Iran says it has 100 vessels for each US warship

[The Northerner]

TEHRAN, Iran – The former naval chief for Iran's Revolutionary Guard said the country has set aside 100 military vessels to confront each warship from the U.S. or any other foreign power that might pose a threat, an Iranian newspaper reported Saturday.

Such a military confrontation in the vital oil lanes of the Persian Gulf would be of major global concern. The warning builds on earlier threats by Iran to seal off the Gulf's strategic Strait of Hormuz — through which 40 percent of the world's oil passes — in response to any military attack.

"We have set aside 100 military vessels for each (U.S.) warship to attack at the time of necessity," Gen. Morteza Saffari was quoted as saying by the conservative weekly Panjereh.

The U.S. and Israel have said military force could be used if diplomacy fails to stop what they suspect is an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Iran denies any aim to develop such weapons and says its nuclear work is for peaceful purposes like power generation.

The U.S. Navy's 5th Fleet headquarters is based just across the Gulf from Iran in Bahrain.

Saffari said more than 100 foreign warships were currently in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman, adding that their sailors were "morsels" for Iran's military to target, the newspaper reported.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100724/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_us

[flvegan]

1. "morsels"????

[LiberalFighter]

2. They need to drink more tea.

[LostInAnomie]

3. Did Baghdad Bob find work in Iran?

[greytdemocrat]

4. The "General"

does realize, rowboats don't count...right???

[JVS]

5. Quantity has a quality all its own.

[Warpy]

7. It does, and even rowboats and inflatables

with guys with some kind of explosive launcher can inflict damage on surprisingly large ships. It's what the Somali pirates use.

Remember, you can die from bee stings if you get enough of them.

Still, the casualties we'd inflict would be enormous. They could mount maybe one or two attacks before the losses would render them ineffective.

[JVS]

11. Even with such losses, the cost of the weapons to destroy them is more for us than...

setting up a speedboat. If we spend a couple hundred thousand taking out a $5,000 speedboat we're not doing so hot. And then once in a while a speedboat will hit the jackpot.

[Statistical]

27. You have to compare relative GDP in a war of attrition.

The US has roughly 50x the GDP of Iran. So us spending couple hundred grant taking out a $5,000 speedboat has more of an economic impact on them.

It would be like you and a billionare both get robbed. He loses $100,000, you lose one paycheck. While his loss is larger in nominal terms you will "feel" your loss more.

[hack89]

30. Sink them en mass while in port.

very cost effective.

[Doeed]

6. Target practice for the Navy

Allah is likely to run out of virgins.

[Lint Head]

8. There is one missle for them all.

[WonderGrunion]

9. Are they counting flying carpets?

WTF are they getting high on in Iran?

[razorman]

10. I guarantee that we know where every Iranian naval vessel is at any given time.

It should only take about 30 minutes to put their entire navy on the bottom of the sea.

[PJPhreak]

12. LOLOLOL!!! What?These?!? Bawhahahahahaha,Yea Riiiiiiiigght!

Good Luck,Dudes!

[midnight armadillo]

13. I wouldn't be so quick to laugh...

What are you going to shoot little boats with? Harpoon missiles? 5 inch guns at targets going dodging randomly at 50 mph? US Navy ships are largely equipped to fight other capital ships.

The US simulated just such a conflict in 2002: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
The "Red" force was the local Persian Gulf forces, the "Blue" force the US & allies:
On the second day of the exercise Red used a fleet of small boats to determine the position of Blue's fleet. Without warning, Red launched a massive salvo of cruise missiles, overwhelming the Blue forces' electronic sensors, destroying sixteen warships. This includes one aircraft carrier, ten cruisers and five out of the six amphibious ships. The equivalent of this success in a real conflict would have resulted in the death of over 20,000 service personnel. Soon after the cruise missile offensive, another significant portion of Blue's navy was "sunk" by an armada of small Red boats carrying out both conventional and suicide attacks, able to engage Blue forces due to Blue's inability to detect them as well as expected.

In fact, this is of great interest to groups like DARPA, whose recent solicitation for technologies to defeat small boat attacks can be found here: http://dodsbir.net/solicitation/sbir103/darpa103.htm
Topic SB103-008 High Speed Naval Surface Munition
...conceive, design, and demonstrate propulsion, maneuvering control, and engagement capabilities that will enhance the tactical mobility of a small semi-autonomous very high speed maritime surface munition that is capable of speeds of 100 knots or greater in sea state 4 or above... The munition must have the ability to acoustically sense the presence of a group of high speed small boat(s) and then acoustically single out and engage an individual boat from the group.

[Prometheus Bound]

14. I wouldn't either.

It includes submarines that Iran claims have been able to go beneath US warships without detection.

And if an old North Korean sub was allegedly able to do that during a US-South Korean war-games drill, US ship commanders must be a tad concerned.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

18. There are ready answers....

Cobras, Apaches, Hueys with mounted guns, AC-130s, any fast mover with a gun.

Really nasty is a supersonic low pass (also questionable under the law of war) but its low cost and very effective.

The key is know they are coming...

[Motown_Johnny]

25. with these, they are designed to take out tanks. Those speed boats will be easy targets

[Dick Dastardly]

31. I would be very quick to laugh at any suggestion that the Iranian navy poses any threat to the US

Navy.

These boats and any weapons they carry would be made short work of by various US Navy close-in weapon system (CWIS) like the Phalanx CIWS, The Millennium Gun or any of the many others systems.
Radar, laser and infrared targeting will put up an impenatrable wall of lead or release cluster type explosive cover. There has been a whole slew of weapon systems developed since the Cole attack.


Phalanx Anti-Ship Gun (CIWS) video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02jNb_mZDjE


Phalanx CIWS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

20 mm Phalanx Close-in Weapon System (CIWS)
http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNUS_Phalanx.htm

Fast Boat Threat Faces Hail of Hellfires
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/defense/index.jsp?plckController=Blog&plckScript=blogscript&plckElementId=blogDest&plckBlogPage=BlogViewPost&plckPostId=Blog%3A27ec4a53-dcc8-42d0-bd3a-01329aef79a7Post%3Ade07c957-e8d9-407b-a712-9f7221a31b54

US Navy Fact File
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact.asp



U.S. Navy Completes Initial Testing Of Lockheed Martin Naval Gun
The U.S. Navy has completed initial testing of Lockheed Martin's Millennium Gun as part of its effort to validate and qualify new naval cannon technology for fleet self protection. The gun's capabilities -- including its high rate of fire and air-bursting Advanced Hit Efficiency And Destruction (AHEAD) ammunition – were recently evaluated during two weeks of testing. The Millennium Gun is a multi-mission, close-in weapon system capable of engaging multiple fast-attack surface craft and near-shore land targets in littoral and riverine waters, as well as defending against anti-ship missiles and aircraft. Creating a "wall of lead," the Millennium Gun fires 35-mm ammunition, including the AHEAD round, at 1,000 rounds per minute. Each AHEAD dispenses 152 subprojectiles that form a cone-shaped pattern to destroy a target's control surfaces, seeker and other vital components as it moves through this lethal cloud.
http://www.gizmag.com/go/4006/

[MyNameGoesHere]

15. Whoa with some of the comments on this post

I fully expect the ranks of the military to swell.

[JVS]

23. I'm sure it's just blowhards blowing hard.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

16. Can we say "classic target for cluster sub munitions"

Best done prior to them leaving port...but still viable if the are packed close enough in the water

[The abyss]

19. It really has nothing to do with the number of vessels.

What does matter is that the Russian government is totally supportive of the nuclear energy operations in Iran, have been all along: Bushehr.

What does matter is that the Chinese government has been investing into gas & oil development agreements with Iran. Meanwhile the Chinese attendance at the US T-Bill auctions goes down every quarter.



The world is realigning and there ain’t anybody inviting the US to the party.

[madrchsod]

21. china is iran`s biggest natural gas customer and weapons supplier.

[madrchsod]

20. here`s the problem the us forces face....

those sea lanes are narrow and Iran has missiles along their coastline. their navy has a few second class boats and several subs but nothing for the us navy to worry about

[laurel46]

22. It would be horrible to bomb the Iranian people

In case some have not been following the news, Israel has been threatening them for years and is dragging the US into another war. Yes the Iranian governement is full of extremists but not all Iranians are like that and the current regime will most likely fail in a few years. Even the CIA thinks it is madness to bomb iran for Israel. (I saw a video lecture to congressional staff but can't find it now) Our choice is to stop killing people in the middle east and become their friends and have many friends in a less violent world, or please Israel's ultra religious government.

Please don't think about how easy it would be to kill more people or brag about how capable at killing we are. Iran is upset at genocide of the palestinians, should we really go to war to support apartheid?

Here is a link to a cia story, but the story is everywhere.
http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2010/06/17/cia-predicts-fall-of-israel-in-20-years/

[Jim Sagle]

32. It's a fake, bullshit meme that we'd be "doing it for Israel."

There are plenty of US hawks with motives (geopolitics, natural resources, looting the public treasury to name a few) that have nothing to do with Israel. Israel makes a good cover story in case it all goes bad. "We did it all for Israel, boo hoo. Get the joooooooooos who made us do it."

[Orsino]

24. That's nearly as pathetic as the swagger and bluster of our hawks. n/t

[JVS]

26. These hawks never learn. We're already bogged down in 2 wars but here on DU...

I've seen people clamoring for fights with North Korea and Iran. As a dog returns to his vomit, so a fool returns to his folly.

[Sheepshank]

28. 100:1 ?

Honestly, they sound really stupid in the blowhard braggartry. Yes that's a real word today.

[Iggo]

29. Here we go again.

Whipping up 'team spirit' for another war.

Yay Team!

[Dreamer Tatum]

33. And we have a cruise missile for every dinghy docked to Iranian soil.

They wouldn't even see it coming. It wouldn't even be interesting...just sad and pathetic.