Bush Administration Agenda to Sacrifice the Fifth Fleet – The New Pearl Harbor

Originally posted by semperfortis
All well and good except...

The United States Fifth Fleet has the means and the potential and the armament to turn Iran into a sheet of glass should they launch even one cruise missile our way.

If you check the total non-nuclear and Nuclear armament of that fleet, you will find they have more than any combination of countries in that area...And enough to adequately protect themselves...

How do offensive weapons protect the fleet once the Iranian missiles are launched?

The pertinent aspects of this story are a) mobile missile launchers and b) virtually indefensible missiles.

Unless you can hide aircraft carriers and warships or make them outrun a cruise missile, they are likely to get hit with Iranian missiles.

Unless the attack on Iran includes taking out all their strategic missiles, including the mobile ones, then this story seems viable.

I imagine Iran have all their missiles on alert and will fire off everything as soon as the 1st US bomber enters Iranian airspace.

Everything will be targeted at Israel and any US targets in the area.

Here's an interesting article and a reality check for those American's who think their fleet in the Persia Gulf is invincible.

The uninvited guest: Chinese sub pops up in middle of U.S. Navy exercise, leaving military chiefs red-faced.

Daily Mail
American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk - a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board.


By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

reply to post by kindred


Yeah and the story looks like its over a year old with no proof what so ever. If that did happen I can guarantee that sub was forced to the surface by two very aggressive LA or Virgina class attack subs. They more than likely seen the sub and used it for the exercise training.

Originally posted by goosdawg
Here's a possible scenario:

1) Israel strikes first to take out Iran's nuclear facilities.
2) Iran retaliates by launching their "Sunburns" against the US Fifth Fleet.
3) With the popular support of the sheeple, the Neo-Con US Government is free to unleash their dogs of war on Iran.
4) Welcome to the End of Times.

Yep, thats pretty much how I am calling it beforehand as well.

reply to post by Flyer


The Enterprise has three types of anti-air defense systems and when you have a Aegis battle group surrounding the carrier you have a massive umbrella around you.
www.fas.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...

Iran would be foolish to try and sink a carrier because they would more than likely get nuked in return. Your talking about 3-4 thousand American lives and billions of dollars of ship. The Capitan will defend her at all cost and every NATO ship in the area would do the same.

posted on 31/7/05 @ 16:11 by LaBTop :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

But not everyone shared Gen. Kernan's rosy assessment. It was sharply criticized by the straight-talking Marine commander who had been brought out of retirement to lead Force Red. His name was Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper, and he had played the role of the crazed but cunning leader of the hypothetical rogue state. Gen. Van Riper dismissed the new military concepts as empty sloganeering, and he had reason to be skeptical. In the first days of the "war," Van Riper's Force Red sent most of the US fleet to the bottom of the Persian Gulf.

I advise especially the ones convinced that the US war machine seems invincible, to read this whole thread, and that whole post of mine from 2005.

Memories run short at ATS.

[edit on 11/11/07 by LaBTop]

The planet won't like any more DU being used. We'll all be coughing or gagging.

reply to post by Sky watcher


Yeah and how effective will they be against thousands of missiles?

Remember the patriot missiles, they didnt work well and the US completely lied about their effectiveness during the war.

reply to post by kindred


This Chinese sub story popping up now is disinfo, IMHO.

All the current reports on this incident fail to mention when this event took place, and are simply parroting the Daily Mail story.

Until told otherwise, I believe this is simply a rehash of a story that took place last year:

CBSNews | Chinese Sub Came Close To U.S. Ships

Note the timeline: 2006/11/14

Now why would this story suddenly become "news" again at this time?

And why don't the current reports mention when this incident took place?

Could this be an attempt to plant the idea in the media, and the sheeple's minds, that the US Navy is vulnerable to a surprise attack?

Found the full interesting story back at Rense.com, by googling up the name of " Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper ", a damn interesting soldier.

Myth Of US Invincibility Floats In The Persian Gulf :
www.rense.com...

Some more info on Van Riper :
www.pbs.org...

I must have missed something...

I thought the "news story" was about the "sacrifice" of the U.S. Fifth Fleet... Not combat capabilities. A "sacrifice" nullifies any tactical or strategic superiority held by ships on station... Or has this discussion sprung from the realization that the precept of sacrificing a battle group is laughable.

I'd still like an end date... I have my calendar handy and like to get that penciled in.

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Not if I can help it. Flagged, starred, StumbleIt... the works. If enough people know, they won't get away with it. If it turns out to be false... no harm, no foul.

So I guess the way to get stars is to push anti-Bush propaganda?

Looking at the article it is about a hypothetical war game using computer simulation and so I fail to see how that plays into the title of “The Neoconservative Agenda to Sacrifice the Fifth Fleet – The New Pearl Harbor” and of course they needed to add a sub title of “The Neo-Conservative Strategy to Attack Iran” so show that Bush is going to attack Iran.

Beachcoma,

Just what are "they" getting away with? The agenda of the author in this article is rather easy to see and the jump from a war simulation to attacking Iran for real and sacrificing the 5th fleet to do it is like a jump to another planet.

You know I’m ready for a different president and a new direction, but this type of propaganda does America no good, and is what continues to create a chasm between people who if they actually compared their beliefs without using a political stamp on them would find they were more likeminded than what the two power house political parties would want everyone to believe.


[edit on 11-11-2007 by Xtrozero]

reply to post by goosdawg


i do not like war anymore than you or anyone with a brain in their head but hiding ones head in the sand wont stop the mad ayatollahs from their quest to make the whole earth become adherents of the muslim faith----------and that is their end goal-----since our society is not interested in obeying the Creator G-D ----we are permitted to experience having to cope with insane dictators like hitler and irans ahmadinejad.if neville chamberlain were alive right now we would probably find dr. michael salla and himself walking in lockstep till the iran regime fulfilled its threats to wipe israel off the map-----and do you think they would stop there?--------then they would take over all the middle easts oil countries and have us begging for oil .somebody has to do something other than surrender to these maniacs----as said G-D could solve the problem for us but humans prefer their own ways till they are on the losing end of conflicts-----and yes i would hate to see any americans murdered or ships sunk in a conflict with iran.

That's why I'm only getting worried when all Navy battle groups silently leave the Persian Gulf, because then an Iran attack is imminent, be it a first strike by Israeli planes, or US stealth planes.

The Gulf is basically a big lake, where such battle groups have no reason to stay if a war starts with an adversary possessing 3 Mach and faster, cruise missiles.

So, if the US government decides to start a war, without retreating those battle groups, they essentially offer them on a plate to the guided missile commanders from the opponent.
That's what's called a sacrifice.

Because then they can bring in the Neutron bombs to clear the battlefield from living opponents, and save the infrastructure for pumping the oil for the homeland security aspect.
It's bad for fighting spirits and moral in a hot dessert battle theatre, while your parents back home freeze to death because of lack of energy.

Originally posted by Flyer
Remember the patriot missiles, they didnt work well and the US completely lied about their effectiveness during the war.

Actually the patriot missile was a huge sucess story. Here was a missile that was ONLY designed for anti-aircraft and in a very short peroid that would have taken years it was redesigned to fill a roll that we had nothing for that roll of shooting down missles from the a ground base launch site.

I would think that since they have had 15 years to continue to improve what turned out to be a very needed and successful weapon that today it is extremely more capable than the first generation back in the Gulf War.

Also most ships use a verson of the Phalanx anti-missile system that basically puts up a wall of bullets at an extremely fast rate. I saw this in operation in Iraq and it can even track and hit small morter rounds with its capabilities. The bigger the missle the easier it is for this system, and it was first used to handle a massive aircraft or missle launch at a ship.

I seems to me that many who bang their chests about the might of the US fleet have not real all the links that were provided. Here we go again:

Excercises show that fleet is vulnerable:Source

Using a range of asymmetrical attack strategies using disguised civilian boats for launching attacks, planes in Kamikaze attacks, and Silkworm cruise missiles, much of the Fifth Fleet was sunk. The games revealed how asymmetrical strategies could exploit the Fifth Fleet’s vulnerability against anti-ship cruise missiles in the confined waters of the Persian Gulf.

Translation: They played out the war. Supposedly doing their best (after all they are the competent sailors you quote them to be). And they lost, with most ships sunk.


DD officials admit no counter to Russian missile:Source

The U.S. Navy, after nearly six years of warnings from Pentagon testers, still lacks a plan for defending aircraft carriers against a supersonic Russian-built missile, according to current and former officials and Defense Department documents.

Translation: Current navy missile defensive systems starting with the AEGIs system are no match for this kind of threat. Which leaves the navy naked to an attack.


It is actually even worse:

Both the Exocet and Silkworm cruise missiles were an older generation of anti-ship missile technology that were far surpassed by the Sunburn and Yakhonts missiles.

Translation: This extract is from the same source as the first extract. According to this, the simulated attacks in the Millenium Challenge were of even older design than the ones used by China (and very likely also Iran) now. and they STILL managed to sink most of the fleet. Consider that.

No,

We read them..

We all just realized they were left wing liberal propaganda sites and therefor intellectually did not take them seriously...

Sorry,

Semper

""and yes i would hate to see any Americans murdered or ships sunk in a conflict with iran.""

Do you realize that the US government has changed it's tactics and full out admits that it feels authorized (by god knows what), to declare war on ANY opponent they see worthy?
First strike they call that.
They did already many times, but at least needed an excuse. Not anymore.

And yes, I hate to see innocent Iranian civilians and soldiers getting murdered (no other word for it) for the case of some power hungry tyrants.
Who keep lying and telling the press to print their lies.

Iran has proved to the UN inspectors that they are not making weapons grade plutonium, and that their nuclear program is aimed at preparing for a world without oil.
Why then, must Iran get attacked?

And their presidents words were translated intentionally wrong, he did not tell the world to want to wipe Israel from the map. He said in Farsi something very different, but your slave media keep repeating their lies, because they know a majority will believe it, after endless repeats.