OnTheRocks Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6484279.stm Is Iran just pushing buttons to start Armageddon? Or will this blow over in a few days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Karl Rove probably set this up to garner more war support from the UK citizenry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 UK sailors captured at gunpoint Is Iran just pushing buttons to start Armageddon? Or will this blow over in a few days? It will probably blow over in a few days. Sounds dramatic but these things aren't all that uncommon and incidents like this were always going to be likely with the British and Iranian forces in close proximity in the Gulf. There'll be a lot of huffing and puffing in public from both sides and the return of the sailors will be resolved by quiet diplomacy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Holy crap! This is big! WTF are the Iranians thinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Holy crap! This is big! WTF are the Iranians thinking? Big...like when they did it in 2004, and nothing happened. The utter silence from the Iranian government is interesting, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Big...like when they did it in 2004, and nothing happened. The utter silence from the Iranian government is interesting, though. Scouring the earth for cricket coaching candidates, no doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chicot Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 Scouring the earth for cricket coaching candidates, no doubt. ? Are you confusing Iran with Pakistan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 ? Are you confusing Iran with Pakistan? I don't think so. I figure cricket coaches are in shorter supply now, so this is one way to corner the market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 maybe they are forcing the sailors to convert to Islam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted March 23, 2007 Share Posted March 23, 2007 I wonder if Iran has these missles? http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20070323...rg/ako7y_orw538 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 I wonder if Iran has these missles? http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20070323...rg/ako7y_orw538 That article's complete bull sh--. The Navy's been planning around defeating supersonic antiship missiles since the mid-70's. And even if the "Sizzler" is a threat, and even if the Iranians have them...do you have any idea how difficult it is to get within launch range of a carrier if it doesn't want you there? The article's not even believable bull sh--. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 I wonder if it was in retaliation for this. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle1530527.ece Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 That article's complete bull sh--. The Navy's been planning around defeating supersonic antiship missiles since the mid-70's. And even if the "Sizzler" is a threat, and even if the Iranians have them...do you have any idea how difficult it is to get within launch range of a carrier if it doesn't want you there? The article's not even believable bull sh--. Complete BS? I guess that's why the Pentagon is so adament about addressing this issue. I guess they should consult you first before they start worrying. And as top this weapons potential, if it is as good as is claimed, it could be launched from land around the Persian Gulf at American ships, and not just Air Craft carriers. If they knocked out a few cruisers that would be a serious blow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Complete BS? I guess that's why the Pentagon is so adament about addressing this issue. I guess they should consult you first before they start worrying. And as top this weapons potential, if it is as good as is claimed, it could be launched from land around the Persian Gulf at American ships, and not just Air Craft carriers. If they knocked out a few cruisers that would be a serious blow. Yes, complete BS. The Navy's been preparing against this kind of threat for 30 years, the Navy knows this, had they bothered to interview more than on Navy officer for the article, they may have twigged to this. "The Navy" isn't worried...a bunch of appointed civilians who understand as little about this sh-- as you do are as worried as you for the same reason you are: a complete lack of understanding of the naval battle space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Yes, complete BS. The Navy's been preparing against this kind of threat for 30 years, the Navy knows this, had they bothered to interview more than on Navy officer for the article, they may have twigged to this. "The Navy" isn't worried...a bunch of appointed civilians who understand as little about this sh-- as you do are as worried as you for the same reason you are: a complete lack of understanding of the naval battle space. Chuckle, career navy experts in the past have dismissed ironclad warships, air craft carriers, submarines and many other weapons. Ever hear of Billy Mitchell? Do you remember the attack on the USS Stark? That was an old missle that hit that ship, I'm sure the technology has improved since then and so should the defensive capabilities Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 do you have any idea how difficult it is to get within launch range of a carrier if it doesn't want you there? http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20...21539-3317r.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bungee Jumper Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20...21539-3317r.htm Doesn't mean it was easy. And it highlights a far bigger concern than "Sizzler" missiles: US ASW practice and training has seriously declined since the end of the Cold War. I wouldn't be surprised if the Kitty Hawk didn't even have a squadron of ASW aircraft on board at the time... Yep...the only ASW component is HS-14, with 4 Seahawk/Oceanhawk helos. Nothing to prosecute subs in the outer ASW ring. The carrier battle group has one ship - a Spruance-class destroyer - that's a true anti-sub platform. You want to complain about something, complain about the state of ASW practice in the Navy, not "Sizzler" missiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Tom knows more about this subject than I do... but I believe China uses 4 targeting satellites for their missiles. Even with radar and inferred targeting, the missiles can't distinguish between a tanker and a carrier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Doesn't mean it was easy. And it highlights a far bigger concern than "Sizzler" missiles: US ASW practice and training has seriously declined since the end of the Cold War. I wouldn't be surprised if the Kitty Hawk didn't even have a squadron of ASW aircraft on board at the time... Yep...the only ASW component is HS-14, with 4 Seahawk/Oceanhawk helos. Nothing to prosecute subs in the outer ASW ring. The carrier battle group has one ship - a Spruance-class destroyer - that's a true anti-sub platform. You want to complain about something, complain about the state of ASW practice in the Navy, not "Sizzler" missiles. Which leads me to another question. Who the hell names a ship the Kitty Hawk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 24, 2007 Share Posted March 24, 2007 Which leads me to another question. Who the hell names a ship the Kitty Hawk? Never took US history in school up there, I take it? Or history of aviation... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts