Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

[Sapiens]

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/61797

Apparently, six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf within the next month, and Defense Secretary, Robert Gates, was quoted as saying "It´s a reminder for the Iranian Regime".

[algerwetmore]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

Maybe it's a reminder to the Iranians to keep pumping oil, and to trade that oil in american petrodollars.

[jtabeb]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/61797

I think this is misquoted

Deployment of Aircraft Carrier a US ‘Reminder’ to Iran, Says Gates

by Julian Borger
The US defence secretary, Robert Gates, said yesterday the deployment of a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf could serve as a “reminder” to Iran of American resolve to defend its interests in the region.

[joesam45]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

Couldn't they just send a note?

[Slimprofits]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

I think this is misquoted

Deployment of Aircraft Carrier a US ‘Reminder’ to Iran, Says Gates

by Julian Borger
The US defence secretary, Robert Gates, said yesterday the deployment of a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf could serve as a “reminder” to Iran of American resolve to defend its interests in the region.

Final verdict: This is all much ado about nothing. Julian Borger is a half-decent propagandist at best and Ian Brockwell is a buffoon.

Gates: Brief overlap of carriers a “reminder” to Iran

After a brief period with two carriers in the Persian Gulf, the USS Harry S. Truman has redeployed from the region, replaced by the USS Abraham Lincoln, according to the Navy.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday that two carriers would be in the Persian Gulf briefly.

“This deployment has been planned for a long time,” Gates told reporters during what is a rare trip to Mexico by a defense secretary.

A Navy official said the move was part of normal rotation of forces as the Lincoln relieves the Truman, which had been conducting maritime security operations there.

Asked Tuesday if the brief overlap of carriers in the Gulf signaled an escalation of tensions with Iran, Gates said no, noting that the U.S. Navy presence in the Gulf goes up and down.

“I don’t see it as an escalation,” Gates said. “I think it could be seen though as a reminder.”

When asked later if the deployment was meant to send a message to Iran, Gates replied, “I think I’ll just leave it the way I did.

[kelton56]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

http://www.gonavy.jp/CVLocation.html

This will tell you where the carriers currently are located. Only Lincoln will be in Persian Gulf. HS Truman is now in the Mediterranean Sea, supposedly on the way back to US after replacing Enterprise in Dec 2007. Most of our carriers either are in home port or undergoing repairs/renovations.
Now if Kitty Hawk, which is to be decommissioned and junked in Jan 2009 anyway, gets called out of Yokosuka Japan to go to Persian Gulf...hmmm.

[Guest]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

Persian Gulf is not the big story right now. Lebanon is what's breaking news. Hezvbollah are in the process of permanently neutering the Lebanese Government, Iran just delivered forty fast approach speedboats loaded with explosives to Hezbollah in Northern Lebanon, and Iran is closely monitoring and supporting Hezbollah's final "hollowing out" of the Lebanese state to become a 100% wholly owned Meditteranean ancillary to the Iran sponsored "Shiite Resurgence".

This is the big new unfolding geopolitical shift in the struggle for influence between Shia and Sunni. Aircraft carriers are if anything more critical standing off the Lebanese coast right now than they are in the Persian Gulf. Those insisting that Iran has been "bullied" and "greatly misunderstood" are turning a blind eye to their process of simply devouring Lebanon - as few would plausibly argue that Hezbollah is not a closely backed and influenced extension of Iran's geopolitical wishes.

This country under the Mullah's is turning genuinely toxic for stability in the region. Lebanon was a shining jewel of multi-cultural tolerance - far more progressive and enlightened than any other majority Muslim country in the region, save perhaps Turkey. This country, the very best of the Middle East as a social and economic model, has simply been "chewed up" by Iranian and Syrian interests. Many Americans are blind to this, because they are thinking in stereotypes - hence anything or any party which is supported by George W. Bush is "bad".

Not so - and ignoring what's happening there as a mere "detail" will prove a huge oversight. Lebanon wholly devolving to Iranian influence is huge news.

[tombat1913]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

On the other side of the fence, Iran doesn't have battlegroups sitting in the Gulf of Mexico, nor have they invaded a country bordering the U.S.. They don't run a global empire, and don't have our track record of overthrowing sovereign nations and installing dictators to serve their greedy overconsumption. For every speedboat they've sent sent to Hezvbollah, we've sen't a few nukes to Izrael.

Perhaps we have a right to stereotype the Neoconservatives who brought us the Patriot Act, dozens of unconstitutional wars, massive vote fraud, sanctioned torture and rapidly degenerating privacy. After all, fool me once shame on....shame me, fool me twice....shame on........... uh..........well you can't get fooled again.

[metalman]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

On the other side of the fence, Iran doesn't have battlegroups sitting in the Gulf of Mexico, nor have they invaded a country bordering the U.S.. They don't run a global empire, and don't have our track record of overthrowing sovereign nations and installing dictators to serve their greedy overconsumption. For every speedboat they've sent sent to Hezvbollah, we've sen't a few nukes to Izrael.

Perhaps we have a right to stereotype the Neoconservatives who brought us the Patriot Act, dozens of unconstitutional wars, massive vote fraud, sanctioned torture and rapidly degenerating privacy. After all, fool me once shame on....shame me, fool me twice....shame on........... uh..........well you can't get fooled again.

can hardly wait til we can't afford to do this shit no more. oh, right. that happened years ago. :eek:

[Guest]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

Tombat - You are thinking that due to this one observation about Iran's meddling in Lebanon I must be a cardboard box receptacle for stereotypical ideas? That kind of worldview can't seem to conceive of people who's observations are willing to endorse or condemn issues right across all ideological lines. If you are conservative, all the liberal issues "must be bad". If you are liberal all the conservative issues "must be bad". Some notable degree of sclerosis applies to both in my view. I take note only of the incredibly drab way in which "liberals" AND "conservatives" can't seem to think outside of their polarised stereotypical positions. I will confess however that out of the two lists below, the one that is 'a little more soft in the head is the list typical of ultra-liberal American views. But they both have a goodly insertion of 'crap theories'.

"Staunch Conservatives":

> America is only trying to spread democracy in the world
> Israel is inherently peaceful and yearns for peace with it's neighbors.
> Christianity and Judaism have a mission in the world to overcome evil
> Iran is part of the axis of evil
> Egypt's and Jordan's rulers are "good", and Iran and Syria's leaders are "bad".
> We need to fight the war on terror "over there" so it doesn't come "over here"
> Europeans, with their criticims of our wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to roll back tyranny, have betrayed America's
drive for establishing democracies.
> A clash of civilisations is coming
> (add to the above: non-sequitur -America getting overrun by immigrants who will destroy our "heritage and way of life").
> Nations in the middle east are a hotbed of cynical players who will be at each other's throats when the US
becomes isolationist
> Petroleum is a vital global strategic asset who's market must remain at least relatively 'unpoliticized'.
> The US has commitments in the world which when repudiated will result in a considerably more dangerous world.
This reality must coexist with America's severe fiscal problems
> Bush betrayed conservative principles by expanding government more than any other president in recent history (or known history).

"Staunch Liberals":

> America has been blatantly exploiting everyone and must revert to 'strict neutrality'
> Israel has imposed an agenda upon America and America must 'cut it loose' and let it fend for itself. Israel is militaristic and foments wars with it's neighbors. They actively oppress Palestinians
> Israel's "intransigence" is a direct result of Bush's unrestrained endorsement of it's interests. Israel is an accomplice of Western imperialist nations
> Iran and Syria are not part of the "axis of evil". They are largely misunderstood nation viewed in distorted terms by the West, led by US cynical interests. Many claims about their activities are 'manufactured' by US government.
> If and when America retreats and leaves the entire region alone, Iran will not seek to exercise an undue influence upon the region, or politicize the increasingly strategic oil reserves in the region.
> The "war on terror" is a complete myth, manufactured so that US "corporate state" companies can grow fat on the profits.
> Nations in the middle east will subside into a model of peaceful co existence if only the US would allow them to.
> 09/11 is "questionable" - we will never know for sure if the US government did not conduct a "false flag" operation to usurp American democracy.
> Petroleum belongs to everybody to share amicably, and if we stop acting overbearing the nations which have it will continue to make it available to us on the same old free market terms as before. They obviously have no interest in politicizing it.
> US pullout from "imperial overstretch" not only a fiscal imperative - it's also key for the peaceful sharing of oil by all nations.
> The US's "commitments" in the world are mere covers for imperialism. When we desist from that everyone will gain new bonds of friendship and the world will become more peaceful.

[metalman]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

just took this survey and came out as follows...

Your Political Profile:

Overall: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal Social Issues: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal Personal Responsibility: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal Ethics: 0% Conservative, 100% Liberal Defense and Crime: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal

How Liberal Or Conservative Are You?

[krakknisse]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

Returning to the original topic on US escalation in the Occident. This story is a little old but is not just speculation:

CBS Evening News: April 29th 2008: "Hostile" Iran Sparks U.S. Attack Plan

(CBS) A second American aircraft carrier steamed into the Persian Gulf on Tuesday as the Pentagon ordered military commanders to develop new options for attacking Iran. CBS News national security correspondent David Martin reports that the planning is being driven by what one officer called the "increasingly hostile role" Iran is playing in Iraq - smuggling weapons into Iraq for use against American troops. "What the Iranians are doing is killing American servicemen and -women inside Iraq," said Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.[snip]

No attacks are imminent and the last thing the Pentagon wants is another war, but Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen has warned Iran not to assume the U.S. military can't strike.

"I have reserve capability, in particular our Navy and our Air Force so it would be a mistake to think that we are out of combat capability," Mullen said.

I think this is more brinkmanship than an actual attack plan. But it is sometimes hard to read through the doublespeak.

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

K

It is probably brinksmanship to warn offhandedly about our military strength to the Iranians. As if they don't know it.

The US has very tight military and diplomatic alliances with Arab nations around the gulf all with the express purpose of holding the Iranian's in check.

There is no doubt Iran continues to try to de-stabilize Iraq (albeit increasingly unsuccessfully) but the biggest threat they could pose is not nuclear but a shutdown of the Hormuz straits with some sort of massive small boat attack against supertankers transiting. I'm not so sure what that would accomplish for them in the long run but the Iranian government is rather feckless.

Note this interesting little tidbit: The speculation is that they are hoarding oil in anticipation of a further price spike in oil.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020103
Iran books supertanker for oil storage
Tue, 13 May 2008 18:07:59

The National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) has reportedly booked a supertanker to save 270,000 tons of crude oil for about 90 days.

The NITC reserved the Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC) Universal Prime for delivery into the Middle East in the month of June 3-6; shipping sources told Reuters on Tuesday, adding that Iran was still requesting for more tonnage for storage purpose.

Iran is currently using 13 VLCCs for its floating storages of over 28 million barrels of oil, Reuters said in its report.

Shipbrokers said that the NITC has booked three double-sided, single-hulled crude oil tankers, owned and operated by Singapore-based Tanker Pacific, for about $44,000 each, the report added.

A US-registered shipping company also claimed that it was approached with the tonnage inquiry, but turned down the offer, according to the report.

[GRG55]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

K

It is probably brinksmanship to warn offhandedly about our military strength to the Iranians. As if they don't know it.

The US has very tight military and diplomatic alliances with Arab nations around the gulf all with the express purpose of holding the Iranian's in check.

There is no doubt Iran continues to try to de-stabilize Iraq (albeit increasingly unsuccessfully) but the biggest threat they could pose is not nuclear but a shutdown of the Hormuz straits with some sort of massive small boat attack against supertankers transiting. I'm not so sure what that would accomplish for them in the long run but the Iranian government is rather feckless.

Note this interesting little tidbit: The speculation is that they are hoarding oil in anticipation of a further price spike in oil.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...onid=351020103
Iran books supertanker for oil storage
Tue, 13 May 2008 18:07:59

The National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC) has reportedly booked a supertanker to save 270,000 tons of crude oil for about 90 days.

The NITC reserved the Very Large Crude Carrier (VLCC) Universal Prime for delivery into the Middle East in the month of June 3-6; shipping sources told Reuters on Tuesday, adding that Iran was still requesting for more tonnage for storage purpose.

Iran is currently using 13 VLCCs for its floating storages of over 28 million barrels of oil, Reuters said in its report.

Shipbrokers said that the NITC has booked three double-sided, single-hulled crude oil tankers, owned and operated by Singapore-based Tanker Pacific, for about $44,000 each, the report added.

A US-registered shipping company also claimed that it was approached with the tonnage inquiry, but turned down the offer, according to the report.

Just two comments I have pointed out before:

1. The Iranians are storing the oil because there are no buyers. It's heavy and it's sour. Undoubtedly, like a delinquent California mortgage holder trying to sell his home in early 2007, there are lowball bids. But just like said homeowner the Iranians are in denial that the world is entering a period [albeit perhaps a rather short period] of surplus low-grade, but cheap-to-develop-and-produce, oil.
2. The USA would never put 6 carrier groups into the Gulf. They would start colliding with each other. Seriously, the Gulf is an extremely vulnerable water body for large warships. Large parts of it are too shallow for commercial freighters much less carriers. As you point out above there is a well known choke point at the Strait of Hormuz and the USA would never, ever risk trapping such a large number of carrier groups inside. Finally, the air operations from the carriers can be carried out effectively from the Indian Ocean side of the Strait, in coordination with the US air base at Al-Udeid in Qatar and the US Navy 5th Fleet operations headquarters in Mina Salman, Bahrain.

[Guest]

Re: Six US Aircraft Carrier groups will be on their way to the Persian Gulf

just took this survey and came out as follows...

Your Political Profile:

Overall: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal Social Issues: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal Personal Responsibility: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal Fiscal Issues: 100% Conservative, 0% Liberal Ethics: 0% Conservative, 100% Liberal Defense and Crime: 50% Conservative, 50% Liberal

How Liberal Or Conservative Are You?

this questionaire demonstrates the big problem in political thought today; The misconception that everything is "conservative" or "liberal" and that there are only two answers to each of the questions. They're couched to force you into one of the pigeon holes. This pigeon holing is exactly why we get the crappy government we have. Most of the questions the answer should be "none of the above" Life is much more nuanced than these alternatives allow. Yet our system forces people to "pick a team" and then encourages them to root for it whole hog. So what we wind up is with the doctrinaire morons who can't think beyond stage one deciding things.

It encourages biased thinking that rewards one's "team" rather than acheiving superior results. Because the typical voter is not particularly bright or independent minded, he's very succeptible to conforming to either mindset totally rather than thinking for himself. Since we're offered two sets of bad choices, it usually pathetically devolves into one supporting the side that they agree with most on a few highly emotional but usually unimportant issues.

We could use a 3rd and probably 4th major party to achieve anything approaching the results most here would like to see.

The answer to most polls on politics and the two main parties on most issues should be "they're both wrong".