Confirmation Aircraft Carrier John C. Stennis to Sail for Persian Gulf Next Week

[madhoosier]

The GONAVY site updates for today have the aircraft carrier scheduled to leave for the Persian Gulf the first week of January.

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/gonavy/atsugi/gonavy604.html

Scroll down to just past halfway down the page and at the bottom of the Stennis’s deployment information it says “First week of January 2007 will leave Bremerton for the Persian Gulf.”

[Barrett808]

1. So will this be Bush's big "Iraq" announcement?

That he's attacking Iran?

I truly hope the sane members of the power elite intervene.

[onenote]

2. nah, we attacked iran the last time ships moved to the gulf (in October)

didn't we?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2840031

:sarcasm:

[Stella_Artois]

4. This is getting a bit repetative

The Navy does rotate its forces on station in various parts of the world. Every time a carrier group leaves port it seems that Iran MUST be the target. It does not seem possible that this is another rotation...

[FogerRox]

7. Actually no

The Ike got to the Persian Gulf around Nov 7th, due to stay 6 months, 'till May. Though 2 carriers is not much, 4 or 5 would get interesting.

[MnFats]

3. how many carrier groups is that in all now?

and...should we be worried about handling SOMETHING elsewhere in the world with all this sea power concentrated there>????

[FogerRox]

6. "how many carrier groups is that in all now?"

Where? Mid East? one, the Ike.

When we see 4 or 5 carriers and 10 or so LA class attack subs then you can take a crap.

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/12/23/11152/873/17#c17

Good way to avoid the bull shit, Heres a site to track carriers:

http://www.ne.jp/asahi/gonavy/atsugi/gonavy604.html

[madhoosier]

9. Carrier groups

I followed your link and scrolled just beyond halfway down to the Stennis's deployment info.

Here's what it said; "the first week of January 2007,
will leave Bremerton for the Persian Gulf."

[MnFats]

13. does this mean I can't take a crap until then? And...

...Where is the Enterprise?

[IndianaGreen]

11. Isn't this the third carrier group in that bathtub known as Persian Gulf

The more ships we put in the Gulf, the more likely targets for Iranian missiles and torpedoes.

How many people will Bush put in harm's way before he is stopped by the Congress?

[FogerRox]

14. No, there is one carrier, the IKE in the Persian Gulf

Follow the link on post #6. to see where all our carriers are. 9 out of 12 carriers spent the holiday in port. 1 @ persian gulf, 1 @ atlantic, 1 @ pacific.

Theres a few people here and @ D-KOS cryin wolf.... Most dont have a clue about military matters and are spouting a lot of BS.

2 Months ago some one here @ DU was screaming loud about the IKE carrier group was now in the Persian Gulf. Unitll another DUer, posted that her son (serving on the IKE) had just called her from Italy. He was on shore leave.

[madhoosier]

15. Ike to be joined by Stennis

Follow the link in the original link in the my first post in this thread or or the link in the sixth message, they are both the SAME LINK.

Scroll down to just beyond the middle of the page to the Aircraft Carrier John C. Stennis deployment information.

The last line of the deployment info has the Stennis now scheduled to leave Bremerton THE FIRST WEEK OF JANUARY!! This is several weeks ahead of the previously scheduled deployment!!

Edited brain lapse... Bremerton not Bremington.....

[FogerRox]

22. madhoosier, I am glad you havent bought into the hype

Some folks have had the Stennis already in the Mid East with 2 other carriers. AS you & I know, the crew of the Stennis enjoyed Christmans on shore leave.

[AllexxisF1]

23. Excuse us FogerRox, We bow to your all knowing Military genius [/sarcasm]

Excuse us Foger Rox for not keeping up to date on where Military carriers are at any given point in time. Instead of being a first class jerk why don't you be a little humble and perhaps explain your apparent VAST KNOWLEDGE about Navy affairs in a non condescending manner, to us plebes.

But please...enlighten us oh great one on why the U.S. Navy is sending another carrier into the Persian Gulf when normally there is never more than one?

Because (as mentioned above) the Ike is not going anywhere.

[FogerRox]

30. LOL, you have the facts, make up your own mind

[Solo_in_MD]

16. Glad to have someone else here trying to debunk this nonsense

Carrier workups are planned years in advance and can not be dramatically rushed.

[FogerRox]

24. I dont trust these folks who come to DU... &

Aurthoritativly post up false info.

When you examine the Military option, we cannot stop Iran, we can slow them down, from a nuclear program. Unless we nuke Iran repeatedly/seriously & turn it into s piece of glass. At which Point our name will be mud Muslims will be horrified over the death toll, and our troops in Iraq would be completely overun/killed. This would turn the Mid East against us, it would be over. The Saudis might not survive.

[Solo_in_MD]

31. Military expertise is rare here and is treated with suspicion when it shown, BTDT

However, I disagree about there not being effective military action possible against Iran. There are a number of viable scenarios that would kill or serious set back the Iranian nuclear program. Key point is that they depend heavily on the quality of our (and Israeli) intelligence. Not advocating it, but they are out there.

[FogerRox]

33. Are we somewhat in agreement?

"we cannot stop Iran, we can slow them down,"

"a number of viable scenarios that would kill or serious set back the Iranian nuclear program"

And as I am sure you know, I am no military expert. But I find it easier to be a fact checker.

[Solo_in_MD]

34. I think so

short of a complete takeover, its practically immpossible to stop a sovereign nation from doing something it is commited to do. Israel and nukes comes to mind. No one wanted them to have them, they are coy about if they do, but its clear they have them.

[Catch22Dem]

5. I was there when the Stennis was dedicated...Gore was the keynote speaker

It was a really interesting event. 1993 I think. Could have been 94 I guess.

[sarcasmo]

8. 3500 Fort Bragg troops and now the Navy. Look out Iran.

[JanusAscending]

10. Something is up.

because my 19 yr. old grandaughter is being shipped to Kuwait in mid Feb. She's reg. Navy MEDIC ! This is her first assignment since finishing her training!! I heard that Gates was shipping the 3,500 to Kuwait as well!???

[One_Life_To_Give]

32. Why does Kuwait surprise you?

We have a fair number of Navy and Coast Guard personnel working in that area. So why would a medic being posted there be out of the ordinary?

[IndianaGreen]

12. Iran is holding all the trump cards

Bush is bluffing in a game of euchre.

[Solo_in_MD]

17. ahh, its not a game

What the hell is euchre?

[Zynx]

18. Indeed. We have nowhere near the forces there to attack Iran.

Not even close.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

19. Since when does rational thought

play a role in BushCo's plans?

[madhoosier]

20. Troop levels, why do you think Bush ain't going to pop a few nukes?

a reply to this thread; http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2666820

Remember that the United States has built several new airbases in Iraq. These bases will be able to deploy many attack aircraft as well as AWACS, refueling tankers, etc. Also the goal of an attack on Iran is to destroy Iran's military and civilian infrastructure to render Iran incapable of absorbing the Shia areas if Iraq. The long-run effect of America's attack on Iraq is to leave Iran as the dominate Islamic power in the Middle East.

Really the only thing between Iran and Mecca, Medina, the Saudi Royal Family and all that lovely oil is the United States Military and the political pressure from the newly elected democrats to bring the troops home may be unstoppable in the coming months.

A final thought on troop levels required for an attack on Iran. If ya pop a few nukes, ya don't need nearly as many troops.

[Supersedeas]

21. a New Year....a New War for the Fratten Boy in Chef

[itsmesgd]

25. So, is that 4 or 5 carrier groups?

Weather and logistics dictate that an invasion before February is unlikely and unadviseable. We will have a strong force in place by February, which leads me to believe that we are going to get another war with an "I" country in March. I wonder if this will be propogated by the need to quell violence that follows Saddam's hanging. Plus, wee are "testing" the selective services draft machinery in the very near future as well.

There are no coincidences

[AllexxisF1]

26. Let's see.

If I had to take an educated guess the only way we would attack Iran is by air power alone. Perhaps some special forces operations but primarily air based attacks in order to delay Iran's nuclear program.

So "if" this monster wishes to start up with Iran what should we be on the look out for? Please if anyone can interject any information it would be appreciated.

Questions:
Does the U.S. already have enough aircraft platforms in Iraq and offshore that could do the job of air superiority and support of bomber squadrons?

Would the U.S. consider using B2's B1B's and B-52 straight from the states or are they also still in theater?

Would the U.S. utilize more than two carriers for this operation considering it would be a dead give away to the Iranians? Not to mention the close proximity of having more than two in such a small geographical area?

Will this be a joint operation with the Israeli's?

I guess what it comes down to is there any one thing that would really stand out as an inevitable attack by us on Iran?

[itsmesgd]

27. my guess is that Israel will launch the first tact nuke

and then we will finish the job in order to protect Israel. Then we get to take "cover" under
1. not actually starting the war, 2. we get to protect Israel. They will spin it to look like we are heros, but how can we be "defensive" when we have these carrier groups just hanging out in the region.

[FogerRox]

35. Some damn good questions, probably due to thinking.......

If I had to take an educated guess the only way we would attack Iran is by air power alone. Perhaps some special forces operations but primarily air based attacks in order to delay Iran's nuclear program.

Yes. Let me back up, there are 2 basic options, conventional & Nuke.

So "if" this monster wishes to start up with Iran what should we be on the look out for? Please if anyone can interject any information it would be appreciated.

I'll stick to a conventional air campaign.

The MOAB is considered a Bunker buster, is only deliverable by C-130, see globalsecurity.org.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/moab.htm
Next is the 4,000 pound buster . I owe you a link here... its in my DU journal.

Then we have the
Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant missile
On 27 May 1999 Raytheon was awarded a $25,829,379 undefinitized cost-plus-incentive-fee/cost-plus-fixed-fee, ceiling amount contract for the modification of the Tactical Tomahawk missile to the Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant configuration as part of the Second Counter-Proliferation Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration. The Tactical Tomahawk missile will be modified to incorporate the government-furnished penetrator warhead and the hard-target smart fuze. Four Tactical Tomahawk Penetrator Variant missiles will be assembled to conduct the advanced concept technology demonstration testing. Work will be performed in Tucson AZ and is expected to be completed by March 2003.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/smart/bgm-109.htm

Questions:
Does the U.S. already have enough aircraft platforms in Iraq and offshore that could do the job of air superiority and support of bomber squadrons?

Would the U.S. consider using B2's B1B's and B-52 straight from the states or are they also still in theater?

If we are talking delivering bunker busters.. sure, use land based bombers, but land based bombers will probably be using the same bunker busters as carrier based planes.

Would the U.S. utilize more than two carriers for this operation considering it would be a dead give away to the Iranians? Not to mention the close proximity of having more than two in such a small geographical area?

Excellent point. A Conventional campaign might require a lot of follow up attacks, so I guess there is the need for 4-5 carriers, plus LA class attack subs, the subs can fire from 12 vert launch tubes, allowing for a staggered savo of 12, plus the 4 horizontal torpedeo tubes, for 16 in all. Guided missile Cruisers only hace 2 vert. launchers. SO if you want to "start it up"... Penatrator tomahawks are probably the best bunker buster we have/can deliver in any real quantities, and that requires a lot of LA class attack subs for a opening round salvo. ALso there is no need to stray from the Arabian Sea, which is east of the Persian Gulf & the Straights of Hormuz. Basically this can be done from the open seas.

The Iranians only have older SAMs, IIRC Sam-6. Their doctrine is to use Aircraft for air defense, not SAMs. TO save the SAMs for point defense (nuke sites?). One of the primary uses of carrier air power would be to take out the 300 or so planes of the Iranian Air Force, then take out the SAM sites. THis can be done just as easily from carriers stationed in the Arabian Gulf.

Isreal?

I'll chicken out & say I dunno.

I guess what it comes down to is there any one thing that would really stand out as an inevitable attack by us on Iran?

1)In a conventional campaign to attack Iran Nuke sites..... LA class attack subs are probably the best launch platform for the Tomahawk. A bunch showing up in the Arabian sea/Gulf of Oman is worth keeping an eye out for.

2)Everyone knows the the Persian Gulf is a little bathtub. In an all out military affair, any Navy caught there is vulnerable. The place to launch an attack on Iran would be from a safer vantage point, the Arabian Gulf.

3) Long term...If we do put carrier groups into the Persian Gulf I would find this puzzling. I think the options there are Battleship diplomacy & Posturing. Or Gulf of Tonkin.

[Javaman]

28. So when do you think the strike will take place? Jan 20th?

Trying a desperate attempt to deflate the Dems power by killing thousands.

Moron* is a prick.

[shanti]

29. exactly

probably just in time to take congress's focus off of HIM and to IRAN.

[FogerRox]

36. I'm not sure if the Stennis can be there by Jan 20th

They would have to leave right now...

[Xenotime]

37. The new congress needs to stop this type of action..