US warships frightened by Iranian boats; War of Terror; US foreign policy, etc...

Discussion in 'World Events' started by S.A.M., Jan 7, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    Yeah, they have been claiming that since then haven't they, well the Pres, better get his ass in gear.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    It's a stupid and nonsensical argument, usually employed by Leftists who want to silence people they don't agree with: Are you a soldier, would you send your son to die? Yes, I'm quite familiar with this tawdry tactic that has no bearing on my opinions or the issue.

    And if direct experience is required to hold an opinion about something, then they better shut the sciforums down, because I'm willing to wager most of us don't have direct experience of many of the topics we regularly bandy about.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    Are you praising the Iranians?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,045
    Fleet of five?

    Just ... just out of curiosity, what constitutes a fleet? I mean, the dictionary definition is fair, but didn't this start out with five Iranian boats?

    I mean, sure, there's the dictionary definition, but isn't that just a bit overblown?
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Hunt, Terence. "Navy: Iran Incident 'Deadly Serious'". Time.com. January 13, 2008. See http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1703144,00.html
     
  8. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Of course, I cannot imagine any people today who have suffered so much and have still held on to their culture and society. They've survived the Arabs, the Byzantines, the Romans, the Mongols, the Ottomans and have retained their identity. They share a very long history with India.

    They are where we were after independence, although they adopted the parliamentary democracy system in 1906 or thereabouts, external factors have made it difficult for them to come to fruition. I have no doubt they will though, as we did.
     
  9. angrybellsprout paultard since 2002 Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,251
    I think you mean Iraq where the US was beaten so badly by the Marine in charge of the Iraqi forces that the US had to cheat to only be slightly beaten.
     
  10. Buffalo Roam Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,931
    But they didn't hang on to their cultural identity, the cultural identity of Persia was Zoroastrianism,and it was supplanted by Moslems in the 7th century with Islam and Sharia' Law, when you change the major religion and replace the laws, you change the Culture.

    Zoroastrianism

    The ancient Iranian religion of wisdom is one of the first monotheistic religions, founded by the Prophet Zarathushtra over 3000 years ago. It may have profoundly influenced Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Western and Eastern culture.Before the Islamic conquest of Persia, Zoroastrianism was the state religion of the Sassanian Empire of Persia (224-651 AD) and played an important role in the earlier Median, Achaemenian and Parthian dynasties
     
  11. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    Hopefully the Americans won't destroy yet another seat of antiquity, a people who have lived continuously for thousands of years as a country.
     
  12. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    iceaura's earlier recalling Lt.Gen. Paul Van Riper's Pentagon dissidence during the Millenium Challenge wargame (2002) seems important to this discusion, because it brings to light what the 5th Fleet (thanks Tiassa for the correction) should fear the most- and it isn't a "fleet" of 5 speedboats.

    It's worth revisiting Millenium Challenge now, because Van Riper demonstrated potential tactics of a more determined, more unified, better equipped, and better trained enemy than Iraq was in 2003; in other words, Iran in 2008. Speedboats were only one component of the attack that defeated a hypothetical US Navy in the wargame- It was a combined attack that overwhelmed a representative simulation of US fleet defenses. Employing scores of harrying sea vessels and aircraft of all sizes that saturated US tracking, the attack exploited confusion during a moment of escalation, delivering a sudden and devastating coordinated attack involving ships, aircraft, and guided missiles. The exercise showed how Hormuz, and the Persian Gulf, can be a deadly trap- even for the most powerful navy on Earth.

    Although the initiation of hostilities is not in Iran's interest, Iran could be backed into a position where pulling out nearly all the stops, and suddenly unleashing nearly everything they've got against the US fleet might be the most effective military response to sufficient US provocation, such as imminent air attack from US forces. While Iran might use small craft (in much greater numbers than were involved in the non-incident last week) to saturate taskloads aboard US warships, their heavier shipboard and shore batteries are what pack the knockout punch: Amid the hurly-burly of engaging multiple targets, the nightmare scenario is for fast anti-ship missiles such as Sunburn to streak into our capital ships.

    Because the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea does not provide for US convoys to forcibly deny the approach and maneuvering of other vessels, warships transiting Hormuz are relatively naked- they must file through without their standard defensive formation and perimeter, and they must allow other vessels passage. The Gulf as a whole does not allow the physical or legal maneuvering space of the open sea. This reality remains while tensions may escalate, presenting extraordinary risks for the US Navy. The US President's recent sabre-rattling, and the major US media's penchant for overdrama are dangerous games (with real, irreversible consequences) that certainly do not Support Our Sailors, in terms of valuing their lives. We have nothing to gain from a shootout with Iran that is worth the risk to our Navy, not to mention our equally vulnerable garrisons in Iraq and Afghanistan.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2008
  13. stretched a junkie's broken promise Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,244
    OK.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Direct experience absolutely gives opinions weight.
     
  14. Echo3Romeo One man wolfpack Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,196
    Haha, that article sucks. Van Riper was actually the one who cheated, by "spawning" his speedboats right in the middle of the battle group, which was far out in the deep water at the time of his attack, out of range for a Boghammer. Also, the blue fleet was refloated in order to continue to the amphibious landing phase, so the Marines could get some training time in. In short, the events that made MC02 famous amongst the armchair general corps actually have very little importance to what it was intended to stress and consequently it is often interpreted in an incorrect context, quoted example included.

    In my experience in several consecutive wargames as OPFOR, shit like this happens all the time. It really isn't anywhere near as a big a deal as you guys are trying to make it out to be. The reason is that you're making wildly false assumptions about the purposes of these wargames. Their primary function is to sharpen the skills of the crewmembers aboard the ships participating, usually in preparation for a deployment. Back in the late 90s when I was afloat as part of 3rd FAST, carrier groups heading over to the gulf used to spend a week down off the coast of Puerto Rico getting their shit pushed in so that they could get everyone worked up from "sitting around chipping paint in Norfolk" to "sitting around looking for bad guys" before they finally shifted colors for hajjiville.

    All the times I participated in wargame excercises as the red team, my parent ship was side tasked from an active deployment. They were looking forward to this as a challenge, and a welcome change of pace from the boring as fuck counter narcotics operations they were doing otherwise. The first exercise was against a carrier group just coming out of overhaul. The second was against a combined NATO fleet. In any red/blue exercise, there is a very big difference in the mindset of the commanders in the two forces. In the blue force, they are usually more worried about keeping everyone sailing in the same direction and not running into each other while getting all their damage control drills done and making sure some shitwit shipyard worker didn't leave a wrench sitting inside a radar antenna. They see it as a necessary pain in the ass checkbox to tick off before they deploy, along with the plethora of inspections any ship needs to pass before being deployable (CART, TSTA, FEP). During an exercise, the red team, with a real underdog feeling about the whole thing (1-2 ships vs carrier group, or 4-5 against about 40), is already worked up and sharpened from being on active deployment, and basically goes into the event with no real responsibilities but to have fun and kick ass. Which is what we always did. We also cheated like dirty cheating motherfuckers. It is all well and good for the rules of the game to say that the USS Yorktown (a Ticonderoga class AEGIS cruiser) was really some imaginary 3rd world nation's beat to shit second hand WWII vintage destroyer, but that didn't stop us from using every ability at our disposal, including every asset of our communications, sensors, and intelligence infrastructure that a "real" opponent would obviously have no access to on the ship we were supposed to be playing. The OPFOR, with less responsibility and ROEs to adhere to, gets to play creative games just to have fun and really put the squeeze on the blue team by being stupendous assholes as much as possible. (This is why wargames are so much goddamned fun, especially as OPFOR.) In one event around Puerto Rico and the USVI, we actually disguised the hull number to match that of a ship in the blue team's fleet to confuse the pilots scouting. Later, we strung the decorative lights all over the place one night, had a bunch of people sit around on deck fully illuminated having a party, and then we merged into the cruise ship traffic leaving port. The XO actually ordered the OOD to call the port to find out what the harbor movement schedule was. Honest to god, that one cost the blue team half their fleet, carrier included, when they killed the lights and started "shooting". In another exercise up near Canada, we had a submarine on our team that just sat underneath the best ship the blue team had, and every time they'd "respawn" as per the rules of the game, they'd immediately get "torpedoed."

    In both excercises, we did the same thing that Van Riper did. We ignored the results of the game, changed the rules on the fly, or flat out allowed the blue team to cheat and score an easy kill on us, simply to allow some specific aspect of training to proceed. While occasionally it made us on the OPFOR a little bitter at the time, in the long run, which do you think would do the greater good? Telling the entire NATO minesweeping fleet to fuck off and go home crying because the OPFOR ship made a suicide attack and killed half the blue team, or letting them refloat and get the actual minesweeping excercise training that everyone dragged all their toys up to Nova Scotia to play with in the first place? (In MC02 the fleet was refloated in order to conduct the amphibious ops that were primary to the exercise.) The creative tactics employed by the OPFOR commanders (at least the non-cheating stuff we let them know about) are almost certainly noted and taken into consideration in some office in the Pentagon, as they are recorded and released in the after-action reviews and lessons learned debriefs in following days and weeks. Sometimes they're noted in the field as well while the exercise is taking place, if it is something immediately useful to the trainees. In one of the excercises, we were so ruthless and effective as OPFOR, that they not only granted us extra "lives" to let the blue assbeatings continue for more training opportunities, they also sent a message to the fleet announcing the victory of [imaginary red team shitbag country] in repulsing NATO. That said, in general, the results of the wargame part usually rest upon the creativity of a few specific officers. Stressing the tactical abilities of a half dozen Captains (Navy) or Colonels is something that can be done just as easily in simulation in a meeting room, and mobilizing 40 ships and assorted aircraft for a week to see who is the better thinker would be a collossal waste of resources. Large scale military exercises are conducted to give the run of the mill grunts aboard the participating units some "combat" experience in an active operational environment. Past a certain point, it doesn't matter who "wins", as long as OS3 Needledick learns how to read his radar console or stop fucking up their callsigns on the radio.

    In reality, a carrier group is not going to sail into harm's way. You will never see a strike group sail through a choke point like the SOH or Taiwan Strait when there is a tangible chance that it is going to get attacked. It will operate in the deep water with full mobility where nothing can touch it, but where the long arm of its strike aircraft and Tomahawks can pound targets deep inland, with impunity, indefinitely. If it does need to transit the choke point, it will only do so after the defenses have been suppressed. Patton referred to static defenses as monuments to human stupidity for a reason: when your defenses are immobile, you can only address the enemy on their terms, and you will never, ever hold the initiative.
     
  15. stretched a junkie's broken promise Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,244
    "WHY IS IRAN STILL IN THE CROSS-HAIRS?
    CLUES FROM THE PROJECT FOR A NEW AMERICAN CENTURY"
    (http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/new-american-century.php)

    "Skeptical observers might think that the two countries were being goaded into World War III – either that, or that someone wanted to convince American viewers that Iran indeed remained a threat, despite a recent National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) finding that the country is not engaged in a nuclear weapons program as formerly alleged. Before President George W. Bush left for his Middle East visit on January 8, he told the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot, "Part of the reason I'm going to the Middle East is to make it abundantly clear to nations in that part of the world that we view Iran as a threat, and that the NIE in no way lessens that threat."2 Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) said in a recent MSNBC news broadcast that there is still a "great possibility" of nuclear action against Iran. The target has just shifted from nuclear power plants to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which has been declared a terrorist organization. Paul said, "[T]here are still quite a few neoconservatives who want to go after Iran under these unbelievable conditions."
     
  16. Exiled Registered Member

    Messages:
    87

    Would you approve of Iran using nuclear weapons against Israel?
     
  17. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    The imaginary ones?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    It is more likely that Israel would use one against Iran.

    Forget the media rhetoric, Iranians have not invaded anyone for 1400 years.
     
  18. Exiled Registered Member

    Messages:
    87
    The Iranian people are not an aggressive people.

    There leader on the other hand~

    Ahmadinejad

    “They have created a myth today that they call the massacre of Jews and they consider it a principle above God, religions and the prophets.”

    “As the Imam said, Israel must be wiped off the map.”
     
  19. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,824
    More mythmaking from Memri :yawn:

    This is getting really old.
     
  20. Exiled Registered Member

    Messages:
    87
    Perhaps, or perhaps not. All depends on what side of the fence you sit.

    Am I to believe that Ahmadinejad was just kidding around?
     
  21. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    I never said it didn't, but your positing that unless I've been in combat that I can't speak about foreign policy and armed conflict. This is asinine.
     
  22. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,603
    You are to check up and discover that you have been lied to about Ahmedinejad. Starting from the notion that he is the Iranian's "leader".

    He's a politician. His power is about equivalent to Nancy Pelosi's,with a little Condi Rice thrown in.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2008
  23. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    E3R: "Van Riper was actually the one who cheated, by "spawning" his speedboats right in the middle of the battle group, which was far out in the deep water at the time of his attack, out of range for a Boghammer."

    Nope. Red was shadowing and then harrying shipping from Basra to the Strait of Hormuz for days in the simulation, with all kinds of small and large craft. Try and comprehend that with a few extra fuel cans and a box lunch, even the smallest Boghammers can cross the Persian/Arabian Gulf. Obviously you haven't sailed there enough to get the picture. I have.

    "In short, the events that made MC02 famous amongst the armchair general corps actually have very little importance to what it was intended to stress and consequently it is often interpreted in an incorrect context, quoted example included."

    It was exactly the same context that caused a fatal loss of situational awareness aboard the USS Vincennes. Our potential adversaries know all about saturating the CIC, having learned from numerous simulated and real encounters.

    "In my experience in several consecutive wargames as OPFOR, shit like this happens all the time. It really isn't anywhere near as a big a deal as you guys are trying to make it out to be."

    The only way you can pretend to be smarter than Van Ripen is to ignore what he has to say:
    It's much more significant than you allow, considering we can't refloat our ships, and can't re-animate our Sailors if we make these kinds of prideful errors in real engagements, the likes of which we have zero experience with in US naval history. Just because we are a much more powerful nation than Iran, and just because we have the world's most complex weapons and sensors, just because we have the world's best-trained sailors does not mean that our ships can not be reduced to fish in a barrel in the confined waters of the Persian Gulf.

    "The reason is that you're making wildly false assumptions about the purposes of these wargames."

    I made no characterization of the purpose of training exercises, because the purpose is obvious.

    "Their primary function is to sharpen the skills of the crewmembers aboard the ships participating, usually in preparation for a deployment."

    Well, duh.

    "Back in the late 90s when I was afloat as part of 3rd FAST, carrier groups heading over to the gulf used to spend a week down off the coast of Puerto Rico getting their shit pushed in so that they could get everyone worked up from "sitting around chipping paint in Norfolk" to "sitting around looking for bad guys" before they finally shifted colors for hajjiville. All the times I participated in wargame excercises as the red team, my parent ship was side tasked from an active deployment. They were looking forward to this as a challenge, and a welcome change of pace from the boring as fuck counter narcotics operations they were doing otherwise. The first exercise was against a carrier group just coming out of overhaul. The second was against a combined NATO fleet. In any red/blue exercise, there is a very big difference in the mindset of the commanders in the two forces. In the blue force, they are usually more worried about keeping everyone sailing in the same direction and not running into each other while getting all their damage control drills done and making sure some shitwit shipyard worker didn't leave a wrench sitting inside a radar antenna."

    I'm thrilled; awed. You're my Hero. But can we get back on topic?

    "They see it as a necessary pain in the ass checkbox to tick off before they deploy, along with the plethora of inspections any ship needs to pass before being deployable (CART, TSTA, FEP). During an exercise, the red team, with a real underdog feeling about the whole thing (1-2 ships vs carrier group, or 4-5 against about 40), is already worked up and sharpened from being on active deployment, and basically goes into the event with no real responsibilities but to have fun and kick ass. Which is what we always did. We also cheated like dirty cheating motherfuckers. It is all well and good for the rules of the game to say that the USS Yorktown (a Ticonderoga class AEGIS cruiser) was really some imaginary 3rd world nation's beat to shit second hand WWII vintage destroyer...

    Yes, how harmless the sand-niggers are to gods like us right?

    "...but that didn't stop us from using every ability at our disposal, including every asset of our communications, sensors, and intelligence infrastructure that a "real" opponent would obviously have no access to on the ship we were supposed to be playing."

    Are you insinuating that Iran lacks sophisticated sensors, or just regaling us with another self-aggrandizing sea-story?

    "The OPFOR, with less responsibility and ROEs to adhere to, gets to play creative games just to have fun and really put the squeeze on the blue team by being stupendous assholes as much as possible. (This is why wargames are so much goddamned fun, especially as OPFOR.) In one event around Puerto Rico and the USVI, we actually disguised the hull number to match that of a ship in the blue team's fleet to confuse the pilots scouting. Later, we strung the decorative lights all over the place one night, had a bunch of people sit around on deck fully illuminated having a party, and then we merged into the cruise ship traffic leaving port. The XO actually ordered the OOD to call the port to find out what the harbor movement schedule was. Honest to god, that one cost the blue team half their fleet, carrier included, when they killed the lights and started "shooting"."

    With what weapons did you take out half a fleet at a stroke from one ship? Did the deadly birds come flying out of your ass like the rest of your story?

    "In another exercise up near Canada, we had a submarine on our team that just sat underneath the best ship the blue team had, and every time they'd "respawn" as per the rules of the game, they'd immediately get "torpedoed.""

    How brilliant of you. How could they ever have figured that one out.

    "In both excercises, we did the same thing that Van Riper did. We ignored the results of the game, changed the rules on the fly, or flat out allowed the blue team to cheat and score an easy kill on us, simply to allow some specific aspect of training to proceed. While occasionally it made us on the OPFOR a little bitter at the time, in the long run, which do you think would do the greater good?"

    I don't know, I'm a stupid bubblehead. Please tell us why Iran will always play by our rules.

    "Telling the entire NATO minesweeping fleet to fuck off and go home crying because the OPFOR ship made a suicide attack and killed half the blue team"...

    What an amazing suicide attack, where one ship takes out half an opposing fleet: Strike! Sea battles are just like bowling, huh?

    "...or letting them refloat and get the actual minesweeping excercise training that everyone dragged all their toys up to Nova Scotia to play with in the first place? (In MC02 the fleet was refloated in order to conduct the amphibious ops that were primary to the exercise.)"

    Yes, you already mentioned that. So what's your point?

    "The creative tactics employed by the OPFOR commanders (at least the non-cheating stuff we let them know about) are almost certainly noted and taken into consideration in some office in the Pentagon, as they are recorded and released in the after-action reviews and lessons learned debriefs in following days and weeks. Sometimes they're noted in the field as well while the exercise is taking place, if it is something immediately useful to the trainees. In one of the excercises, we were so ruthless and effective as OPFOR, that they not only granted us extra "lives" to let the blue assbeatings continue for more training opportunities, they also sent a message to the fleet announcing the victory of [imaginary red team shitbag country] in repulsing NATO."

    But of course no Iranian could be as smart as you, E3R

    "That said, in general, the results of the wargame part usually rest upon the creativity of a few specific officers. Stressing the tactical abilities of a half dozen Captains (Navy) or Colonels is something that can be done just as easily in simulation in a meeting room, and mobilizing 40 ships and assorted aircraft for a week to see who is the better thinker would be a collossal waste of resources. Large scale military exercises are conducted to give the run of the mill grunts aboard the participating units some "combat" experience in an active operational environment. Past a certain point, it doesn't matter who "wins", as long as OS3 Needledick learns how to read his radar console or stop fucking up their callsigns on the radio."

    So war games are for training. And you kick ass. Roger that. Will that e all, Sir?

    "In reality, a carrier group is not going to sail into harm's way."

    So there's no threat in the Persian Gulf. Hot Damn! What a relief!

    "You will never see a strike group sail through a choke point like the SOH or Taiwan Strait when there is a tangible chance that it is going to get attacked."

    You mean Ike, Enterprise, Boxer, and Iwo are stuck in that bathtub for a decade or more? Those crews are going to be pissed to learn of this. They may be perfectly safe in the Gulf, according to you, but there's a Stark difference in how I see it.

    "It will operate in the deep water with full mobility where nothing can touch it"

    Um, there's no deep water in the Persian Gulf.

    "but where the long arm of its strike aircraft and Tomahawks can pound targets deep inland, with impunity, indefinitely."

    Bushit.

    "If it does need to transit the choke point, it will only do so after the defenses have been suppressed."

    At least the crews can tell when the cruise is over- when everything that moves, looks like it might move, or could conceal anything that might move, all along the Gulf has been tured into smoking rubble. Pardon our Force Protection DUst.

    "Patton referred to static defenses as monuments to human stupidity for a reason: when your defenses are immobile, you can only address the enemy on their terms, and you will never, ever hold the initiative."

    That's exactly where you have entirely missed the point. Our battle groups have limited mobility in the Gulf. What Van Ripen taught about first-strike by the Red team also went right over your head. You have obviously failed to consider what the defeat of a declining superpower typically entails- and it doesn't include any necessity for higher casualties on the superpower side. The illusion of US invulnerability, and the vanity that you have so representatively displayed here, E3R is the fattest target in the world today.

    Speaking of grand illusions, Philipino Monkey's notorious commentary was apparently spliced into recordings for media release last week, by someone who is doing their anonymous part in war agitation- probably some network asshole eager to trade lives for Neilsen ratings.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page