Why the US Navy will be destroyed in Hormuz

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


The reason for the push in air technology is to diminish the loss of aircraft carriers during times of conflict. In addition allied nations who have aircraft carriers are trained with US naval doctrine and vice versa so each others carriers can slot into each others task force flawlessly. The US and France have done cross training, landing on each others aircraft carriers.

As far as losing in the straights I dont think it would be nearly as bad as you portray it. From 2002 compared to now we have increased our carriers to 11 active with another 1 or 2 super-carriers under construction. We have a couple that are slated to leave operational service as well. Our reliance on carriers has evolved since WWII. Yes we use it for force projection against nations who dont have that ability, but that is and has been changing, with China the latest nation to have a carrier.

We must take into account our unseen assets as well. A loss of an aircraft carrier now days is viewed by some countries as a massive victory, and other areas a political victory, and in others its merely a loss (not to downplay the loss of life that would occur).

Lets not get to ahead of ourselves shall we? The OP is talking about a naval exercise, and it is clearly a different animal than a live fire incident. Can the Iranian navy bloody the nose of the US Navy through the means of low-tech and unconventional means? Of course they can, but can they sustain a long conflict with the US Navy? Probably not. The only real danger is transiting the Straight of Hormuz which is one of the most narrowest waterways in the world.

I served on an aircraft carrier and transited the Straight of Hormuz quite a few times. General Quarters! General Quarters! For those not familiar with that term, all ship personnel and equipment assumes a constant state of readiness for any potential threats. Speed boats or missiles and whatever Iran thinks to throw at them. If Iran thinks they are going to catch the US Navy with its pants down? Then they are sadly mistaken. When I was in, we were always running drills and exercises going through there.

My guess is, the Iranian Navy will get some pot shots here and there. That is if they are lucky enough. However, get the fleet in open water and Iran will curse the day they ever decided to be so emboldened. One battle group has multi-layered defense systems, multiple ships and subs, and an immense amount of firepower. They can operate from hundreds of miles from their target area. Does the Iranian Navy even remotely have that capability? Absolutely not! They are a brown water navy and on their best day a regional naval force. The US Navy does not even need to cross the straight to pummel Iran. They don't even need to operate out of the Persian Gulf.

To be fair, they do have long range missiles, but I believe naval planners have developed adequate contingencies against that particular threat. With all due respect OP, this scenario sounds like a two-bit act of fiction ripped from a Tom Clancy novel. I know the exercise cited was a real exercise, but that is all it is. Iran does not stand a chance in a conventional fight against the US Navy, but in an unconventional warfare setting they have an ability to bloody a nose here and there.

reply to post by IsraeliGuy


Remember if a traditional battle is won in a week or so, it doesn't mean the whole war is over, France got beat by the Nazis very quickly didn't they? they still kept on fighting though didn't they? same as Iraq/Afghanistan just because they lose the main battle they just turn to different tactics. Still is a war isnt it if the last US soldier was killed on Nov 14th of this year in Iraq.
If Israel ever gets invaded and you post "Oh no civ's are being killed" I will have a attitude like yours eh? no I won't because I don't accept innocent people being killed.
Also Civ deaths are the same thing as Army etc deaths? no they are not people who join the army have to understand they may get killed, Civ's are innocent.

No.

If you set your goal to annihilate the ability of said country to pose any international thread, you do not even need to occupy it with foot soldiers, rather destroy as much of it's aircraft/ships/land vehicles, installations and infrastructure.

In Iraq/Afghanistan wars the goal was once to find Bin Laden and then to completely eradicate a guarilla style militia that in all honesty don't pose a threat to anyone who is not trying to occupy the country.
As I said, if you're talking about conventional terms, US did crush it's opponent's military threat in under a week. The part where they sustained many losses was the part where they stayed and occupied, and this is what you cling to.

US will not need to occupy Iran. The goal is not to eradicate any militias. It's to stop the nuclear factories.

Why on Earth do you insist on comparing these wars even though it's a flawed analogy?

War is and has always been unperdictable.

It is niave and a bit ignorant to perdic such nonsens in the primal concept of law we call chaos.

If anything ww3 will humble man like no other war he dared wage.

The blood of man will once again fertalize the crescent..


Man is still a animal.. No matter how badly he wants to be sentinal..

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


I'm impressed with this new toy.
Japan made it.
It reminds me of a probe droid from the Empire Strikes Back.

reply to post by Bicent76


crescent and the North america.You want ww3? Israeliguy sure does.Looking at the IDF guy's attitude it makes me think that Hitler might have been right.I feel disgusted with the catcalls and drooling for genocide here by the westerners .

What about just setting off a tremendous amount of Thermite over and on Iran and just turn the country to glass? They can't drill for oil and they'd be slipping around a lot.... that'll teach 'em!!!!

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


I always enjoy reading online fiction. If you think that the U S Navy or the U S military in general reveals even 1/2 of its weapons capability to the general public, you are both mistaken and very naive my friend.

very shallow...I'm sorry but this thread is plain incorrect in its assumptions. The US Navy almost always uses a strike first, strike hard approach to these types of situations. All the cigarette boats in the world won't help them if they are destroyed my tomahawk missiles prior to our advancement in the strait. You guys seem to forget that the US can "get" you without leaving the couch...fools

Originally posted by mkgandhas
reply to post by Bicent76

 

crescent and the North america.You want ww3? Israeliguy sure does.Looking at the IDF guy's attitude it makes me think that Hitler might have been right.I feel disgusted with the catcalls and drooling for genocide here by the westerners .

WW3 ??? No, you know things went rather well in Libya. Another one bites the dust.
That wasn't such a chore now was it?
--------
Moving on.
Lets get rid of that NUT in Iran.
No need to nuke Iran. We just need a simple regime change.

Most Iranians actually love the USA.
I know a few right here in the USA.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by longtermproject

 

I bet a lot of sailors have GPS on their smartphone apps and can accurately measure the speed, I believe it can go pretty fast, but still not faster than a missile

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

Not a lot of cell towers out in the middle of the ocean.

Signal can really suck.

reply to post by manta78


It is not fiction, if you are calling Commander Viper fictional, you are sadly mistaken. Please point out evidence where what I said was fictional. Please show my quotes. Please do.

I also find it hilarious that your pic is one of the RQ-170 drone, you know the one Iran just hacked and brought down.Or at least something similar.

reply to post by butcherguy


It just goes to show that you dont know anything about GPS or how it works. GPS does not rely on cell towers. The GPS works off of satellites in space, you know, where there are no cell towers. Face Palm

reply to post by randomname


A simple exocet missile can easily sink a carrier, and carriers make big targets. Being in such a small area in the middle east these will make primary targets.

reply to post by Eurisko2012

We just need a simple regime change.

Why do we need to dictate a regime change in Iran? We as americans need a regime change in the USA. Would you be ok with a regime change in the USA if China invaded and told us it was for our own good?

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
It is not fiction, if you are calling Commander Viper fictional, you are sadly mistaken. Please point out evidence where what I said was fictional. Please show my quotes. Please do.

Please show your evidence for:
1. How the lesson was not learned from a drill that happened 10 years ago.
2. That the Iranians hold the exact same capabilities, or even better ones, than the other team in that drill.
3. That technology hasn't advanced for the US navy since then.

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
We as americans

AHAHAHAHAHA!
I never set foot in the US and I'm more American than you.

How twisted is your logic to consider yourself American while wishing your army would crumble and Iran/Russia/China cripple your country in a war?

You're not fooling anyone but other traitors such as you.