Gaza Air War
Meanwhile….
RFAArgus at anchor off Lady's Mile beach 🇨🇾Limassol this morning.
2 x @845NAS Merlin Mk4s on deck
Via @LogiconLtd
RFAArgus at anchor off Lady's Mile beach 🇨🇾Limassol this morning.
2 x @845NAS Merlin Mk4s on deck
Via @LogiconLtd
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The Israeli Air Force released footage of an Arrow 2 anti ballistic missile intercepting a Houthi MRBM launched from Yemen.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Images from earlier today in the Eastern Mediterranean:
The USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) steam together with their respective strike groups, joined by Sixth Fleet command ship USS Mount Whitney (LCC 20).
The USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) steam together with their respective strike groups, joined by Sixth Fleet command ship USS Mount Whitney (LCC 20).
Nice photo op.
Interesting points (I added the spoiler to avoid visual clutter) but I'll remind you that Reagan got mixed up in Lebanon, which was a direct result of the Israeli operations against Palestinian refugees in Southern Lebanon, and the suicide truck bomb killed over 200 US Marines, and another one killed over 50 French troops.
I got to float around the Eastern Med for a while (as our ship awaited calls for naval gunfire support) during that period. A friend of mine (USMC, Phrog pilot) had an RPG go through his aircraft without exploding.
Reagan didn't quite avoid getting involved.
I got to float around the Eastern Med for a while (as our ship awaited calls for naval gunfire support) during that period. A friend of mine (USMC, Phrog pilot) had an RPG go through his aircraft without exploding.
Reagan didn't quite avoid getting involved.
I view the current situation from the perspective of Israel's intervention in the Bekka Valley in '82 which, as you point out, resulted in casualties from American and French contingents of the Multi National Force. It was the loss of three USN jets in one day during airstrikes against Syrian targets which convinced Reagan to withdraw from the conflict. It was a very wise decision. He placed a higher priority on protecting American servicemen than placing them in harm's way. There is a danger that America may once again be drawn into the region by Israel. What happened to the MNF effort in Lebanon should inform any renewal of the idea from Israel that an International peace keeping force would be a viable solution for Gaza.
RE: melmothtw #335
Yes, aware of the Nickel Grass airlift which helped prevent a catastrophe. Nixon was careful to limit material support and avoid direct involvement in an Arab war. Shuttle diplomacy by Kissinger defused hostilities between States which were, at that time, representative of competing Cold war ideologies between the US and USSR. However, that operation created a precedent, and a permanent reliance by Israel upon the United States for political, financial, and crucially, military support.
Last edited by Senior Pilot; 4th Nov 2023 at 08:54. Reason: Remove JB drift
The following users liked this post:
Or they are not total idiots/tools and are watching if Hamas survives the IDF attacks before going to action themselves in order to assess their chances. They might be looking at replacing Abbas. Being massively decimated by IDF might interfere with such plans.
I view the current situation from the perspective of Israel's intervention in the Bekka Valley in '82 which, as you point out, resulted in casualties from American and French contingents of the Multi National Force. It was the loss of three USN jets in one day during airstrikes against Syrian targets which convinced Reagan to withdraw from the conflict. It was a very wise decision.
He placed a higher priority on protecting American servicemen than placing them in harm's way. There is a danger that America may once again be drawn into the region by Israel. What happened to the MNF effort in Lebanon should inform any renewal of the idea from Israel that an International peace keeping force would be a viable solution for Gaza.
However, that operation created a precedent, and a permanent reliance by Israel upon the United States for political, financial, and crucially, military support.
Back to air power: with the Houthi launches of both cruise and ballistic missiles into theater from a goodly distance, I wonder what that does to force mix choices intended to neutralize that threat.
As an aside, if ever there was a case for trying out the boost phase intercept project, that might be just the one.
Two Carrier task groups sounds like a huge collection of assets but there is a lot of area to be covered, the Ships themselves require air cover, and the air arm can only carry out so many sorties a day and do so for extended periods of time demands a lot from ships, aircraft, and people.
Not to mention a few other oceans and hotspots that require the attention and presence oof Western Naval Forces.
The Wild Card in this is Turkey. Is their Boss Fellah just talking smack or is he serious about intervening and does he have the support of his. own military and populace for doing that?
How complicated is it for a NATO member, in this case Turkey, to take up arms against some of its NATO Allies?
That must be a worrisome thought for those on each side that might have to tangle with the other.
Not to mention a few other oceans and hotspots that require the attention and presence oof Western Naval Forces.
The Wild Card in this is Turkey. Is their Boss Fellah just talking smack or is he serious about intervening and does he have the support of his. own military and populace for doing that?
How complicated is it for a NATO member, in this case Turkey, to take up arms against some of its NATO Allies?
That must be a worrisome thought for those on each side that might have to tangle with the other.
The following users liked this post:
Two Carrier task groups sounds like a huge collection of assets but there is a lot of area to be covered, the Ships themselves require air cover, and the air arm can only carry out so many sorties a day and do so for extended periods of time demands a lot from ships, aircraft, and people.
Not to mention a few other oceans and hotspots that require the attention and presence oof Western Naval Forces.
The Wild Card in this is Turkey. Is their Boss Fellah just talking smack or is he serious about intervening and does he have the support of his. own military and populace for doing that?
How complicated is it for a NATO member, in this case Turkey, to take up arms against some of its NATO Allies?
That must be a worrisome thought for those on each side that might have to tangle with the other.
Not to mention a few other oceans and hotspots that require the attention and presence oof Western Naval Forces.
The Wild Card in this is Turkey. Is their Boss Fellah just talking smack or is he serious about intervening and does he have the support of his. own military and populace for doing that?
How complicated is it for a NATO member, in this case Turkey, to take up arms against some of its NATO Allies?
That must be a worrisome thought for those on each side that might have to tangle with the other.
The following users liked this post:
Are the French still in Djibouti.....seems a nice airfield there that has seen lots of use by various air forces.
And very close to Yemen.
Of course there are other airbases around the Middle East where land based air ops can follow from.
But that does not negate the time constraints ocean based assets must confront.
And very close to Yemen.
Of course there are other airbases around the Middle East where land based air ops can follow from.
But that does not negate the time constraints ocean based assets must confront.
Administrator
As neither Mod nor Admin
That is a good question, but if you look at the mutual antagonism between the Greeks and the Turks over the last 60 years, or so, in NATO it isn't too hard to expect that there is a lot of back channel communication ongoing at the moment among NATO allies, none of which sees print.
Each base in such a nation has political constraints attending those basing arrangements.
The Wild Card in this is Turkey. Is their Boss Fellah just talking smack or is he serious about intervening and does he have the support of his. own military and populace for doing that?
How complicated is it for a NATO member, in this case Turkey, to take up arms against some of its NATO Allies?
How complicated is it for a NATO member, in this case Turkey, to take up arms against some of its NATO Allies?
Are the French still in Djibouti.....seems a nice airfield there that has seen lots of use by various air forces.
And very close to Yemen.
Of course there are other airbases around the Middle East where land based air ops can follow from.
But that does not negate the time constraints ocean based assets must confront.
And very close to Yemen.
Of course there are other airbases around the Middle East where land based air ops can follow from.
But that does not negate the time constraints ocean based assets must confront.
Two Carrier task groups sounds like a huge collection of assets but there is a lot of area to be covered, the Ships themselves require air cover, and the air arm can only carry out so many sorties a day and do so for extended periods of time demands a lot from ships, aircraft, and people.
Having seen how Erdogan has acted in such ambiguous scenarios in the past I'm quite confident he won't do much if anything apart from pleasing his audience by talking big words. In geostrategic matters he is pragmatic. Just look at Russia/Ukraine. He has never escalated on either side. Same with Aserbaidschan. Supporting? Yes. Engaging? No. Syria: Except from bombing the poor Kurds (which is the only constant pattern) he hasn't done much. Moreover he won't want to finish off his supply of Fighter Aircraft or updates of those from the US for good.
Are the French still in Djibouti.....seems a nice airfield there that has seen lots of use by various air forces.
And very close to Yemen.
Of course there are other airbases around the Middle East where land based air ops can follow from.
But that does not negate the time constraints ocean based assets must confront.
And very close to Yemen.
Of course there are other airbases around the Middle East where land based air ops can follow from.
But that does not negate the time constraints ocean based assets must confront.
Hutch
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
Recent imagery [28 Apr 23] seems to show 16 x C-130 and 15 x V-22 Osprey, along with other 'stuff'.
Some NASA B-57's have been there at one point in time.
Doing weather research of course.
Doing weather research of course.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
While everyone's watching the carriers, consideration should be given for the boats capable of covertly launching a 154 Tomahawk salvo in 6 minutes.
The four longest serving submarines in #USNavy history. The four horsemen of the Tomahawkalypse: Ohio, Michigan, Florida, Georgia (O.M.F.G.)
154 times this...per boat
https://www.military.com/equipment/s...sile-submarine
The four longest serving submarines in #USNavy history. The four horsemen of the Tomahawkalypse: Ohio, Michigan, Florida, Georgia (O.M.F.G.)
154 times this...per boat
https://www.military.com/equipment/s...sile-submarine
That of course depends upon the "Load Out", all tubes and racks filled and what the make up of the variants included.
Could be some Nukes are aboard an of course the likelihood of those being used is extremely remote to the level of total improbability.
Then one would have to consider the kinds and types of targets and having an appropriate missile for that target.
Sheer numbers of missiles is just the starting point but for sure if all four boats are in the Operational Area they bring considerable fire power with them along with all of the other capabilities they possess.
There has been no. mention of any Attack Subs being deployed but common practice is for every Carrier Task Group to have some as part of the defensive screen for the Task Group.
Could be some Nukes are aboard an of course the likelihood of those being used is extremely remote to the level of total improbability.
Then one would have to consider the kinds and types of targets and having an appropriate missile for that target.
Sheer numbers of missiles is just the starting point but for sure if all four boats are in the Operational Area they bring considerable fire power with them along with all of the other capabilities they possess.
There has been no. mention of any Attack Subs being deployed but common practice is for every Carrier Task Group to have some as part of the defensive screen for the Task Group.