Thursday, May 24, 2007

What? Can't a country do war exercises?

So what if it's right on off the coast of Iran? The Persian Gulf is a small place! With all the warships and subs we have here, there might just be an acci... OMG!! Did you see that? One of our ships had a collision!! Bomb Iran! Bomb it now!! Bom... oh. Just us. Jeez, tell the admiral to stop making the ship do wheelies.

Carry on:
THE US today threatened new UN sanctions to punish Iran's nuclear drive as it ratcheted up tensions with the biggest display of naval power in the Gulf in years.

A bristling US armada led by two aircraft carriers steamed into waters near Iran for exercises, hours before UN watchdogs said Iran was expanding its uranium enrichment program in defiance of international sanctions.

[snip]

The US Navy said the Gulf exercises were not directed at Iran but Mustafa Alani, senior analyst with the UAE-based Gulf Research Centre, said it was no coincidence the powerful flotilla arrived on the day of the IAEA report.

"The aim of this step, which coincides entirely with the end of the UN deadline (to suspend enrichment), is to send a clear message to Iran that a military option is available to Washington," Mr Alani said.

The carriers USS John Stennis and USS Nimitz sailed through the Strait of Hormuz into the Gulf along with a helicopter carrier and amphibious assault ships carrying an estimated 2200 marines.
And here:

WASHINGTON - As the United States and Iran prepare to hold talks on stabilizing Iraq, tensions between Tehran and Washington are ratcheting up again.

The U.S. Navy on Wednesday began its largest war games off the Iranian coast since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, with two nuclear-powered aircraft carriers leading a flotilla of nine ships, dozens of combat aircraft and more than 2,100 Marines.

As the air and sea exercises commenced, the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency reported that Iran is expanding its nuclear program - which U.S. officials charge is aimed at developing nuclear weapons - in defiance of U.N. Security Council demands that it suspend uranium enrichment.

Iran also has stepped up arms shipments to insurgents battling American troops and the U.S.-backed governments in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. officials said. For the first time, Iran has begun supplying the Taliban in Afghanistan with explosively formed projectile bombs, which have been used to destroy U.S. armored vehicles in Iraq, the officials said.

These developments are part of a wider pattern of tit-for-tat actions and reactions that some members of Congress, U.S. officials and Arab governments worry could escalate into an armed confrontation.

Another example of the back-and-forth: As U.S. forces in Iraq continue to hold five Iranians it seized from a diplomatic facility in Irbil in the Kurdish zone, Iran has detained three Iranian-Americans, among them Haleh Esfandiari, a leading Middle East expert at the at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C.

Let me just repost what I put up February 12 of this year:

In the Strait of Hormuz:

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
U.S. Navy nuclear submarines maintaining vigil off the coast of Iran indicate that the Pentagon’s military plans include not only control over navigation in the Persian Gulf but also strikes against Iranian targets, a former commander of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, Admiral Eduard Baltin has told the Interfax news agency.

“The presence of U.S. nuclear submarines in the Persian Gulf region means that the Pentagon has not abandoned plans for surprise strikes against nuclear targets in Iran. With this aim a group of multi-purpose submarines ready to accomplish the task is located in the area,” Admiral Baltin said.

He made the comments after reports that a U.S. submarine collided with a Japanese tanker in the Strait of Hormuz.

“American patience is not unlimited,” he said. “The submarine commanders go up to the periscope depth and forget about navigation rules and safety measures,” the admiral said.

Currently there is a group of up to four submarines in the Persian Gulf area, he said. So far they only control navigation in the Persian Gulf, the Gulf of Oman, and in the Arabian Sea, he said. They might receive different orders in future: to block off the Gulf of Oman, that is the Iranian coast, and, if need be, launch missile strikes against ground targets in Iran, he said.
We've packed so many warships and subs into the area, 'accidents' are bound to happen:
The Straits of Hormuz carry a vast quntity of the worlds oil in a huge number of ships. Traffic is very heavy there. There is a “Traffic Separation Scheme” in place that separates opposing shipping traffic to reduce the possibility of collision in this vital, and narrow, passage.

The USS Newport News and the Mogamigawa were travelling in the same direction so the “Traffic Separation Scheme” did not offer any protection to them. Since the USS Newport News was fully submerged the Mogamigawa was not even aware of her presence and could not take action to avoid the collision.
As LondonYank observes:
Somehow I always thought it would be other guys who would sink a tanker in the Strait of Hormuz to block the Persian Gulf. I reckoned without the peculiar incompetence of this administration and the bad luck our military has had in the region.
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting


Update: And Francis Townsend (a White House 'Counter Terror' Official) sounds just a little bit too excited to tell us that Bush is keeping all options on the table (starts at 1:13):

4 comments:

mapaghimagsik said...

Does *anyone* think this is going to end well? Besides the evangelicals?

ellroon said...

End well? Of course not! That's the whole point.

Consider the Left Behind = End of Days = Nyah Nyah We're Up Here With God And Get to Watch You Writhe in Agony Book Series. Imagine basing your entire religion on the Rapture and the reappearance of Jesus.

Did you read the rejoicing that went on at the Rapture sites when Israel attacked Lebanon? It was breath-taking.

All that waiting, all that condemning of others, all that reading of the signs.... Wouldn't you want to make it happen if you could?

The Christianists want this to end badly. They plan not to be here.

mapaghimagsik said...

Yoiks. Thanks for reminding me just how 'dead ender' the Christianists are. I think there's a reason the romans considered them lion chow.

ellroon said...

Lol, Mapaghimagsik! Not all Christians are like this, in fact for a long while I was one myself.

I use Christianist as a subtle difference for those who hardly refer to Jesus at all. They are all about power, hatred, force, superiority, ego... in fact, all the things that Jesus was not.