Skip to comments.
Tehran Fears U.S. Attack [USS Eisenhower, Enterprise]
ADKNI ^
| 10/11/06
| freedom44
Posted on 10/11/2006 2:35:42 PM PDT by freedom44
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 161-175 next last
To: Psychotronic Weapon
Ask yourself the question: "When was the last time YOU heard an actual conservative American (not a paleopantywaist) whining about killing Islamofascisti????
81
posted on
10/11/2006 4:06:08 PM PDT
by
BlackElk
(Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
To: Pukin Dog
Yeah, its kind of difficult to engage in aggressive diplomacy with a weapon that is designed to be covert.
Keep em guessing PD! 8^)
82
posted on
10/11/2006 4:06:24 PM PDT
by
bill1952
("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
To: thinkthenpost
Many folks keep making the claim that a Carrier Battle Group has more firepower than all of WWII combined. I've never called anyone on it because I don't really understand it, could you elaborate please in what manner, and compared to what? I mean short of nukes, which I can neither confirm or deny the presence of any nuclear weapons on any Naval platform I just don't get it. Think about it like this:
During WWII, thousands of bombs might be dropped on a target before it could be considered damaged or destroyed. Imagine you wanted to take out a bridge with dumb bombs on a B-25 how many you would have to drop to do the job?
The low explosive yield, combined with the bridge construction of the day means that you would need many aircraft making runs on the target and dropping their complete load in hopes that a percentage of the weapons would land on-or-close to the target in numbers large enough to destroy it.
Move forward to today:
You have a bridge that needs taking out? You strap a couple of JDAMs on an F-15E, with a backup in case of a systems failure, and the bridge is history with one or two hits.
That is the difference allowing the comparison you question.
83
posted on
10/11/2006 4:06:26 PM PDT
by
Pukin Dog
(Being a Liberal is just a coping mechanism for low self esteem and/or bad parenting.)
Comment #84 Removed by Moderator
To: GOP_Party_Animal
When it's their time, they won't know until the bombs start falling. Unless the New York Times tells them first.
85
posted on
10/11/2006 4:09:40 PM PDT
by
savedbygrace
(SECURE THE BORDERS FIRST (I'M YELLING ON PURPOSE))
To: thinkthenpost
Well, the firepower is often compared to the number of bombs dropped by both sides during the entire WWII. With the nukes available in the Battle Group, the total tonnage of TNT far exceeded what was dropped in WWII.
Having said that, it is not neccessary to invade Iran. We can just bomb the hell out of them. More likely just all their military facilities, and leave it at that.
To: EGPWS
Apparently, an apt pupil of his, although not one of history
87
posted on
10/11/2006 4:14:04 PM PDT
by
bill1952
("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
To: ARE SOLE
88
posted on
10/11/2006 4:14:08 PM PDT
by
Frank Sheed
(Tá brón orainn. Níl Spáinnis againn anseo.)
To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
if the last shell had come down 200 yards closer to the beach, guess what the lead on the four news networks would've been that night? Well, it aint horseshoes, and close gets no points. The lead might have been "US blows the crap out of Hezbollah after suffering an attack on a Carrier". Who knows?
89
posted on
10/11/2006 4:14:11 PM PDT
by
Pukin Dog
(Being a Liberal is just a coping mechanism for low self esteem and/or bad parenting.)
To: EQAndyBuzz
We should announce tomorrow that we plan on drilling ANWR and screw the environmentalists. Say that the world cannot be held hostage by a crazy Iranian.Or by nutsy environmentalists.
90
posted on
10/11/2006 4:14:20 PM PDT
by
Ole Okie
To: BlackElk
91
posted on
10/11/2006 4:16:09 PM PDT
by
Frank Sheed
(Tá brón orainn. Níl Spáinnis againn anseo.)
To: Psychotronic Weapon
First of all, I've heard Muslims freaking out about "friendlier" European countries such as Denmark. Has it occured to you that they don't like Iceland or Japan either, but we are their biggest enemy, so they focus on us the most?
To: Pukin Dog
Well, it aint horseshoes, and close gets no points.200 yards is too damn close when the target costs several billion dollars.
The lead might have been "US blows the crap out of Hezbollah after suffering an attack on a Carrier".
Try "Multi-billion Dollar Carrier Put Out of Action by One Shot from Goat-Herding Hezbullah Freedom Fighter."
To: Psychotronic Weapon
Imagine what the middle eastern countries would be like if we didn't need their oil anymore! We really need to get off of our oil addiction.
To: Psychotronic Weapon
It' called containment. If we let Iran build a couple of nuclear weapons, some crazed ayatollah might decide to sneak one into Washington and destroy most of our federal government. Worse still, Iran could use the first few nukes as a defensive shield and then build a full arsenal of nuclear weapons and ship-launched cruise missiles to attack the US. Given that many people in Iran believe strongly in the concept of martyrdom, it's quiet possible that a crazed supreme ayatollah would use a nuclear arsenal in a first strike against us and sacrifice Iran to destroy most of the US.
Nuclear weapons are the ultimate sneak attack weapons: compact, relatively easy to conceal and extremely powerful. We have to stop this kind of catastrophic scenario early before Iran has any nuclear weapons.
95
posted on
10/11/2006 4:21:46 PM PDT
by
defenderSD
(The concept of national martyrdom, combined with nuclear weapons, is extremely dangerous.)
To: OPS4
Now its time to send a couple of Nuke Subs to sit off N. Korea
you never know, after spending my career in that part of the Navy, I think I can safely say they may already be there :)
96
posted on
10/11/2006 4:24:21 PM PDT
by
Bottom_Gun
(Crush depth dummy - proud NRA member & Certified Instructor)
To: Psychotronic Weapon
Thank you for your opposing opinions. You are right, this isn't a game of Risk and war is never easy or fun.
To: EGPWS
you got that right, standard depolyment is 2 SSNs to a battle group..now where they are in and around the group, you have to guess ;)
98
posted on
10/11/2006 4:29:27 PM PDT
by
Bottom_Gun
(Crush depth dummy - proud NRA member & Certified Instructor)
To: Psychotronic Weapon
PW Neville:
Actually, it is harder to be a war hawk when you are advocating that the US military be politically forced to tuck its tail between its legs and flee because of homefront cowardice, with "conservatives" playing the role of McGovern and the Americong. Win, by whatever means necessary.
Let's do the math indeed. Each military life is precious BUT.... death IS an occupational hazard. In the 1960s, America's highways claimed 4,000 dead per MONTH (and no one was planting road bombs. In the Iraq War, we have lost fewer than 3,000 dead Americans (which, with our allies, is all that counts) in more than 3 1/2 years.
99
posted on
10/11/2006 4:29:48 PM PDT
by
BlackElk
(Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
To: Sen Jack S. Fogbound
I don't know about just bombing them. That doesn't get rid of the problem permanently and it only strengthens their resolve to build nuclear weapons later in this century. I think if we take military action against Iran, it's going to be an air war for 1-3 months followed by a fast invasion from Iraq and Afghanistan, followed by a forced regime change. I would think that after pulverizing their army from the air for a few months, we could capture Tehran in less than a month.
We also have this new weapon, which could knock out the engines on all their vehicles and turn the Iranian army into an army of foot soldiers. Foot soldiers couldn't do much to stop our armored divisions. This could be Bushs's ace in the hole, along with all those other super-secret new weapons that are rumored but not yet seen.
100
posted on
10/11/2006 4:29:53 PM PDT
by
defenderSD
(The concept of national martyrdom, combined with nuclear weapons, is extremely dangerous.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 161-175 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson