*BREAKING* Russia Arms Syria With "Ship Killers": Missiles Threaten U.S. Navy Carrier

reply to post by Eurisko2012


The USS Enterprise is retiring in 2013. It will be 42 years old when it does.

It is being replaced by the USS Gerald R Ford, the first of a whole new class of advanced super carriers able to support up to 220 sorties in 24 hours.

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

The USS Enterprise is retiring in 2013. It will be 42 years old when it does.

It is being replaced by the USS Gerald R Ford, the first of a whole new class of advanced super carriers able to support up to 220 sorties in 24 hours.

Oh really? Hmmm.........

I guess we will need to come up with a whole new ship with the name U.S.S. Enterprise.

Food for thought.

So why did the Israeli ship get hit by the Hezbollah in 2006?

Or are you saying that the anti-missile technology is that much better five years later?

It might be but the reason that most pro basketball teams score 100 points a game is that it is much harder to defend than attack.

When it comes to missiles that are a few meters long and ships that are over 100 meters long the defender has a huge disadvantage.

The fact is that firing enough missiles guarantees a hit.

As I said earlier, Israel had no idea that 50 of its Merkava tanks would be hit and of that 42 knocked out of the battle when it started the 2006 invasion of Lebabnon.

The attakers with small missiles had the advantage.

The main point being that Israel underestimated the skill and technology that the defenders of Lebanon had.

The US and UK underestimated the Iraqis too and many American and British troops are dead and many more injured for life because politicians and generals were over confident.

The US is already looking weak the last thing it needs is the video of a sinking US Navy carrier on every Chinese and Russian TV as a symbol of end of empire.

Originally posted by TrueBrit
While those ship killer missiles must be of some sort of concern to those who might be deployed to become targets for them, I would say that if a single one hits a UN vessel, a US vessel, a vessel from the UK, France , Germany , or any of the nations which are coming out in support of the Syrian people, then theres no excuse for that.

We have the technology now to track and destroy missiles well before they get within a mile of a target area, using lazers, or other projectiles. Anything making it through the net of crap that technology makes possible, that we could throw up round any vessel , would only make it to target through inaction, lazyness, or cheapskatedness,rather than by "sheer chance" or because " there is only so much we can do to protect our servicemen... "blather that we get fed by the military talking heads.

At the same time, if theres a snowflakes chance in hell that any action against the Syrian military would result in collateral damage of more than say ten people, total over the course of any engagement of any length from a day to a decade, then it shouldnt be done, and another way MUST be found, even if that way is out and out assasination , which at least has the advantage of only spilling the blood of those who NEED removing when done correctly.

I doubt the anti-ship missiles will be all that effective for Syria, not that I believe there will be an actual conflict. US can position its carriers and the supporting fleet well off shore, hundreds of miles in fact. There is no need for them to move ships within sight of shore, because unlike the Israelis there is not going to be need to provide cover and intelligence for ground forces, since US/NATO would never be reckless enough to actually land infantry on the ground.

Theoretically the missiles in question can target ships that are hundreds of miles away, but it is far more difficult, especially considering Syria is unlikely to have eyes in the air monitoring the exact movement of the ships in the Mediterranean. The P-800 is most effective when launched from the air, and Syria does not have the hardware to do that. Second best alternative is firing it from ships closer to the target, which is also highly unlikely for Syria. Attacks from the shore are most effective only within a line of sight, unless one has effective radars and intelligence planes to do over-the-horizon monitoring (again unlikely for Syria).

Additionally, the Eastern Mediterranean is teeming with ships of all sorts and sizes, and it is likely that some non-military ships will be between the missiles launcher and the carrier group. There is always a likelihood with missiles like these, that they will hit a different ship if one happens to be enroute to the target and similar in signature.

It would be more meaningful for Syria to get S-400 anti-air systems, not that they would change much anyway, since as I said before it is highly unlikely that there will be a conflict. This is all just for show.

reply to post by tommyjo
I was Listening to Webster Tarpley on world crisis radio today ..his brief ,just getting back from Syria is stating something different ...He says that there are Russian Ships in Tartus and he heard rumours of the S300 missiles .tarpley.net... He mentions 4 subs there as well ....Looking at Pepe Escobars latest article on Asian Times www.atimes.com... he mentions them as well ..." THE ROVING EYE
That rocky road to Damascus
By Pepe Escobar

The trillion-dollar question in the "Arab Winter" is who will blink first in the West's screenplay of slouching towards Tehran via Damascus.

As they examine the regional chessboard and the formidable array of forces aligned against them, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the military dictatorship of the mullahtariat in Tehran must face, simultaneously, superpower Washington, bomb-happy North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) members, nuclear power Israel, all Sunni Arab absolute monarchies, and even Sunni-majority, secular Turkey.

Meanwhile, on their side, the Islamic Republic can only count on Moscow. Not as bad a hand as it may seem.
Syria is Iran's undisputed key ally in the Arab world - while
Russia, alongside China, are the key geopolitical allies. China, for the moment, is making it clear that any solution for Syria must be negotiated.

Russia's one and only naval base in the Mediterranean is at the Syrian port of Tartus. Not by accident, Russia has installed its S-300 air defense system - one of the best all-altitude surface-to-air missile systems in the world, comparable to the American Patriot - in Tartus. The update to the even more sophisticated S-400 system is imminent.
From Moscow's - as well as Tehran's - perspective, regime change in Damascus is a no-no. It will mean virtual expulsion of the Russian and Iranian navies from the Mediterranean."
Yet key lateral moves by the West are already on. Diplomats in Brussels confirmed to Asia Times Online that the former Libyan "rebels" - now trying to come up with a credible government - have already given the go-ahead for NATO to build a sprawling military base in Cyrenaica.

NATO has no final say in such matters. This is decided by the boss - the Pentagon - interested in emboldening Africom in coordination with NATO. As many as 20,000 boots are expected to be deployed on the ground in Libya - at least 12,000 of them Europeans. They will be responsible for Libya's "internal security", but also be on alert for possible, further military campaigns targeted at - who else - Syria and Iran.

A report [1] by a Qatar-based researcher for the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) even comes close to admitting that the self-described "Free Syria Army" is basically a bunch of hardcore Islamists, plus a few genuine army defectors, but mostly radicalized Muslim Brotherhood bought, paid for and weaponized by the US, Israel, the Gulf monarchies and Turkey. There's nothing "pro-democracy" about this lot - as incessantly sold by Western corporate and Saudi-owned media.
The House of Saud, Jordan and rising Qatar are more than comfortable doing the US's and Israel's bidding. The House of Saud - the GCC's top dog - invaded Bahrain with 1,500 troops to smash pro-democracy protests very much like the ones in Egypt and Syria. The House of Saud helped the ruling, Sunni al-Khalifa dynasty in 70% Shi'ite Bahrain to conduct widespread torture; Bahrainis confirm that everyone tortured was forced to confess direct links with "evil" Tehran.
Russia knows that if the current Libyan model is reproduced in Syria - and with Lebanon already under a de facto NATO blockade - the Mediterranean will indeed become that dream, a NATO lake, which is code for total US control.
When the US neo-conservatives ruled the universe - that was only a few years ago - the motto was "Real men go to Tehran". An update is in order. Call it "Real men go to Tehran via Damascus only if they have the balls to stare down Moscow".

Its a good article ..I took snips but a read in full as well as the latest podcast from Tarpley gives a diffrent perspective ...peace

Again my point is that the ourcome of military conflict is very hard to predict in advance.

Israel thought it would be a cake walk to invade Lebanon but they were wrong about that and lost troops equipment and were made to look bad in the eyes of military experts.

The US thought that invading Iraq would be cheap and easy but it was not.

Israel, with all of its intel resources failed to appreciate the skill and bravery of the Lebanese defenders. The US failed to appreciate the determination with which Iraqis would defend their country from an illegal attack.

Israel did know or underestinated the use of Russian anti-tank weapons combined with effective tactics and a motivated force. The US did not anticipate IED's and how effective they would be against US vehicles.

You can all talk about certain types of missiles until you are blue in the face but you do not know what will happen if the US threatens Syria or Iran or Syrai and Iran.

Some of you are saying that US ships will not get close to the Russian missiles in Syria but US ships are close to Russian and Iranian missiles in the Persian Gulf. I have sailed in the Straits of Hormuz and know how narrow and shallow it is. It is hard to get out of range in some areas.

I don't know what is going to happen either and if we are lucky and American politicians and military leaders are sligtly smarter now than they were when they decided to attack Iraq nothing will happen.

I am not saying that the US might not attack Syria and defeat it in an hour either. That is possible but the potential for a tremendous fail makes taking the chance hardly worth the risk.

Really, we just have to pull the plug on supporting Israel and force Israel to comply with international law.

At the base of all this - Israel is the problem.

Originally posted by the2ofusr1
reply to post by tommyjo

 

I was Listening to Webster Tarpley on world crisis radio today ..his brief ,just getting back from Syria is stating something different ...He says that there are Russian Ships in Tartus and he heard rumours of the S300 missiles .tarpley.net... He mentions 4 subs there as well ....Looking at Pepe Escobars latest article on Asian Times www.atimes.com... he mentions them as well ..." THE ROVING EYE
That rocky road to Damascus
By Pepe Escobar

Conspiracy is money to the likes of those people you quote. They have to create and enhance stories based purely on dubious stories. Ask yourself why the Syrian News Agency reported the Russian warships in the first place?

Ask yourself how the Russians transited to the area without anybody noticing? Turkey controls the Turkish Straits under treaty. Ask yourself how a large deployment of Russian warships transited to Tartus via the Black Sea?

Russian Admiral Valentin Selivanov has revealed.

"In Tartus now there aren't any our ships. There is only our floating workshop and storage platform. A month ago also there came the Black Sea Fleet patrol ship "Smetlivy", but she has already returned to Sevastopol."

www.stringer.ru...

The Smetlivy was exercising with NATO assets along with the rescue ship Epron. The Smetlivy was at the time the only Russian warship in the Mediterranean. Admiral Selivanov revealed that she has already returned to Sevastapol in the Black Sea. The whole story was bogus from the start!

rusnavy.com...

Again ask yourself why the Syrian News Agency reported the Russian warships? This Lebanese article explains it.

www.nowlebanon.com...

The reality is that the Russians haven't deployed warships to Syria or the Mediterranean. The last frigate returned to the Black Sea Fleet after exercising with NATO assets on the 19th. The Kuznetsov Battle Group is likely to deploy on a routine patrol from December to the Mediterranean.

Originally posted by michael1983l
Russia owns one aircraft carrier why would they have it in Syria and not defending Russia?

The story of the Russian carrier currently in the Mediterranean is bogus. Russia every few years deploys their aircraft carrier on lengthy deployments. Every now and again they deploy the aircraft carrier to the Mediterranean. During 2009 the carrier visited Syrian waters. It is expected that on this upcoming December deployment that the carrier battle group will enter the Mediterranean and possibly enter Syrian waters on a visit.

See following article on preparations for the aircraft carrier deployment.

www.itar-tass.com...

Originally the Kuznetsov was due to start the routine deployment this month.

rusnavy.com...

Announced back in September.
www.hurriyetdailynews.com...

Of course watch all the conspiracy story twisters invent it as deployed in direct defence of Syria.

Originally posted by BRAVO949
At the base of all this - Israel is the problem.

And Israel has what to do with any of this? As is the case with any development in the Middle East, people will try to somehow work their agendas into everything.

Originally posted by nightbringr
Great work as always Bob!

Can't wait for the new episode. Love that you talking to a Syrian insider. Debkafile is reporting increasing amount of defections from the Syria army, I wonder if your source can confirm this? Would we wonderful if the regime collapsed from within and a confrontation could be avoided! This one has the potential to get very ugly.

edit on 26-11-2011 by nightbringr because: (no reason given)

Yes he did - in a way. We were talking about the Free Syrian Army which is the organization that is absorbing what defectors there are. At the moment, the FSA is the smallest of the three main opposition groups; but it is also the most violent, responsible for the attacks on Syrian military bases in recent days.

The deadline set by the Arab League for Assad to accept hundreds of Arab observers passed on Friday without any response from the Assad regime. Having already been suspended from participation by the Arab League, the next step is economic sanctions and the no-fly, no-movement zone designed to prevent the Syrian Army from continued attacks on civilians which the UN says has claimed over 3,500 lives.

Originally posted by Bluesma

Originally posted by Eurisko2012
reply to post by Bluesma

 

We wouldn't need an aircraft carrier to topple Syria. A military airport in Iraq would be better.

Look how easily Libya folded.

I am making no comment about that as I have no knowledge to base an opinion on. I only intended to respond to the part I did have some knowledge about- the current whereabouts of this particular carrier.

I DO appreciate the update. I'd just like to point out that when I broke this story, I was relying on intelligence from STRATFOR, which is always impeccable. So at the time of the OP, my information was accurate. That's one nice thing about aircraft carriers; they move.

reply to post by Eurisko2012


CVN-79, a Gerald R Ford class carrier, almost became the next Enterprise, but was then named the John F Kennedy.

CVN-80 looks like it could end up being the next Enterprise though.

On the other hand the US Navy might be saving that name for something much more interesting and potent than a supercarrier.

"Control of space means control of the world."
Lyndon B Johnson

You are saying that the destruction of Syria is on the Israeli agenda, right?

Did you have a chance to read the Sept 2000 PNAC document calling for toppling Syria, Iran, Iraq?

How about the famous 1995 "Clean Break" document written by radical Zionists calling for the US to take down all of the Muslim nations that could challenge Israel?

Nothing happens in the Middle East without the hand of Israel somewhere behind it.

If you don't know that a small group of Zionists including the CFR run US foreign policy then you will not be able to unstand anything going on anywhere near Syria.

Originally posted by maloy

Originally posted by BRAVO949
At the base of all this - Israel is the problem.

And Israel has what to do with any of this? As is the case with any development in the Middle East, people will try to somehow work their agendas into everything.

Shouldn't we be naming carriers after Chinese Chariman of the Communist Party since we are borrowing money from China and using Chinese steel and Chinese electronics in them?

USS Mao Tse Tung - sounds fine to me.

or

USS David Ben Gurion

Since Israel tells us where the aircraft carriers should be located most of the time.

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

CVN-79, a Gerald R Ford class carrier, almost became the next Enterprise, but was then named the John F Kennedy.

CVN-80 looks like it could end up being the next Enterprise though.

On the other hand the US Navy might be saving that name for something much more interesting and potent than a supercarrier.

"Control of space means control of the world."
Lyndon B Johnson

reply to post by BRAVO949


Israel and China are pawns in a much greater game. A game we have been playing long before either existed.

we should have such an empire for Liberty as she has never surveyed since the creation

Thomas Jefferson

We have it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation, similar to the present, hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of a new world is at hand.

Thomas Paine

You might also want to look at our Great Seal when you get a chance.

I like to say there is no point in worrying, from a Jewish standpoint they should know who comes out top, no doubt if things do get bad they will have casualties and that is normal, but I believe super natural events or perfect timing in God's plan for us will cause great natural disasters and plagues in which certain tribes and nations or cities who try and come between Israel and Christ's return.
We should not hasten any return because it is said to be a unique day and a very dark day so no one wants it to happen but there are Islamic factions that demand a response when concerning their 12th Imam prophet to take stage in which Iran is a great believer in their own prophecy including eradication of Crosses and Jews and probably Christains alike.

But people should have faith, God will play a part in it, not only that but when the rapture occurs all who is left will be the trouble makers anyway.

If not then we just have to see what happens, mars might be the next best place to go.

Pass In Review

reply to post by OldCorp

USS George H.W. Bush Arrives in 6th Fleet

The Bush passed through the Suez Canal on November 20 after moving through the Red Sea en route from the Indian Ocean, and so was in the southeast Mediterranean at that time. The STRATFOR/Zero Hedge graphic you referenced correlates with the US Navy reports, but offers only very broad notions of locations and routes.

While I don't see any direct evidence it passed close by Syria on the way to Marseille, it was in the general area at that time. I haven't seen anything detailing its movement in that area more specifically, so where it may have gone while in transit to Marseille seems somewhat open to speculation.

I do think it's fair to say the Bush is probably out of danger from Syrian missiles in its current location, however.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

Originally posted by USAisdevil
reply to post by Eurisko2012

 

aircraft carrier would be good target practice for sure.As for airport in iraq that remains to seen.Persian gulf would be sealed off and oil would 300$ dollar/bbl.

Russia will make good money on western stupidity.

edit on 26-11-2011 by USAisdevil because: (no reason given)

The oil situation is looking good.

Libya oil is back online.

It's the good stuff. - sweet crude -
Yum.

There is great news in the USA. We found more oil and LOTS of natural gas.
We will be exporting LNG to Europe.

The USA is and always will be an economic superpower and a military superpower.

Oil reserves mean absolutely NOTHING in terms of the price of oil. Price of oil is determined by speculation, dominated by the financial/business elite. They control world affairs with determining the price of oil.

Well, the speculators have the power to force the price of oil up and down. However, eventually the
Free Market takes over and finds a stable price level.

The Free Market usually shows up when reports of - gluts - appear.
Supply & Demand

You believe that nonsense? The "invisible hand" applies to the free market. We don't live in a world with a free market. Capitalism has evolved into its finance state which is nothing more than neoliberal imperialism. What this means is that the hands of the elite few control the market, not the other way around.

Originally posted by Eurisko2012

I heard the U.S. Navy is retiring one of our aircraft carriers ahead of schedule due to DOD budget cuts.
They are expensive.

Yes. From what I understand we'll be going from twelve carriers to eleven?
But not this particular carrier- it is brand new.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


I got points off for having a couple quotes: a short response, to the short post it responded to.....it was too much.
I will start to complain if you don't get reprimanded and points taken off for THIS one!