Iranian Vessels Harass U.S. Destroyer, Forces It To Change Course

[AmirPatriot]

Reduced flying times !?! ... that, plus aging equipment, will kill the effectiveness of an air force right quickly.

Reduced flying hours forces grounding of 17 USAF combat air squadrons
April 8, 2013
The Air Force will distribute 241,496 flying hours that are funded to squadrons that will be kept combat ready or at a reduced readiness level called “basic mission capable”

...the memo said.

“Historically, the Air Force has not operated under a tiered readiness construct because of the need to respond to any crisis within a matter of hours or days,” “The current situation means we’re accepting the risk that combat airpower may not be ready to respond immediately to new contingencies as they occur.”

Air Force officials had warned that mandatory budget cuts would lead to a reduction of flying hours by 18 percent, with readiness dropping to “sub-optimal levels,” according to information provided to Congress. The drop in flying hours would mean that it could take up to six months to repair the damage to readiness, the Air Force warned lawmakers in a February presentation.

Average aircrews lose currency to fly combat missions within 90 to 120 days of being grounded, and it takes from 60 to 90 days to conduct training to return aircrews o mission-ready status, according to Air Combat Command.

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/...ces-grounding-of-17-usaf-combat-air/78539120/

Air Force seeks more flight hours to recover from 2013 stand down
By: Brian Everstine, February 4, 2015
The Air Force is asking for a small increase in its flight hours as it still tries to dig itself out of a readiness hole dating back to a stand down of combat squadrons in 2013.

Seventeen combat squadrons were forced to stand down for three months, while additional squadrons faced reduced flying hours as a result of sequestration in 2013. More than 44,000 flying hours were cut. In addition, the Air Force was forced to cancel a weapons school pilot class and Red Flag exercises, leading to a drop in readiness and pilot proficiency that the service said would take years to recover.

The service's fiscal 2016 budget request, released on Feb. 2, calls on Congress to increase funding for flying hours to full capacity, along with ensuring Red Flag exercises and weapons school classes are up and running to focus "on full-spectrum combat readiness to succeed in a contested environment."

"Recovery is not a short-term fix and will take years to fully rebuild," the Air Force's budget summary states. "To recover readiness to the required levels, the Air Force must react to personnel and operations tempo as well as adequately fund readiness programs such as flying hours, weapon system sustainment, ranges and simulators."

To compensate for this increase, the Air Force is again trying to cut its A-10 fleet, along with divesting EC-130H aircraft.

https://www.airforcetimes.com/artic...-flight-hours-to-recover-from-2013-stand-down
... at least three years, that's how long it takes to recover!

Unfortunately this is the situation with Iran. It will for sure reduce readiness. But the aircraft are old and require high maintenance. Just imagine the logistical nightmare that a single 40 year old F-14A is, even the US Navy complained about its "hanger queen" status. These aircraft don't have many flying hours left, we have to keep them preserved until they are replaced.

 

[Penguin]

Yak-130/M-346/JL15/JL9 > new aircraft, trainer with armament capability for light A2A and A2G, the latter three supersonic.

 

[Oldman1]

True, but I admire Iranian for forcing the US ship off course, showing who the boss of strait of Hormuz is

LOL! They failed.

U.S. Navy Aircraft Carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) conducts daily flight operations in the Persian Gulf on September 13, 2016.

Film Credits: U.S. Navy Video by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Apprentice Jake Stanley/Released

There is a very big difference between what happened in the 1980's when Iran was in a bloody war were it could not even import bullets and was weak compared to the Iran of today. Iran of today does this to you:

US today could try do what it did in the 80's but I think your people realise, it would not end well for them.

If you want to avoid such humiliations, take your ships and go back home. Persian gulf belongs to us. It did long before you existed and long after you perish. Nothing will ever change that fact.

LOL! Doesn't matter if its the 80s or the early 21st century. Iran going to war with the U.S. will not end well for Iran. Iran knows that. Thats why they didn't attack the ship. If they did, they know they will lose their Navy and Air Force in a matter of days. So you guys capture military personnel that got lost, big deal. You returned them immediately in hours. We are not at war. Unless you want one.

don't worry , next time we will repay ...

Trust me, Operation Praying Mantis was repayment in kind for attacking our ships. We came to collect.

 

[mohsen]

Double-Standard Approach: US Crying Wolf Over 'Foreign Provocations'
© REUTERS/ US Navy
Politics
21:18 16.09.2016(updated 21:40 16.09.2016) Get short URL

Washington needs to look hard in the mirror before accusing foreign powers of "provocative behavior" and "unsafe maneuvers," US academic Ted Galen Carpenter writes, commenting on the US Navy's overseas patrol missions.

Iran Denies Harassing US Navy Vessels in Persian Gulf

"What would be Washington's reaction if Russia, China and Iran sailed uninvited into waters close to US territorial waters?" Ted Galen Carpenter of the Cato Institute asks in his article for The National Interest.
Washington has repeatedly cried wolf over "provocations" on the part of Russia, China and Iran.

Last month the USS Nitze was intercepted by small patrol boats from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while sailing through the Strait of Hormuz.

In early September the Pentagon raised the alarm when the USS Firebolt was reportedly "harassed" by Iranian ships in the Persian Gulf.

Commenting on the incident Brigadier General Masoud Jazayeri, deputy chief of staff of Iran's armed forces, denied the Pentagon's allegations, stressing that Iranian vessels acted in full accordance with international law.

As Iranian defense minister Gen. Hosein Dehghan said in an interview to Tasnim news agency: "If any foreign vessel enters our waters, we warn them and if it's an invasion, we confront."

While US officials were beating the drums over Tehran's "provocative behavior," no one asked what American heavily armed destroyers did near Iranian coasts.

"No one seemed to question why it was not provocative for the United States to sail a heavily armed destroyer (along with other warships) six thousand miles away from the American homeland to operate within a few miles of the Iranian coast," Carpenter emphasized, referring to the incident, which happened near the Strait of Hormuz.

US Needs to Stop Playing 'Chicken' With Beijing in South China Sea

A similar double-standard approach was demonstrated by Washington when it authorized the US Navy's "freedom-of-navigation" (FONOP) patrols in the South China Sea close to China's territorial waters.
The US' FONOP maneuvers carried out "thousands of miles from the American homeland" are portrayed as "perfectly normal" by Washington, despite the fact that they threaten to upset the fragile balance of power in the region.

Likewise, US warships maneuvering in the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea in waters close to Russia run a risk of inflaming conflict between Washington and Moscow.

However, it was Washington who cried wolf and accused Russia of "unsafe" and "unprofessional" maneuvers after Russia's Su-24 had flown over the US Navy missile destroyer Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea back in April.

"A US guided-missile destroyer only 70 nautical miles from Russian territory at Kaliningrad is given a stern display of aerobatics by two Sukhoi Su-24s — and then Washington erupts with accusations of being harassed by an 'insane flyby'," British writer and analyst Finian Cunningham wrote in his article for Sputnik.

USS Donald 'Duck' Cook

Cunningham reminded his readers that "the US warship… [came] on the back of a massive military build-up by American forces and their NATO allies around Russian territory over the past two years."
According to Carpenter, the same flawed logic is demonstrated by Washington in Syria.

While Russia and Iran's involvement in the region's affairs is depicted as "outrageous and an indication of odious motives" by US hawks, "America's intervention from six thousand miles away is widely viewed as not only proper but inescapable, for both strategic and moral reasons," the US academic emphasized.

"How would the United States respond if the naval forces of another power sailed uninvited into waters close to US territorial waters-and did so repeatedly despite Washington's objections?" Carpenter asked.

There is something fishy about the US media stance that "we're the good guys, so nothing we do is wrong or provocative," he noted. To make matters worse, Washington's actions seem profoundly dangerous, the US academic warned.

 

[VEVAK]

Double-Standard Approach: US Crying Wolf Over 'Foreign Provocations'
© REUTERS/ US Navy
Politics
21:18 16.09.2016(updated 21:40 16.09.2016) Get short URL

Washington needs to look hard in the mirror before accusing foreign powers of "provocative behavior" and "unsafe maneuvers," US academic Ted Galen Carpenter writes, commenting on the US Navy's overseas patrol missions.

Iran Denies Harassing US Navy Vessels in Persian Gulf

"What would be Washington's reaction if Russia, China and Iran sailed uninvited into waters close to US territorial waters?" Ted Galen Carpenter of the Cato Institute asks in his article for The National Interest.
Washington has repeatedly cried wolf over "provocations" on the part of Russia, China and Iran.

Last month the USS Nitze was intercepted by small patrol boats from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps while sailing through the Strait of Hormuz.

In early September the Pentagon raised the alarm when the USS Firebolt was reportedly "harassed" by Iranian ships in the Persian Gulf.

Commenting on the incident Brigadier General Masoud Jazayeri, deputy chief of staff of Iran's armed forces, denied the Pentagon's allegations, stressing that Iranian vessels acted in full accordance with international law.

As Iranian defense minister Gen. Hosein Dehghan said in an interview to Tasnim news agency: "If any foreign vessel enters our waters, we warn them and if it's an invasion, we confront."

While US officials were beating the drums over Tehran's "provocative behavior," no one asked what American heavily armed destroyers did near Iranian coasts.

"No one seemed to question why it was not provocative for the United States to sail a heavily armed destroyer (along with other warships) six thousand miles away from the American homeland to operate within a few miles of the Iranian coast," Carpenter emphasized, referring to the incident, which happened near the Strait of Hormuz.

US Needs to Stop Playing 'Chicken' With Beijing in South China Sea

A similar double-standard approach was demonstrated by Washington when it authorized the US Navy's "freedom-of-navigation" (FONOP) patrols in the South China Sea close to China's territorial waters.
The US' FONOP maneuvers carried out "thousands of miles from the American homeland" are portrayed as "perfectly normal" by Washington, despite the fact that they threaten to upset the fragile balance of power in the region.

Likewise, US warships maneuvering in the Baltic Sea and the Black Sea in waters close to Russia run a risk of inflaming conflict between Washington and Moscow.

However, it was Washington who cried wolf and accused Russia of "unsafe" and "unprofessional" maneuvers after Russia's Su-24 had flown over the US Navy missile destroyer Donald Cook in the Baltic Sea back in April.

"A US guided-missile destroyer only 70 nautical miles from Russian territory at Kaliningrad is given a stern display of aerobatics by two Sukhoi Su-24s — and then Washington erupts with accusations of being harassed by an 'insane flyby'," British writer and analyst Finian Cunningham wrote in his article for Sputnik.

USS Donald 'Duck' Cook

Cunningham reminded his readers that "the US warship… [came] on the back of a massive military build-up by American forces and their NATO allies around Russian territory over the past two years."
According to Carpenter, the same flawed logic is demonstrated by Washington in Syria.

While Russia and Iran's involvement in the region's affairs is depicted as "outrageous and an indication of odious motives" by US hawks, "America's intervention from six thousand miles away is widely viewed as not only proper but inescapable, for both strategic and moral reasons," the US academic emphasized.

"How would the United States respond if the naval forces of another power sailed uninvited into waters close to US territorial waters-and did so repeatedly despite Washington's objections?" Carpenter asked.

There is something fishy about the US media stance that "we're the good guys, so nothing we do is wrong or provocative," he noted. To make matters worse, Washington's actions seem profoundly dangerous, the US academic warned.

It's beyond double standard!!! They are trying to create tensions with Iran knowing full well Iranian's aren't going to back down and this helps them create propaganda against Iran to divert attention to what's going on in the South China Sea by pointing at us and saying look these are the bad guys!!!

Every incident with the U.S. has happened on the edge Iranian territorial waters or airspace!

The US Spy planes were flying 1 mile from Iranian Air Space if that's not provocative then I don't know what it!!!

If it was an Iranian plane flying 1 mile from U.S. airspace they would just shoot it down and claim that Iranians entered U.S. airspace and we had no choice!!!

If the Russian & Iranian leaders were smart they would accept a full on military alliance that would include co-investment in the development & sale of new weapons and the Russians would accept to sell & deliver 50 Su-30's to Iran within a year (Half new and half on loan to Iran for training to be swapped out with new ones upon delivery) + immediately start co-production of both the Su-30, T-50/Su-PAK (at a rate of 24 per year) & it's weapons inside Iran and the Russians would have to accept be content with a $120 Billion USD for a full on technology transfer + transfer & development of the facilities and tools needed....(Cost of 100 of each fighter included + Iran will pay 10% of the production cost of each aircraft that it chooses to produce after)
Deal to be paid at a rate of $12 Billion a year by Iran + MoU of an additional $10 Billion USD investment by Iran to be match by the Russians in R&D in the co-development of a new 6th generation fighter with no vertical stabilizers inside Iran project to commence upon deliver of the 1st batch of 12 T-50's!!!

But that's my dream anyways!!! But we all know that ain't happening! Not with Russia and not with China because they are both afraid of U.S. sanctions more than anything else

As for the Chines the Chinese can easily get the US to back off all they really have to do is threaten to sell 100 J-21 & 100 J-31's to Iran + a technology transfer and co-production of both fighters in Iran if the U.S. doesn't back down.

 

[BlueInGreen]

It's beyond double standard!!! They are trying to create tensions with Iran knowing full well Iranian's aren't going to back down and this helps them create propaganda against Iran to divert attention to what's going on in the South China Sea by pointing at us and saying look these are the bad guys!!!

Every incident with the U.S. has happened on the edge Iranian territorial waters or airspace!

The US Spy planes were flying 1 mile from Iranian Air Space if that's not provocative then I don't know what it!!!

If it was an Iranian plane flying 1 mile from U.S. airspace they would just shoot it down and claim that Iranians entered U.S. airspace and we had no choice!!!

If the Russian & Iranian leaders were smart they would accept a full on military alliance that would include co-investment in the development & sale of new weapons and the Russians would accept to sell & deliver 50 Su-30's to Iran within a year (Half new and half on loan to Iran for training to be swapped out with new ones upon delivery) + immediately start co-production of both the Su-30, T-50/Su-PAK (at a rate of 24 per year) & it's weapons inside Iran and the Russians would have to accept be content with a $120 Billion USD for a full on technology transfer + transfer & development of the facilities and tools needed....(Cost of 100 of each fighter included + Iran will pay 10% of the production cost of each aircraft that it chooses to produce after)
Deal to be paid at a rate of $12 Billion a year by Iran + MoU of an additional $10 Billion USD investment by Iran to be match by the Russians in R&D in the co-development of a new 6th generation fighter with no vertical stabilizers inside Iran project to commence upon deliver of the 1st batch of 12 T-50's!!!

But that's my dream anyways!!! But we all know that ain't happening! Not with Russia and not with China because they are both afraid of U.S. sanctions more than anything else

As for the Chines the Chinese can easily get the US to back off all they really have to do is threaten to sell 100 J-21 & 100 J-31's to Iran + a technology transfer and co-production of both fighters in Iran if the U.S. doesn't back down.

It's still difficult for countries like Russia and China to give Iran that much fire power due to the fact that they themselves have their own national interests in mind. As far as Russia goes, it seems as though there will be a mutual defense agreement sometime in the future but that would really be needed if and only if the possibility of a shooting war was imminent and the interests of Russian and Iran line closely enough to warrant it. I have said in the past that Iran and Russia still have things they have to iron out and issues that must be resolved but I don't think they're issues that can't be solved with talking and overall they shouldn't that big of a problem. But when people say Iran should get deals for hundreds of advanced fighter jets, the West (US, Israel, etc...) will no doubt try to block the deal in any way shape or form down to blowing up the actual transfer of the jets themselves if they have to. With that being said. Both the Russians and the Chinese will be effectively giving Iran a much, much greater fighting potential since Iran would now have an potent symmetrical and asymmetrical fighting force, and whose to say if one day Russia or China ask Iran to do something and Iran say's no, now both of those are stuck with the possibility of confronting Iran on issues as well.

Countries that are powerful militarily ( US, Russia, China) like to keep countries that aren't under their finger at all times. Israel gets 38 billion dollar arms deals and aid packages, Pakistan gets weapons from China, and Russia supplies other countries as well but most of these countries are beholden to the country that supplies it the weapons. Iran's self sufficiency is a great plus and for it to really become deadly in a shooting war type scenario Iran's industrial base would need be to increased immensely.

But I do want to say that I think, if the US keeps on acting the way it is acting, then we might just see transfer of tech and big budget weapons to Iran as well as a military alliance that would no doubt put the US in a much less powerful position. But we have to wait. War isn't a popular idea and it would be horrible to see it happen.

Just got to remember everyone is out to save themselves. (Except for the US, which is trying to control everyone that doesn't agree with it through sanctions, deceit, demonization and military threats).

This day in age, I am not proud to say that I am American and my government does not in any form represent my wishes AT ALL. (and for anyone who want's to tell me to leave US and go somewhere else, why should I, I was born here and I have a right to tell people the truth about our countries wicked behavior, there is no denying it, American exceptionalism is just another word for cancer).

 

[VEVAK]

It's still difficult for countries like Russia and China to give Iran that much fire power due to the fact that they themselves have their own national interests in mind. As far as Russia goes, it seems as though there will be a mutual defense agreement sometime in the future but that would really be needed if and only if the possibility of a shooting war was imminent and the interests of Russian and Iran line closely enough to warrant it. I have said in the past that Iran and Russia still have things they have to iron out and issues that must be resolved but I don't think they're issues that can't be solved with talking and overall they shouldn't that big of a problem. But when people say Iran should get deals for hundreds of advanced fighter jets, the West (US, Israel, etc...) will no doubt try to block the deal in any way shape or form down to blowing up the actual transfer of the jets themselves if they have to. With that being said. Both the Russians and the Chinese will be effectively giving Iran a much, much greater fighting potential since Iran would now have an potent symmetrical and asymmetrical fighting force, and whose to say if one day Russia or China ask Iran to do something and Iran say's no, now both of those are stuck with the possibility of confronting Iran on issues as well.

Countries that are powerful militarily ( US, Russia, China) like to keep countries that aren't under their finger at all times. Israel gets 38 billion dollar arms deals and aid packages, Pakistan gets weapons from China, and Russia supplies other countries as well but most of these countries are beholden to the country that supplies it the weapons. Iran's self sufficiency is a great plus and for it to really become deadly in a shooting war type scenario Iran's industrial base would need be to increased immensely.

But I do want to say that I think, if the US keeps on acting the way it is acting, then we might just see transfer of tech and big budget weapons to Iran as well as a military alliance that would no doubt put the US in a much less powerful position. But we have to wait. War isn't a popular idea and it would be horrible to see it happen.

Just got to remember everyone is out to save themselves. (Except for the US, which is trying to control everyone that doesn't agree with it through sanctions, deceit, demonization and military threats).

This day in age, I am not proud to say that I am American and my government does not in any form represent my wishes AT ALL. (and for anyone who want's to tell me to leave US and go somewhere else, why should I, I was born here and I have a right to tell people the truth about our countries wicked behavior, there is no denying it, American exceptionalism is just another word for cancer).

The thing with Iran is that Iran has 8 years of experience as to what happens when your military is fully dependent on others. And that's not a road they'll ever want to go down again.

Before the revolution it was said that Iran had one of the top 5 most powerful Air Forces in the world but once the U.S. left and the Iran-Iraq war started Iran's dependency on U.S. became clear we didn't have techs, parts or ordinance. And yes those fighters saved Iran's *** but they couldn't operate at full capacity due to Iran's reliance on the US and a war Iran should have won in less than a year dragged on for 8 long years.

Since then the motto has been no more! We build our own weapon as much as we can and honestly the weapons embargo against Iran has truly help Iran reach a point of self-sufficiency in most fields

And for me I don't agree with a lot of things my government does from forcing women to wear the Hijab, to banning clubs, to even banning alcoholic beverages....(These policies have practically killed Iran's tourism and many other industry) BUT I have to say, since this government came to power:

1.Iran has been hands down the fastest growing country in science and technology

2.Iranian today is ranked among the top 10 countries in the world in economic activity growth of women and in the % of women working in industry

3.Self reliance and the development in indigenous industries and not just in the military sector in the past 30 years Iran went from a country that could hardly produce anything to a country with it's own Automobile industry, a space program, a civilian nuclear program, a country capable of producing aircrafts, gas turbines, carbine fiber, a pharmaceutical industry that supply's up to 95% of it's own needs, a country that builds industrial equipment and robots, builds dams not only for Iran but for other countries and so much more

4.I believe after Turkey Iran is the most democratic country in the middle east.

And from me and most Iranian these 4 fact are far more important than a few social issues and as long as our government keeps on performing as well as it has on these issues the vast majority of Iranians will never support a revolution ever!!!!

As for the U.S. with what happened in the democratic primaries I have lost all hope in the U.S. electoral system and now the choice is between Trump & Hillary and I believe neither one will have an open minded policy towards Iran. Hillary Clinton has been bought and paid for by AIPAC and other pro war entities and Trump is even worse because he has a much lower moral standards and the only thing he understands is money and to him war is money at least for some companies that I'm sure he has already invested in...
So for the next 4-8 years U.S. - Iran relations have no where to go but down and this may be good news for the Russians and Chinese because at the very least it eliminates a U.S. - Iran path to an alliance which would have been possible if Bernie Sander was elected but at the same time if they don't beef up Iran they may loos Iran as a potential strong partner regardless of the outcome.

And of all Russia's allies and all the countries the Russians beefed up like China and India the only country that has actually fought with and along side them is Iran

But now all hope of peace and better relations with the US is gone and Iran needs to make weapons production & procurement it's top priority!

 

[BlueInGreen]

The thing with Iran is that Iran has 8 years of experience as to what happens when your military is fully dependent on others. And that's not a road they'll ever want to go down again.

Before the revolution it was said that Iran had one of the top 5 most powerful Air Forces in the world but once the U.S. left and the Iran-Iraq war started Iran's dependency on U.S. became clear we didn't have techs, parts or ordinance. And yes those fighters saved Iran's *** but they couldn't operate at full capacity due to Iran's reliance on the US and a war Iran should have won in less than a year dragged on for 8 long years.

Since then the motto has been no more! We build our own weapon as much as we can and honestly the weapons embargo against Iran has truly help Iran reach a point of self-sufficiency in most fields

And for me I don't agree with a lot of things my government does from forcing women to wear the Hijab, to banning clubs, to even banning alcoholic beverages....(These policies have practically killed Iran's tourism and many other industry) BUT I have to say, since this government came to power:

1.Iran has been hands down the fastest growing country in science and technology

2.Iranian today is ranked among the top 10 countries in the world in economic activity growth of women and in the % of women working in industry

3.Self reliance and the development in indigenous industries and not just in the military sector in the past 30 years Iran went from a country that could hardly produce anything to a country with it's own Automobile industry, a space program, a civilian nuclear program, a country capable of producing aircrafts, gas turbines, carbine fiber, a pharmaceutical industry that supply's up to 95% of it's own needs, a country that builds industrial equipment and robots, builds dams not only for Iran but for other countries and so much more

4.I believe after Turkey Iran is the most democratic country in the middle east.

And from me and most Iranian these 4 fact are far more important than a few social issues and as long as our government keeps on performing as well as it has on these issues the vast majority of Iranians will never support a revolution ever!!!!

As for the U.S. with what happened in the democratic primaries I have lost all hope in the U.S. electoral system and now the choice is between Trump & Hillary and I believe neither one will have an open minded policy towards Iran. Hillary Clinton has been bought and paid for by AIPAC and other pro war entities and Trump is even worse because he has a much lower moral standards and the only thing he understands is money and to him war is money at least for some companies that I'm sure he has already invested in...
So for the next 4-8 years U.S. - Iran relations have no where to go but down and this may be good news for the Russians and Chinese because at the very least it eliminates a U.S. - Iran path to an alliance which would have been possible if Bernie Sander was elected but at the same time if they don't beef up Iran they may loos Iran as a potential strong partner regardless of the outcome.

And of all Russia's allies and all the countries the Russians beefed up like China and India the only country that has actually fought with and along side them is Iran

But now all hope of peace and better relations with the US is gone and Iran needs to make weapons production & procurement it's top priority!

It would seem so that all hopes of peace and a true stop to violence between the US and Iran are gone and it will go down from here. ( I'm an Iranian born In the USA, I have said to others here in this forum in the past so people don't get the wrong idea about me, I have strong feelings for Iran's safety and prosperity as I do for the US)

But with the US being a globalist power hell bent on integrating Iran's banks, resources and economy into its system (meaning the Iranian banks will be controlled by western jewish system) war and conquest is still a very real reality.

I think Iran has the right idea with its (death by a thousand bee stings idea) being the boats that carry rockets and machine guns but they would have to have thousands upon thousand of them to keep the US aircraft carrier strike groups preoccupied.

The new US littoral combat vessel is made to conduct combat operatiins inside enemy waters and can withstand a 10,000lb tnt blast that is detonated practically right next to. These type of ships are no doubt designed specifically for Iran since the IRGCN plans to use suicide boats to blow up ships and air craft carriers or at the very least make them non-combat effective. I can't stress how important it is for iran to employ over a thousand of those high speed boats with the large caliber machine guns and rocket launchers on them and just swarm the US Navy while the khalije Fars and land based cruise missile systems pick off the ships one by one or in a large volley, and those cruise missiles and anti-ship ballistic missiles would yet again need to be produced in number that are in the thousands not hundreds.

I know you guys here know this but the real aspect that I look for in a country that faces the US is how will that country hold up against an enemy that almost always uses a Nazi blitzkreig as their first way of invading a nation and beating a nations military. The US will bomb everything they see that will aid possible military operations, no doubt most of these targets will be civilian ones like power plants telecommunications etc...

It's the only real way the US fights a war, which is one step short from total war.

 

[VEVAK]

It would seem so that all hopes of peace and a true stop to violence between the US and Iran are gone and it will go down from here. ( I'm an Iranian born In the USA, I have said to others here in this forum in the past so people don't get the wrong idea about me, I have strong feelings for Iran's safety and prosperity as I do for the US)

But with the US being a globalist power hell bent on integrating Iran's banks, resources and economy into its system (meaning the Iranian banks will be controlled by western jewish system) war and conquest is still a very real reality.

I think Iran has the right idea with its (death by a thousand bee stings idea) being the boats that carry rockets and machine guns but they would have to have thousands upon thousand of them to keep the US aircraft carrier strike groups preoccupied.

The new US littoral combat vessel is made to conduct combat operatiins inside enemy waters and can withstand a 10,000lb tnt blast that is detonated practically right next to. These type of ships are no doubt designed specifically for Iran since the IRGCN plans to use suicide boats to blow up ships and air craft carriers or at the very least make them non-combat effective. I can't stress how important it is for iran to employ over a thousand of those high speed boats with the large caliber machine guns and rocket launchers on them and just swarm the US Navy while the khalije Fars and land based cruise missile systems pick off the ships one by one or in a large volley, and those cruise missiles and anti-ship ballistic missiles would yet again need to be produced in number that are in the thousands not hundreds.

I know you guys here know this but the real aspect that I look for in a country that faces the US is how will that country hold up against an enemy that almost always uses a Nazi blitzkreig as their first way of invading a nation and beating a nations military. The US will bomb everything they see that will aid possible military operations, no doubt most of these targets will be civilian ones like power plants telecommunications etc...

It's the only real way the US fights a war, which is one step short from total war.

I don't think any ship can take 10,000 lb of TNT specially if it was detonated under water under underneath it's hall
plus that doesn't mean they can take shape charged high explosives or high velocity impacts but I could be wrong...

As for speed boats armed only with rockets & guns yes Iran would need to send 1000's against each US Ships for it to make a difference because they are well equipped to take on 100's of them.....
Iran's swarm tactic will likely be to distract and hide the missile boats, torpedo boats, mine layer & midget subs among them plus a combination of missiles & UAV's or else Iran is fully aware that US ships could easily handle 300-400 simple rocket launching speed boats.

U.S. is also aware of this fact and they know if they want to take on Iran they would need to park their ships at least 500 km away on the edge of the Indian ocean and work their way through Iran's defenses slowly by carpet bombing Iranian shores using stealth bombers and aircraft launched from Diego Garcia outside the range of Iranian missiles and firing cruise missiles launched from the Indian ocean

Unfortunately, Iran also did a major miscalculation. Iran knowing full well that there is no Fighter that we can buy that could go up against the F-22 choose to instead spend all it's money on missiles and this has been a MAJOR MISCALCULATION by Iran!
Because the U.S. also has another and much smarter path and that is to get Saudi Arabia to do their work for them and engage Iran directly while they sit back and reap the benefits of selling the Saudi's weapons at 3x the value and Iran's lack of an Air Force has made the Saudi's bold enough to attempt such foolishness and regardless of the outcome Iran will not only have to give away the location of it's missiles but they'll also empty out a good portion of the stockpile and once a large portion of Saudi infrastructure has been destroyed and both forces have been weekend the U.S. will sweep in and Iran will either have to yield to the U.S. or they'll finish the job and take the Saudi's for all they have to rebuild their military and infrastructure

I believe the Saudi-Yemen war was a practice run the U.S. would provide logistic and intel support and the Saudi's get a test run at going against a country that had no real Air Force just some Russian air defense systems + some ballistic and anti ship missiles...
Yemen's Air Defense systems included SA-2, SA-3. SA-6 (Kub) & SA-19, SA-7, SA-9 & possibly up to 12 SA-15 (Tor) a lot of the same Air Defense systems Iran has yet the Saudi's with ease took out their defenses and took control Yemen's airspace and have managed to take out all of Yemen's SAM in the disputed areas which is basically half of the country and have demolished all the airbases in that area. And except for some minimal damage within 100km of the Saudi border the SCUD missiles fired were either intercepted or fell in the middle of nowhere and had minimal sucess.

Fact is Air Defense systems are only good when you have an Air Force to back them up! I don't think the Saudi's can win a war against Iran but Iran lack of an Air Force and the Saudi success in Yemen in gaining air superiority so quickly and easily could embolden them to try and I have no doubt that Iran can do far more damage than the Saudi's ever could but in such a war both sides will be looser and what the U.S. does afterwards will be the deciding factor

 

[yavar]

 

[Penguin]

Double-Standard Approach: US Crying Wolf Over 'Foreign Provocations'
© REUTERS/ US Navy
Politics
21:18 16.09.2016(updated 21:40 16.09.2016) Get short URL

Washington needs to look hard in the mirror before accusing foreign powers of "provocative behavior" and "unsafe maneuvers," US academic Ted Galen Carpenter writes, commenting on the US Navy's overseas patrol missions.


"What would be Washington's reaction if Russia, China and Iran sailed uninvited into waters close to US territorial waters?" Ted Galen Carpenter of the Cato Institute asks in his article for The National Interest.
Washington has repeatedly cried wolf over "provocations" on the part of Russia, China and Iran.

What an ignoramous, this Ted Galen Carpenter..... he could know e.g. from the following September 2015 'incident' (<bracketed because there really wasn't an incident) involving the Chinese navy (PLA-N):

http://www.wsj.com/articles/chinese...sed-through-u-s-territorial-waters-1441350488
http://edition.cnn.com/2015/09/04/politics/china-ships-alaska-us-waters/
> no problem

As for the Russians:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/03/russian-spy-ship-spotted-near-us-sub-base.html
https://news.usni.org/2016/07/06/ru...waii-u-s-navy-protecting-critical-information
http://europe.newsweek.com/russian-spy-ship-spotted-usnavy-drill-pacific-478723?rm=eu
> no problem

As for Iran:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iran/navy.htm
I believe that farthest out the Iranian navy has been is Zhangjiagang, China, via Pacific Ocean. It has ventured to Pakistan and India, to Tanzania, and into the Mediterranean. Usually 2-3 ships (corvette plus a logistics vessel). It cancelled its port visit to Durban, South Africa and intended foray into the Atlantic. It has never gotten anywhere near US maritime boundaries (but even if it did: no problem)

Map of the U.S. Insular areas.

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

http://blog.geogarage.com/2013/08/us-maritime-limits-based-on-un-sea-law.html

The Exclusive Economic Zones of the United States

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

http://oceanservice.noaa.gov/facts/eez.html