US deploys guided-missile submarine amid tensions with Iran

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

an hour ago

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The U.S. Navy has deployed a guided-missile submarine capable of carrying up to 154 Tomahawk missiles to the Middle East, a spokesman said Saturday, in what appeared to be a show of force toward Iran following recent tensions.

The Navy rarely acknowledges the location or deployment of submarines. Cmdr. Timothy Hawkins, a spokesman for the 5th Fleet based in the Gulf nation of Bahrain, declined to comment on the submarine’s mission or what had prompted the deployment.

He said the nuclear-powered submarine, based out of Kings Bay, Georgia, passed through the Suez Canal on Friday. “It is capable of carrying up to 154 Tomahawk land-attack cruise missiles and is deployed to U.S. 5th Fleet to help ensure regional maritime security and stability,” Hawkins said.

The 5th Fleet patrols the crucial Strait of Hormuz, the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf through which 20% of all oil transits. Its region includes the Bab el-Mandeb Strait off Yemen and the Red Sea stretching up to the Suez Canal, the Egyptian waterway linking the Mideast to the Mediterranean Sea.



Read more: https://apnews.com/article/gulf-tensions-us-submarine-iran-74d6bc9cf2b8781edab7b081151914ae?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_05

[Alexander Of Assyria]

1. Slow warmongering day for AP...when doesn't a Yankee submarine cruise every ocean and bay?

Trillion dollars a year of worldwide weapons, everywhere.

Recent tensions, here, recent tensions there…send in the weapons, the mass media has your budgetary backs!

[oldsoftie]

3. The US Navy is who protects the free movement of goods across the world

Pretty much everyone and every country knows that whether they want to admit it or not.
The US Navy is the primary force of security against piracy across the globe, with NATO as a secondary force.
The world economy depends on it, not just the US.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

5. No argument. America is the worlds self appointed cop. Never to be defunded.

It’s just the overkill on war spending that’s annoying.

[oldsoftie]

7. There's 3 choices for "world cop"; China, Russia & the US. There's only 1 REAL choice.

Anyone who thinks the world would be MORE safe if the US simply stayed home is willfully ignorant. Its just like the UN; nice idea, but fairly powerless without the force of the US behind it.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

15. International court of Justice does just fine without USA being involved. Matter of priorities,

America wants to be world cop and pay the cost? Fine…but who will watch the watcher?

[oldsoftie]

18. The ICJ is a "sternly worded letter" without enforcement powers.

It only "works" if both sides go along with their decisions. Like trying to hold Putin accountable. How are we gonna GET him?

[Alexander Of Assyria]

21. Might want to ask the many now in jail or on trial about that power.

And so why is American military so afraid of joining?

[prodigitalson]

43. SEAL Team 6, British SAS in the cases of Mladic and Karadzic in the Balkans

https://www.wired.com/2011/05/mastermind-of-bosnia-massacre-caught-16-years-later/

There isn't some sort of ICC bailiff that drops into foreign lands and politely issues subpoenas. Any defendant at the ICC was handed over by a cooperating jurisdiction in which they resided or found themselves the target of a violent and clandestine rendition to The Hague courtesy of the world's policeman and their UK auxiliary.

[EX500rider]

29. Yes, it worked out so well in the South Chine Sea dispute..and by "dispute" mean Chinese theft

Beijing rejects tribunal's ruling in South China Sea case

Xi Jinping says China’s ‘territorial sovereignty and marine rights’ in the seas will not be affected.
China has said it will not accept a ruling against it in a key international legal case over strategic reefs and atolls that Beijing claims would give it control over disputed waters of the South China Sea.

The judgment by an international tribunal in The Hague came down overwhelmingly in favour of claims by the Philippines and is likely to increase global diplomatic pressure on Beijing to scale back military expansion in the area. By depriving certain outcrops of territorial-generating status, the ruling from the permanent court of arbitration effectively punches holes in China’s all-encompassing “nine-dash” line that stretches deep into the South China Sea.

The tribunal found that China had violated the Philippines’ sovereign rights in its exclusive economic zone by interfering with Philippine fishing and petroleum exploration, constructing artificial islands and failing to prevent Chinese fishermen from fishing in the zone. At Scarborough Shoal, where it said fishermen from the Philippines and China had traditional fishing rights, it said China had restricted these rights. It added that China had created a serious risk of collision when its patrol boats had physically obstructed Philippine fishing vessels.

The tribunal also condemned China’s land reclamation projects and its construction of artificial islands at seven features in the Spratly Islands, concluding that it had caused “severe harm to the coral reef environment and violated its obligation to preserve and protect fragile ecosystems and the habitat of depleted, threatened, or endangered species”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/12/philippines-wins-south-china-sea-case-against-china

[ancianita]

17. NOT "self appointed." It's actually been the ONLY stabilizing entity of trade across 70% of Earth

since the West won WWII.

Easy to like the military when it does mop up of other nations' conflicts.
Even easier to not like the military when one doesn't know what conflicts its presence prevents.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

22. Stabilized most of Latin America historically real good.. whether they wanted it or not...agreed!

America as a world stabilizing force?…mythical thinking.

[ancianita]

26. I hear you. With 70+ bases across Latin America & the Caribbean it has military hegemony, there and

wherever else the other 700+ bases are.

[EX500rider]

30. "wherever else the other 700+ bases are" Sure, if you want to parrot Ron Paul

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/ron-pauls-strange-claim-about-bases-and-troops-overseas/2012/02/08/gIQApZpqzQ_blog.html

Paul is counting Marine guards and military attaches as part of a vast expanse of U.S. military power around the globe. (In fact, under Paul’s logic, dozens of other countries are “occupying” Washington when they send attaches and other military personnel to their embassies here.) But this document indicates that only 11 countries actually house more than 1,000 U.S. military personnel.

As evidence of the United States occupying “so many countries” or the “all this money” spent on the military, Paul’s statistics barely pass the laugh test. He has managed to turn small contingents of Marine guards into occupying armies and waste dumps into military bases. A more accurate way to treat this data would be to say that the United States has 20 major bases around the world, not counting the war in Afghanistan, with major concentrations of troops in 11 countries.

[oldsoftie]

31. Hey, facts dont matter when you've got an agenda! nt

[ancianita]

34. Why do you say I "parrot Ron Paul." You want an exact number? When it might be classified?

Last edited Mon Apr 10, 2023, 02:56 PM - Edit history (1)

But why Ron Paul? Are you being hostile?

Do you have correct numbers?

What is your point here?

[EX500rider]

35. Did you read the article? The US does not have 700 bases in other countries

That is something Ron Paul said and is not the least bit true.
My point is correct information, which is I think unlikely to originate with Ron Paul. YMMV

[ancianita]

36. I read the OP, assumed it excerpted key points, but did not read the link.

Why is what he said not the least true? I can't stand the guy but at worst his info is outdated.

Here is my backup info.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases

The total number of foreign sites with installations and facilities that are either in active use and service, or that may be activated and operated by American military personnel and allies, is just over 1,000.

[EX500rider]

37. They are stretching pretty hard to reach that number.

They are not all US bases but : This is a list of military installations owned or used by the United States Armed Forces

For instance:
Belgium
Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe is not a US base but NATO HQ.

Bulgaria
Bezmer Air Base, Yambol Province
Graf Ignatievo Air Base, Plovdiv Province
Novo Selo Range, Sliven Province
These are all Bulgarian military base that the US has permission to use.

Germany
Edelweiss Lodge and Resort A hotel, not a base.

Israel
Dimona Radar Facility Israeli facility, the US may have access to it's info but it is not a US base.

ETC..

In any case, the Defense Department every year publishes a list of military facilities in the United States and around the world. As of Sept. 30, 2010, the DOD list shows a list of 611 military facilities around the world, though only 20 are listed as “large sites,” which means a replacement value of more than $1.74 billion.

Most of these — 549 — are small sites, sometimes very, very small.

In fact, some sites appear to be double-counted. There is Spangdahlem Air Force base in Germany, which houses the 52nd Fighter Wing and is counted as a large site. But a separate “base” on the list is the sprawling Spangdahlem Waste Annex, all of three acres, with four buildings totaling 6,500 square feet.

For instance, as of Sept. 30, 2011, there were 53,766 military personnel in Germany, 39,222 in Japan, 10,801 in Italy and 9,382 in the United Kingdom. That makes sense.

But wait, scanning the list, you also see nine troops in Mali, eight in Barbados, seven in Laos, six in Lithuania, five in Lebanon, four in Moldova, three in Mongolia, two in Suriname and one in Gabon. Most of the countries on the list, in fact, have puny military representation.

What’s going on here? The answer is that the list essentially tracks with places where the United States has a substantial diplomatic presence. (The United States has diplomatic relations with about 190 countries.)

In other words, Paul is counting Marine guards and military attaches as part of a vast expanse of U.S. military power around the globe.

As evidence of the United States occupying “so many countries” or the “all this money” spent on the military, Paul’s statistics barely pass the laugh test. He has managed to turn small contingents of Marine guards into occupying armies and waste dumps into military bases. A more accurate way to treat this data would be to say that the United States has 20 major bases around the world, not counting the war in Afghanistan, with major concentrations of troops in 11 countries.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/ron-pauls-strange-claim-about-bases-and-troops-overseas/2012/02/08/gIQApZpqzQ_blog.html

[ancianita]

38. It's the military's count, not "they" who stretch. Go ahead and second guess what's classified. To

me, if the military defines its hundreds of bases as bases, who am I, or Biden, for that matter.

Wikipedia's sources are ultimately from the US military.

This list details only current or recently closed facilities; some defunct facilities are found at Category:Closed military installations of the United States.

An "installation" is defined as "a military base, camp, post, station, yard, center, homeport facility for any ship, or other activity under the jurisdiction of the Department of Defense, including leased space, that is controlled by, or primarily supports DoD's activities. An installation may consist of one or more sites" (geographically-separated real estate parcels).[1]: DoD-3 

The United States operates a global network of military installations and is by far the largest operator of military bases in the world, with locations in dozens of nations on every continent, with 38 "named bases"[note 1] having active-duty, US National Guard, reserve, or civilian personnel as of September 30, 2014. Its largest, in terms of personnel, is Ramstein Air Base, in Germany, with almost 9,200.[1][note 2] The Pentagon stated in 2013 that there are "around" 5,000 bases total, with "around" 600 of them overseas.[2]

Due to the sensitive and often classified nature of this information, there is no comprehensive list with the exact number or location of all bases, stations and installations. The total number of foreign sites with installations and facilities that are either in active use and service, or that may be activated and operated by American military personnel and allies, is just over 1,000.[3]

[EX500rider]

39. You can consider NATO HQ or a golf course or a resort a "US base" I don't

Note only 38 bases are large enough to be named.

[ancianita]

40. I call bases by whatever the military says, and Wikipedia did note those named bases.

So, quibbling aside, we're straight, right?

[EX500rider]

41. Well the military is counting all bases & "facilites" So you get resorts & golf courses etc incl'ed

They also count foreign bases where the US has landing rights to use when needed like the ones listed in Bulgaria etc.
But those aren't really "US bases" IMO

[ancianita]

42. Okay. But Wikipedia did note the named bases, right?

[Alexander Of Assyria]

27. Militaries, liked or unliked not the point, they are all too large, by several degrees of waste.

Don’t think world trade would fall apart if America spent say only half a trillion dollars a year still could still easily patrol all wind sea and water.

Balloons are apparently highly effective, and cheap..and frightening to some.

[ancianita]

28. Agree. And so do many in Congress.

The waste, from what I've gathered, is at the contractor level. I remember them screaming bloody murder when Obama had their budgets cut by 10% across the board. It was a tell.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

33. Obama had to do sequestering...a word I find awkward and in fiscal terms, wtf is it?

Only time military budget was cut was when it was…sequestered…

Maybe another round of military sequestering is in order!?

Whatever that means, don’t ask me!

[FredGarvin]

4. Iran has so much potential

I feel bad for the Iranian people who have to live under a radical theo-fascist government.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

6. Liberate them by killing and bombing at will, that should win over the people! Like Iraqis

now love America.

Throw in a torn up nuclear deal, and..,who can u trust? People all over forget about that, American mass media eyes don’t focus on all the facts.

[McKim]

8. Your'e the Best!!!

Your’e the best, Alexander, you have caught onto the war game. They aren’t bringing those big toys over there for nothing! I wonder how they will spin it.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

11. LOL.

Oh look, another one.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

14. AP says...recent tensions...without mention of said tensions! Again. Just accept, People, it's AP!

No evidence even needed any more, Americans just accept!

[MarineCombatEngineer]

16. Hmmmmm.

Never any criticisms towards US enemies, just criticisms towards tor US for responding to threats.

Very interesting.

[EX500rider]

24. Not to mention what American would call a US sub a "Yankee sub" lol

[MarineCombatEngineer]

25. Good catch,

I didn't even catch on to that.
Me thinks that this is a, well, you know what I'm talking about.

[oldsoftie]

32. Yeah, be careful or you''ll get a hide. Like me.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

10. LOL.

You don't disappoint.

[Magoo48]

2. Jingo bells, jingo bells, jingo everyday; oh what it is to squander, our nation's wealth HOORAY

[McKim]

9. Yes, Our Needs at Home

Yes, our needs as home are so deep. This is all a waste. Let’s just let someone else run the world while we just sit back and enjoy some social and economic benefits. I am tired of us being “Leader of the Free World”. What nonsense.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

13. See post 10. nt

[oldsoftie]

19. And just WHO do you propose take over the role the US plays? Please, tell us.

Tell us which country will stand against Russia's aggression or china's expansionism & threats against Taiwan & other Asian countries?
Or are we supposed to do the same thing we did in the 1930s & lift all drawbridges? THAT worked out really well for the world.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

23. There are certain people who

are always against US moves to defend against Russian, Chinese, Iranian, etc. threats to US/NATO security concerns, especially when it involves China, but generally, any US moves to counter threats to national security.

It just floors me to see this kind of crap on DU, but, unlike "conservative" sites, we do allow for differing view points, however repugnant it may be.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

45. Prefer anyone who is member of International Court of Justice. If you really want Justice for All.

And anyone without an offshore jail where Law and the rule of law is suspended, the accused forgotten. That’s not Justice and The world does notice, even if Americans look the other way at the hypocrisy, or are led away by an embarrassed corporate media. Gitmo gotta Go, then we talk American justice for the world? What other nation calling itself a democracy does that??

Kind of hypocrisy that Justice shuns.

[oldsoftie]

46. Maybe for people living in a fantasy. There are 3 choices. Period.

You dont have to like it but you cant deny it.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

44. Pay up! Don't complain! You want to be worlds policeman? Fund and fund some more!

Meanwhile back at the ranch the nation goes without the good stuff to pay for the war stuff.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

12. LOL.

Oh look, another one.

[oldsoftie]

20. Truly amazing isnt it? nt