Military AircrewA forum for the professionals who fly the non-civilian hardware, and the backroom boys and girls without whom nothing would leave the ground. Army, Navy and Airforces of the World, all equally welcome here.
Well, if the press statement is accurate,at least it indicates there won't be an attack on Iran in the next six months When is the most favorable weather period for flight operations in the Gulf / Indian Ocean?
I am still have my suspicions regarding this issue and whilst Greece owes a few bob and we all think that country is in dire straits the US debt is slightly more than just a few more shekels. The last time I looked it was in excess of $15 TRILLION??? I am guessing that is 'slightly' more than the debt that most countries owe but instead of taking fiscal measures to reel in this situation we are continually hearing reports of more ships, more aircraft, more technical advances....
Could it be that countries that might not be on the Christmas Card lists of the United States of America are actually playing mind games and getting this super power to go bankrupt?
If the Middle East were all of a sudden to sell its oil in either gold or perish the thought, the Euro then it would be Goodnight America! No shots would be needed, no blockades would be needed.
Just me thinking aloud whilst I am as high as a kite
$15,405,000,000,000 I am guessing that is the approximate debt but it is rising so fast it will be out of date before I blink..
That's how we won the Cold War, Glojo, so there's probably something in that.
Good morning Courtney, Totally agree and that was what was behind my witterings of last night. We are looking on this forum at huge amounts of money being spent on new fifth generation F-35 aircraft but are we aware of all the other eye watering military expenditures that are ongoing including the Zumwalt class destroyers that are unlike any other current warship I have seen.
Yet another project is the LHA-6 Amphibious assault Ships which will be the largest of that type ever built.. There are a number of projects all at the construction stage and all costing billions of dollars. Sadly a few of them are plagued with development costs which are going to have huge impacts on costings That one might have problems that show the aircraft industry are not alone when it comes to expensive setbacks.
This link highlights a number of new projects that look amazing but are also not going to be purchased on a Platinum American Express Card.
Is all this off topic? I don't think so as it is possibly an explanation to a much bigger picture than just threatening to close the strait.
Why fight a war with blood and guts when you can bring a country to its knees in a much more clinical and maybe even more ruthless manner?
Some very interesting links there and I have to wonder how they're affording those big ships. I suppose they are working more on the assumption that continuing to spend Government money is good for the economy. Maybe it could be, but it won't help if, as you say, their debt keeps spiralling upward.
Did the builders get the Zumwalt's hull plans upsidedown?
Today, mentioned in passing in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee - without a word or question on the topic from any supposedly well informed Senators - Chief of Naval Operations Jonathan Greenert told the Senate committee that the US Navy is going to deploy 4 minesweepers to the Persian Gulf (which will double the number of US Navy Minesweepers in the Persian Gulf) and also send additional mine hunting helicopters to the region. This comes following news earlier this year that the US Navy is working on the USS Ponce to deploy to the Persian Gulf to be a full time Mine Warfare Command Ship.
In other words, the Chief of Naval Operations announced to the Senate Armed Services Committee this morning specific details about preparations for war with Iran, and in response the Senators drooled on themselves in silent capitulation. The only thing missing from that scene from this mornings Twilight Zone moment in the Senate was the CNO knocking on the microphone asking "is this thing on" for dramatic effect.
When the CNO tells Senators in a public hearing that the Navy is deploying four little 1300 ton minesweepers to the other side of the world, in any context that can be described as the US Navy preparing for war with Iran. Deploying minesweepers to the Persian Gulf isn't like a typical 6 month deployment of a Navy warship, because some big commercial vessel will almost certainly be chartered to carry the ships across the ocean. This is a big deal.
This is also what a naval buildup for war against Iran looks like.
So the US is sending additional Minehunters, minehunting helicopters, and a command ship to the Gulf, and beefing up the anti air and anti missile defences of these forces. Meanwhile, we are planning on doing nothing to improve the defences of our Minehunters. Whilst the Government have decided that we do not need to deploy a CVS/LPH, we need one in the Thames during the Olympics....
According to a new article in Foreign Policy, Israel has, through a longtime but recently deepened relationship with Azerbaijan, gained access to airfields in a country bordering Iran, which it could use to make more feasible its attack on Iran. FP reports:
In 2009, the deputy chief of mission of the U.S. embassy in Baku, Donald Lu, sent a cable to the State Department’s headquarters in Foggy Bottom titled “Azerbaijan’s discreet symbiosis with Israel.” The memo, later released by WikiLeaks, quotes Azerbaijan’s President Ilham Aliyev as describing his country’s relationship with the Jewish state as an iceberg: “nine-tenths of it is below the surface.”
Why does it matter? Because Azerbaijan is strategically located on Iran’s northern border and, according to several high-level sources I’ve spoken with inside the U.S. government, Obama administration officials now believe that the “submerged” aspect of the Israeli-Azerbaijani alliance — the security cooperation between the two countries — is heightening the risks of an Israeli strike on Iran. . . . “The Israelis have bought an airfield,” a senior administration official told me in early February, “and the airfield is called Azerbaijan.”
As it stands, Israel doesn’t quite have the bombing forces or the aerial refueling capacity to launch an attack on Iran that could be sure to hit all of their nuclear sites. Though Azerbaijan has publicly ruled out the possibility of Israel using their airbases to launch attacks on Iran, calling Iran “our brother and friend country,” FP explains that the bases could be put to any number of useful purposes that will extend Israel’s reach, especially by allowing Israeli planes to land on Azeri airfields after an attack. Though Israel has had economic relationships with Azerbaijan for decades, things have changed:
Israel’s deepening relationship with the Baku government was cemented in February by a $1.6 billion arms agreement that provides Azerbaijan with sophisticated drones and missile-defense systems. At the same time, Baku’s ties with Tehran have frayed: Iran presented a note to Azerbaijan’s ambassador last month claiming that Baku has supported Israeli-trained assassination squads targeting Iranian scientists, an accusation the Azeri government called ”a slander.” In February, a member of Yeni Azerbadzhan — the ruling party – called on the government to change the country’s name to “North Azerbaijan,” implicitly suggesting that the 16 million Azeris who live in northern Iran (“South Azerbaijan”) are in need of liberation.
Today on Fox News, John Bolton blasted the Obama administration, accusing them of intentionally leaking the information, saying it was part of “this administration’s campaign against an Israeli attack,” which is motivated by their opinion that “an Israeli attack is worse than an Iranian nuclear weapon.” Israeli newspapers also reported this accusation today — the FP story about airbase access was based on “four senior diplomats and military intelligence officers.” Bolton explained that he believes “the Obama administration has torqued it up a notch, and now they’re going to reveal very sensitive, very important information that will allow Iran to defeat an Israeli attack.” The video is below:
TBH you only have to search an area immediately in front of whichever ship you are escorting .........................
and I really don't feel that pre-positioning 4 small, very slow mine hunters in an area where someone is talking about sowing mines is anything other than common sense - the damn things will take months to get there if the balloon does go up - you might as well base them in Oman or Bahrain as at Hawaii
Last edited by Heathrow Harry; 14th Jul 2012 at 16:56.
given that the USN had pretty much given up on mine hunting vessels until the first Gulf War and we only had a small fleet you'd have to assume either they didn't think it was important or useful or what they had was enough
personally I think mines are a really cheap way of causing the big boys all sorts of bother
Heathrow Harry: This three-year-old article from Janes International Defence Review remains valid in most respects. Note the bit about the SeaFox mine disposal system whose delivery to US MCM forces in the Gulf was proclaimed by the DT as a dramatic new development this week (this article linked by WEBF in post #557).