For a minute there I thought I had to get off my couch, when all the while the fact is we don't have to do anything much but keep things afloat for just a few decades more! In fact, we'd best shut up about PO, because if our offspring finds out we knew about it all along, they'll turn and wring our necks come 2036!
Joined: Apr 27, 2007 Posts: 4262 Location: The Great Sonoran Desert
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 8:26 am Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
Twilight wrote:
Survival can only come from extensive domestic reform, not from military achievements. The reform agenda begins with Americans' relationship with energy. Nothing else matters any more.
And in my mind this reform will come in the shape of the NAU. _________________ "There must be a bogeyman; there always is, and it cannot be something as esoteric as "resource depletion." You can't go to war with that." Emersonbiggins
"... hope is a rotten-thighed whore" Niko Kazantzakis
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 4063 Location: Graceland
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:20 am Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
Twilight wrote:
What I see happening with the US today is a one-man arms race - similar to the one that killed the USSR, yet all the more absurd for lack of a competitor. A similar flavour of ideological hubris is spouted regarding ideological supremacy, the growing arsenal of heavy metal and fighting methods at its disposal, military superiority over opponents and so on. Yet in the arenas that matter, matters of politics and economy, this growth is slowly but surely becoming a life-threatening drain, no longer the means by which survival is ensured. The US is economically hollowing itself out attempting to secure oil supplies, the consumption of which is also hollowing it out. The US is bleeding wealth away as it wastes as much oil as it does, and it multiplies that damage through the taxes it imposes on its people in order to maintain the military strength necessary to maintain the supplies to which it is accustomed.
That is where the conflict is, the domestic economic front. Like the USSR before it, the US will give its wealth away and tax its producers to death.
And everyone else knows it.
There are many hostile participants too, and the peculiar way in which their hostilities manifest themselves is in watching, waiting and not interrupting.
The world is pulling a USSR on the USA and it does not realise it, instead it lashes out at shadows.
The world builds another bunch of railways while the US builds another carrier, more aircraft, more trucks, just like the world did while the USSR built tanks. It is happy to watch that money spent on equipment which will end its days parked in the desert rather than invested into something useful.
The world will not be happy to watch one of its number given a beating, but it will welcome the irreversible destruction of the victor's wealth in the act.
That is where the war is, the US is its own greatest opponent, the same way the USSR turned out to be. Survival can only come from extensive domestic reform, not from military achievements. The reform agenda begins with Americans' relationship with energy. Nothing else matters any more.
Twilight needs his own show. That's great stuff. _________________
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 2:23 pm Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
The_Virginian wrote:
kokoda wrote:
The_Virginian wrote:
Not saying it "wont happen"
BUT...
Putting TWO ( NOT 6) carriers in the Persian gulf means making two SITTING ducks of them....assuming Iran attacked first...
Better to strike Iran with Hypersonic jets, and stealth bombers...at least for a first strike....
Our carrier fleet is extremely outdated and vulnerable...useful in attacking only unprepared countries w/o proper criuse / Skvall / or even old french missiles...in a pond 180 KM wide at it's zenith...it would be very foolish.
If the take to the cover of the open sea...then maybe...
Lotsa' HYPE...little action for years now...
That does NOT mean they CAN'T or WON'T do it!
No such thing as Hypersonic jets ... at least not yet.
Provided that they go in with the intention of just hitting a few strategic targets and then getting out again then it would be a comparative walk in the park for the US. Iran's defenses are old and pretty much useless against modern combat forces.
The problem would be that oil prices would almost immediately go through the roof. That is the last thing that the fragile US economy needs at the moment.
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 10:56 pm Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
It will take decades (maybe NEVER) before CIVILIANS get to use this technology.
Right now we are without a supersonic civilian airliner since the concord went "bye bye."
Yet rest assured, not all the triangle craft reported in the sky is a result of too much beer and weed consumption. _________________ Eickhorn Daggers!
www.pistolanddagger.com
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:00 pm Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
ALBY wrote:
My eyes bleed every time I read about military matters on this board.
Our carriers outdated ? Hardly.
Outdated but still useful. Just like the rifle in my avatar....trumped by better technology....as always, it just depends on the circumstances. _________________ Eickhorn Daggers!
www.pistolanddagger.com
Posted: Sat May 17, 2008 11:06 pm Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
Starvid wrote:
The_Virginian wrote:
Starvid wrote:
The_Virginian wrote:
Not saying it "wont happen"
BUT...
Putting TWO ( NOT 6) carriers in the Persian gulf means making two SITTING ducks of them....assuming Iran attacked first...
Better to strike Iran with Hypersonic jets, and stealth bombers...at least for a first strike....
Our carrier fleet is extremely outdated and vulnerable...useful in attacking only unprepared countries w/o proper criuse / Skvall / or even old french missiles...in a pond 180 KM wide at it's zenith...it would be very foolish.
If the take to the cover of the open sea...then maybe...
Lotsa' HYPE...little action for years now...
That does NOT mean they CAN'T or WON'T do it!
It will take a lot more than a little Exocet to sink a 100,000 ton ship.
But sure, the carriers are far more vulnerable than most people think, if they have to face some real resistance.
But then, so what?
Can't the US afford losing a single carrier?
The "old french Missiles" was the most extreme example of what is commonly available to any state who wants it.
And YES hitting the deck would in a sense "knock out the carrier" by cripilling it's offensive and most defensive capabilities, other than the ships meant to protect it.
The Iranians have MUCH better stuff than Argentina in 82.
Exocet is a pretty small missile. You wont sink a carrier with it. Hurt it? Sure. Knock it out from combat? Maybe.
But if a carrier is hit with 10 missiles, or Sunburns instead of Exocets, well...
I don't even know what we are arguing about, if you read my post you will find that I never said "SINK".... before your last comment I clarified my belief that it could hurt it's capabilities as to make it useless...
Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 1:44 am Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
The_Virginian wrote:
It will take decades (maybe NEVER) before CIVILIANS get to use this technology.
Right now we are without a supersonic civilian airliner since the concord went "bye bye."
Yet rest assured, not all the triangle craft reported in the sky is a result of too much beer and weed consumption.
Why do you conclude that an unidentified triangular craft must be a hypersonic jet? An unidentified craft is just that ... unidentified.
Any useful application Hypersonic technology is decades away. In the mean time the US has is stealth aircraft, cruise missiles, anti-radiation missiles, electronic warfare, satellite surveillance, airborne early warning aircraft and a whole bunch of other nasty weapons that would make short work of Iranian defences.
Joined: Feb 20, 2005 Posts: 2677 Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 5:10 am Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
ALBY wrote:
PS
Since nobody has ever attacked, much less sunk a super carrier, I'd like to suggest to you all that the news of their demise is perhaps, a wee bit premature.
Well, on one hand that says that the Americans have been pretty clever. They have used those carriers with great success against those wo couldn't defend themselves against them.
And on the other hand, the last time anyone sunk a great carrier, it needed to be really, really beat up before it sank. And that carrier wasn't even comissioned yet and had design faults!
But to be fair, Shinano was a converted battleship with a huge amount of armour, while contemporary carriers have no amrour at all. _________________ Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 7:56 am Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
A few carriers were used in the nuclear tests like Bikini Atoll. I think the Big E was amoung them.
The only firing war between carrier equiped navies since WWII was the falklands when a single RN SSN bottled up the entire Argentinian fleet including its carrier.
An SSK is a very very real threat to a carrier. In confined waters with dodgy acoustics Id not be risking the family silverware sticking them in a puddle like the Gulf with a couple of SSKs on the lose.
Keep them in the Indian Ocean where there speed and escourts would make interception by SSK a far less likely outcome.
However there have been reports of Chinese SSNs succesfully shadowing CV battle groups, I think its the one based out of Japan, Hmmmm thats an old Forrestal isnt it? Kitty Hawk maybe?
Ah yes a Song class SSN stalked the CV63 Kitty Hawk battle group in 2006.
Joined: Sep 30, 2005 Posts: 439 Location: Baltimore County, Md
Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 1:41 pm Post subject: Re: Carrier groups headed toward Iran?
that may or may not be 'the virginian' , his infant and rifle in that picture.
but he stated 'the rifle in my avatar' not my rifle in the avatar.
just pointing out that like many of the posters in here, your reading comprehension sucks. similar to six carriers heading to the gulf, when in fact that was never said.
The Reagan left. It is a behemoth. On San Diego Bay, you can take a boat to within a couple hundred yards of it before reaching a floating barrier. From the water, you begin to understand what force projection is about.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
