Will they sink the USS Enterprise.

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Heres a u tube video suggesting that a attack on the enterprise could well be on the cards.
geraldcelentechannel.blogspot.com...

She is the oldest carrier in the US navy with a long history, and also maybe the heart of the Navy. Growing up here in NZ. The Enterprise was a ship most boys new about. I had a great model of the ship. But I digrest.
A false flag attack on this ship will hit most americans very hard. ( Those that are a sleep.)
It would be as big as those planes hitting the heart of new york. The twin towers.
Its also away that they can decommision the ship cheaply. Blow her up by Israelly subs, say Iran did it. Bingo. Win, win for the globilist.

I hope my gut feeling is wrong...




posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
For all the CGI people,,
and for those who are not sure what CGI is ,,
I must say some of the best CGI around,,,
clap/clap,, presentation TOP GUN

now logic,,,flawless,,cruel,,terrifffiing,,thats right it will make u stutter and chill with goose bumps,,
but its only a movie,, thats what you have too ,,,

ya logic flawless,,

certainly,, A+ scaremongering FOR SURE !


Me.
out of
edit on 24-1-2012 by BobAthome because: scaremongering



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:25 PM
link   
I hope your gut feeling is wrong too....but whether an attack is from Iran or a false flag how would you know any different? You wouldnt.

Hopefully someone can post the link to the wargames that the US had recently simulating war with Iran...TIRRANT I think it was called. The US navy general/captain representing the Iranian side launched a pre meditated surprise barrage of missile against the US Navy sinking several ships in the straight.

The wargames were then re-written and redone to have a US positive slant on it second time round.

Correct me if I have any details wrong people.

Point being, legit attack or not, it would be the ideal way to block the straights, surround it with mines afterwards and keep watch on both side of the straight for incoming ships.

Any carriers already inside the straight would not be able to get out, although not quite sitting ducks they would be in a precarious position, thou Im sure Saudi Arabia would help out.

Just my take on it......you watch price of fuel and everything else skyrocket.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:29 PM
link   
I think I actually said this back when (the Enterprise, I think) was stationed off the coast of Libya last year, glad it didn't happen. Although, it certainly does sound like a highly possible and well-conceived false flag.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by aarys
 


ah - the typical " prediction " - make a spurious claim - and add the caveat claiming credit for "preventing " it , when nothing happens - brilliant



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:35 PM
link   
It depends if they have some Chinese carrier killer missiles and if the Ageius antimissile system can shoot them down before they hit



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:43 PM
link   
I think this guy is stealing ideas from ATS.

I swear I read the same post here on ATS in an Iran thread a few days ago, before this article was written(or copied)........

The lastest hype issssssssss...............



But, I guess we will find out soon enough.........time will tell....



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   
So here we have the USS Enterprise, the oldest carrier in the fleet, on her last legs, scheduled to be decommissioned next year. Her name is well known, in part because of the Star Trek TV series. Decommissioning a nuclear aircraft carrier is a very expensive process. USS Enterprise is powered by 8 nuclear reactors, all of which must be disposed of as nuclear waste material along with all the associated machinery. The US Navy would save a great deal of money, more than the scrap worth of the steel, if USS Enterprise were to be sunk in the Persian Gulf, where the radioactive mess is someone else's problem to deal with.

www.youtube.com...

Now, recall that Israel has a past history of attacking US warships and framing others to trick the US into attacks on Israel's enemies, with the Israeli attack on the USS Liberty (initially blamed on Egypt) as the most well-known example.

So, why send an ancient ship at the end of her useful life into harms way? The same reason Franklin Roosevelt moved a bunch of obsolete warships from San Diego to Pearl Harbor, while the newer carriers and warships were well away from Hawaii on December 7th, 1941.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Melbourne_Militia
 


They would be sitting ducks. The US Navy main column is its undeterred under way replenishments. The real reason for the sea lanes to stay open. The straight is closed eventually those carriers could become worthless. Long range strikes would become necessary and DC would resort to nukes quickly. To protect operation broken arrow. Even the marines would soon be in a custards last stand, Alamo, you pick it. Seals would be called in to scuttle all of them and perhaps the sailors too to justify nuking the Persians.
Netanyahu would then attempt to rebuild the 3rd temple so that he becomes messiah and secretly prays for the 1000 year reign.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:02 PM
link   
Iran has anti shipping cruise missiles by the truckload.
The coast of the strait on the iranian side is wrinkled with mountainous terrain.
Iran has islands also in the straits.
It is safe to assume they have hardened emplacements situated deep enough to be impervious or invisible to the bunker buster or cruise tomahawks.
The airforce and navy planes will not be able to get them all right away.
The yakontz and sunburn missiles which iran has purchased from russia, are state of the art missiles, even if the most primitive launch capability is retained within 100 or more miles of the straits, these cruise missiles are self targetting and the Yakontz is supposed to be very fast, and has evasive programming and can fly virtually on the deck to evade the radar till the last possible second.
Also both missiles are well capable of taking out a large ship with a single hit.
Here i must add, it is believed that Syria has just recieved another 72 sunburns delivered from an old order with russia.
Will they use them preemptively in the Mediterranian or the suez canal?
imagine a Carrier sunk in the suez canal!.
The road to war with iran has some unexpected pitfalls which i dont think can be actually planned for.
Theres no telling who will side with who...it will depend on the amount of intimidation Iran can deliver in the rest of the gulf after they close the straits.
Personally i rather liked the idea of by passing the starits with a canal /tunnel system through the neck of land across from iran.....
The finding and killing of irans submarines will also be a priority for the US fleet.
They could merely lie doggo and let the US pass over them, then shoot.....
Not all mines will be detectable or detected considering the volume of waters to sweep either.....as they must be swept under the very guns of Iran too....
Even artillery pieces would be applicable to stopping the ships trying to pass ....



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by aarys
 
What the US Navy has to fear is not the Iranian's but themselves. There is still a trident warhead unaccounted for, and the NWO love to throw soldiers into the fire to soften our support for these nasty invasions. Iran is in no position to pose a "nuclear" threat to these battle groups, so if they are lost to big bombs, it's one of our own.

www.youtube.com...
No matter who starts it, and who wins these battles, the waste of even one of these fine young men and women is not acceptable.


The war hasn't really started and I'm already sick of the slaughter. Those boys should be home, with their families.
www.youtube.com...

AX
FTNWO



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by AlphaExray
 


Well said. I also would hate for war to break out. Most of these wars are started by false flags by the west. Problem. Reaction. Solution.
Also it would be great to keep troops at home with there families. A defence force, should be just that. Not a occupying offencive force. Also a war with Iran could spiral out of control fast. Once Russia or china starts to lose some assets in the conflict. They might just take action on one of the US allies. Maybe Georgia. Or even strike the USA.
Anyways. I have a young family. And i do not want World war 3.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:03 AM
link   
I don't like that false flag scenario at all.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   
The Enterprise is set to sail for Iran in March for it's LAST tour EVER...

Remember that ship was commissioned in 1961...



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Which one? NCC-1701 C, D or E?



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 04:07 AM
link   
It's like I said right from day one......

keep your eyes on the Persian Gulf!



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 07:03 AM
link   
I'm all for possibilities and speculation, it's harmless and provides debate and exchange of ideas and point of views.

But I don't think that THE USS Enterprise would be sacrificed in the name of war. We have to separate this possibility into 2 parts:

1- The USS Enterprise. It's a vessel that carries a big name, it's not by chance that even in pop-culture it's praised as a vessel with powerful meaning (case in point, Star Trek). It not only represents US military might, since it's one of the most notorious vessels in US navy history, but it also represents US diplomatic power and influence.

People should be aware that the name "Enterprise" changes from ship to ship. Wikipedia fails to explain this, and only portrays the last generation of the Enterprise, with nuclear engines. But for instance, the previous version used during WW2, was actually the one that earned the ship it's fame. First because it brings memories of Pearl Harbor (USS Enterprise was one of the ships not damaged during the Pearl Harbor attack, along with most aircraft carriers) and how the US turned it around, and second, because it represents a status of power.

It doesn't matter what other ships are around it. If you put the USS Enterprise somewhere, it has a deep diplomatic effect. Carriers often stop at ports and attract a lot of attention, but the Enterprise seems to even have it's own little fan community.

So, it's like it's a "symbol" that the US can't disregard easily, or sacrifice.

2- The sinking of the USS Enterprise, as it stands now (wether heading for decommission or not) is a massive blow against the US. Yes, it would meet it's objective, since sinking such a famous ship would make all eyes look into it, and it would kinda humiliate the US military power. But, it would also enrage the military, especially increasing the motivation for war within the military. One thing is to hit your national nerve, but it's a whole new level of playing to hit your pride and honor nerve.

That would mean not only a successful excuse for an attack on Iran (or whoever carries out the attack or is blamed for it) and an armed conflict or a possible war, but it would actually send shockwaves throughout the whole world. It's not like a "terrorist attack on some american target". This is "world war" stuff.

Sinking a US Aircraft Carrier (any of them) is a pure declaration of war, not only due to the nature of the attack (that would be brutal, considering the size of the crew) but also because it's almost like sinking an embassy. It's american territory, and they are serious about it. It's not by chance that US aircraft carriers behave in international waters like isolated airspaces, like you see in land with national airspace.

But then again, I like to have a realistic vain in my posts, and I can't forget a big detail about all this scenario:

The US did allow the sacrifice of a whole fleet in Pearl Harbor in order to push for "an entry" into World War 2. At the time, the UK was having trouble with the Nazi Germany, and the US wanted an excuse to get in between.

Now, Israel (another close ally) is "in trouble" with Iran, with almost the same tone as Churchill portrayed the Nazi threat, and I hope the US isn't thinking of doing the same thing, again... Although the signs (even economical and social) seem oddly familiar.

Like in World War2, the fleet was seen as outdated in every way. Battleships were no longer the pride and honor of the Navy, Aircraft Carriers were, thus saving the carriers, and letting the battleships "die" honorably.

...in some way, just like the current USS Enterprise is seen (outdated and going into retirement).



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Tifozi
 




So, it's like it's a "symbol" that the US can't disregard easily, or sacrifice.

And this is exactly why they would use this one for a false-flag.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by aarys
Heres a u tube video suggesting that a attack on the enterprise could well be on the cards.
geraldcelentechannel.blogspot.com...

She is the oldest carrier in the US navy with a long history, and also maybe the heart of the Navy. Growing up here in NZ. The Enterprise was a ship most boys new about. I had a great model of the ship. But I digrest.
A false flag attack on this ship will hit most americans very hard. ( Those that are a sleep.)
It would be as big as those planes hitting the heart of new york. The twin towers.
Its also away that they can decommision the ship cheaply. Blow her up by Israelly subs, say Iran did it. Bingo. Win, win for the globilist.

I hope my gut feeling is wrong...


We are just making room for the constitution class (NCC-1701 for all your Trekies)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 07:40 AM
link   
reply to post by aarys
 


And precipitate WWIII?

AT least we wouldnn't have to worry about the world ending in December. But what a waste if this occurs before the Olympics and we in Britain have spent all that money preparing for an event which will never happen! Confound those making such dastardly rotten plans!





new topics
top topics
 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join