supplement his beleaguered army.The Basij Mostazafan – or “mobilization of the oppressed” – was essentially a volunteer militia, most of whose members were not yet 18. They went enthusiastically, and by the thousands, to their own destruction. “The young men cleared the mines with their own bodies,” one veteran of the Iran-Iraq War recalled in 2002 to the German newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine. “It was sometimes like a race. Even without the commander’s orders, everyone wanted to be first.”

The sacrifice of the Basiji was ghastly. And yet, today, it is a source not of national shame, but of growing pride. Since the end of hostilities against Iraq in 1988, the Basiji have grown both in numbers and influence. They have been deployed, above all, as a vice squad to enforce religious law in Iran, and their elite “special units” have been used as shock troops against anti-government forces. In both 1999 and 2003, for instance, the Basiji were used to suppress student unrest. And, last year, they formed the potent core of the political base that propelled Mahmoud Ahmadinejad—a man who reportedly served as a Basij instructor during the Iran-Iraq War—to the presidency.

Ahmadinejad revels in his alliance with the Basiji. He regularly appears in public wearing a black-and-white Basij scarf, and, in his speeches, he routinely praises “Basij culture” and “Basij power,” with which he says “Iran today makes its presence felt on the international and diplomatic stage.” Ahmadinejad’s ascendance on the shoulders of the Basiji means that the Iranian Revolution, launched almost three decades ago, has entered a new and disturbing phase. A younger generation of Iranians, whose worldviews were forged in the atrocities of the Iran-Iraq War, have come to power, wielding a more fervently ideological approach to politics than their predecessors. The children of the Revolution are now its leaders."



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


Thanks for bringing this war game program up, I remember them talking about this a few years ago. Essentially they where embarrassed at how easily it was for the retired Marine General to use other ways of keeping his line of communications up and also to overwhelm their technology. Many Generals and big money interests where embarrassed at what happened and they can't allow it. Yea the one general for blue said that by unsinking the ships they where able to have 13 more days of data, yea false positive data. They wanted to paint a better unstoppable picture. The last thing they wanted to have is that in the second day of the conflict Iran through other means sunk half the task force and in the second day they sunk the rest. It would point to much at the faults of the Blue and their commanders not knowing that this possibility could happen and the technology from the defense industry being showed up that their technology isn't up to snuff.

About the one person saying that Carrier is hard to kill, no it's not. For one they where being sunk back in WWII by bombs and torpedos. The only country that actually was fought by anti-ship missiles was Britain during the Falkland war and the Argentinians was using what few exocet missiles they had on a couple of planes. They hit 3 ships and sunk one possibly two, the rest where damaged severely. And by "accident" Sadam Hussiens forces almost sunk one of our Aegis cruisers with an Exocet during the Iran Iraq war. And the Aegis is a anti-missile ship. The type of anti-ship missiles that Iran has are specificially designed to kill Carriers and evade anti-missile systems. They go fast real close to the water and when they are close to there target they pop up and burn at terminal velocity to destroy the target with kinetic energy and the missile blowing up inside of the ship. And this is just one type there are several, and we still don't know for sure if the Iranians don't have the VA-111 Shkval ( supercavitating torpedoes ) which are capable of speeds in excess of 200 knots (370 km/h). And also the Sunburn cruise missile (which the US has no defense for).

And for the people that say once Iran sinks a Carrier they will be a glowing parking lot or look like the moon, it won't happen. Russia won't allow us to launch any Nuclear strike that close to their borders or even in their hemisphere. And what about the radiation fallout from the blasts, it will blow into Europe and into Russia. Do you think Russia will allow our radiation to poison it's citizens, they won't.

www.rense.com...

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 08:27 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Pretty sure the SeaRam , Ram and Evolved Sea Sparrow missles are designed to counter that very threat. As far as the super cavitating torpedo do the Iranians or Chinese have a Oscar-II nuke powered sub?


Bill



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 08:50 PM
link   
reply to post by hoghead cheese
 


USS Stark (FFG-31) was an Oliver Hazard Perry class guided-missile frigate, not an Aegis cruiser. As to carriers beng easy to sink, comparing WW2 carriers with the present class of carriers is unrealistic.



posted on Jan, 2 2012 @ 09:53 PM
link   
More drivel from ATS regulars. How insulting that the boy posting this pretends to understand US naval capabilities. Time will put him in his place, though.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Advantage in the naval vessel versus land weapon has switched before. When the size of guns was limited by technology and the guns on the ships were as big as the guns on land, the ships had the advantage because they were mobile and fortifications were not. During the American Civil War ships alone were able to destroy the best fortifications the United States had built. Towards the end of the 19th century, metallugy and engineering advanced the power of artillery and the shore battery became again able to fire at greater distance with higher percent accuracy and larger shells than the naval forces. The shore battery lost its edge during WW2 (along with the battleship) to the aircraft which could be ammased and deployed from ships.

Defensive weapons are new to warfare but every weapon has specifications. US weapons were built to fight the USSR, a fight in which we were expected to be outnumbered-- but not to the extent of the enemy in this senario. Our ships can take out many times their number of ships but are not designed to take out a horde of small one shot per trip vehicles or stock piles of volley fired rockets. The only restrictions the horde has is to keep spread out, so one sorte or missile can destroy only a few weapons, and how to signal the attack without electronics.


edit on 3-1-2012 by Semicollegiate because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 02:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic4life
 

Iran has no real,or imagined,capability to counter the U.S. Navy. Their air force is an composed of seriously out of date platforms, except for their 40 or so Mig 29Cs and 25 or so F-14s;however, these are not significant numbers,even if their pilots were capable;which is questionable. They were not to good in the war with Iraq where they were barely able to defend Iranian airspace. In their largest air battle of the war 60 Iranian F-14s were only able to shoot down 2 Iraqi Mig 21s and 3 Mig 23s. This does not bode well for their capability to challenge America. Iran's best submarine is the Soviet Kilo,of which they have three, is over 30 years old and will not be militarily important. Iran is a Third World nation with a fifth rate military. They will not be able to counter even one U.S. Carrier Battle Group, let alone three. I am sorry you are sympathetic towards them and I do not mean to hurt your feelings but Iran will lose. They might get some chuckle-heads to strap on some bombs and detonate themselves somewhere but it will not make a difference in the outcome of any conflict in the Persian Gulf.



posted on Jan, 3 2012 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


I'm pretty sure there were lots of children in Nagasaki and Hiroshima.

Didn't stop the US from dropping nukes on them, as usual we have a case of selected morality.

They (the Iranian youth) were defending their country, show me a nation that won't have young volunteers when SHTF.

I will defend any and all nations that have not made an act of aggression in over 300 yrs, Iran poses absolutely no threat to the US whatsoever, yet here we are, the US being Israel's attack dog as usual.

Back to the subject, Iran only has to concentrate on the 35 mile wide bottleneck in the Strait, they probably have a passive sensor array on the seabed, it would be very easy to fill such a small area with mines, they have advanced anti-shipping and surface to air missiles.

Cosmic..



edit on 3-1-2012 by Cosmic4life because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
58
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join