Posted on 11/18/2006 10:15:36 AM PST by PghBaldy
As the American President George W. Bush steps up threatening rhetoric against Iran to force it suspend its nuclear program, calling for worldwide isolation of Tehran until it “gives up its nuclear ambitions,” experts predict that the coming days would see a much violent step by Washington against the Islamic Republic.
What asserts the experts’ fears is the fact that on October 31, two nuclear-powered carriers, the USS Eisenhower and USS Enterprise, arrived in Bahrain, accompanied by their carrier strike groups. And on November 9th, the USS Iwo Jima, and the USS Boxer also arrived.
Is President Bush up to something? Asked Rense.com
On October 11, American officials announced that the U.S., Bahrain and other states will hold their first naval exercise in the Gulf to practice interdicting ships carrying weapons of mass destruction and missiles.
The exercises, organized under the U.S.-led 66-member Proliferation Security Initiative and the first to be based in the Gulf near Bahrain, across from Iran, came as Washington and the European Union member states are pushing for imposing sanctions including possible interdiction of ships on North Korea, following its announcement of carrying out nuclear test, and on Iran, which the U.S., backed by Israel and the EU, claims is preparing to produce nuclear weapons.
Iran considers Washington- sponsored war games in the Persian Gulf, off the Iranian coastline as a provocation aimed at creating a situation of direct confrontation between the U.S. and Iranian naval forces in the Persian Gulf, although a senior U.S. official insisted that the exercise is not aimed specifically at Iran.
About the exercises, which experts say reinforces a U.S. strategy aimed at strengthening America’s ties with the Gulf states, which Tehran and Washington are engaged in a fierce competition to win influence over, the official, speaking on condition of anonymity claimed:
"It’s an effort to bring a lot of Gulf states together to demonstrate resolve and readiness to act against proliferation."
"Reports say the U.S.-led naval exercises based near Bahrain will practise intercepting and searching ships carrying weapons of mass destruction and missiles.
Iran's official news agency IRNA quoted an unnamed foreign ministry official as describing the military manoeuvres as dangerous and suspicious. The Iranian foreign ministry official said the U.S.-led exercises were not in line with the security and stability of the region. Instead, they are aimed at fomenting crises, he said." (quoted in BBC, 23 October 2006)
But some analysts reject the idea that the U.S. plans for another war while its army is struggling in Iraq after the situation there worsened beyond the Bush administration and its war allies’ expectations.
The Proliferation Security Initiative is a global initiative, launched in 2003 under President George W. Bush with the aim of stopping shipments of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), includes a group of countries willing to share intelligence information to combat proliferation of WMD, including through military exercises.
North Korea has already announced having nuclear weapons capability, but Iran rejects the United States and other major powers’ accusations that its developing a nuclear weapons program, insisting its nuclear program is solely aimed at peaceful purposes, including power generation.
Sort of like WW-I. Such an endding is actually more common in modern times than unconditionaly surrender. Name another war besides WW-II, less than a couple of centuries past, that ended in unconditional surrender. I can think of a couple/three.
I don't know that we could do that if we wanted to. We've only got 12, normally that means we can deploy 4. In a pinch 6 is possible, but it would leave other areas, such as Korea and the Taiwan Strait, completely uncovered, not to mention the eastern Med.
Well that was a pretty silly rant.
PS We were at peace when Japan launched a surprise attack, we then immediately declared war on Germany. Find a library.
Read your Constitution. Congress, not the President, has the power to declare war.
Now "use of military force" is not quite the same thing. But remember, Bush asked for, and got from Congress, authorization to use military force against those who attacked us on 9-11, and to keep it from happening again as well as separately to attack Iraq.
Absent an attack from Iran, I don't think President Bush is going to attack them without going to Congress first. Could be wrong though, and there's also the fact that the DemonRats don't actually take over Congress until January. Lots can happen in a month and a half.
No, all that would indicate was that a major football game was going on. ;-)
Hmmm ... this could get interesting if the CIA / intelligence assets could document any financial links between Iran and Al-Queda.
Actually we declared war on Japan, the next day, in FDR's words "Yesterday, December 7th, 1941, a day which shall live in infamy".
However, we did not declare war on Germany until after they and Italy had declared war on the US (11 Dec 1941) in support of their treaty with Japan (Tripartite Agreement signed on 27 September 1940) Stupidest thing Der Fuhrer ever did, well maybe next to attacking the Soviet Union, *before* he had finished off the Brits.
Interestingly, FDR did not ask for a Declaration of War against Germany and Italy, but rather stated: "I therefore request the Congress to recognize a state of war between the United States and Germany, and between the United States and Italy.
Congress went ahead and declared it anyway.
"Therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared;"
Methinks someone else needs to find a Library as well.
Iran
Is it true that a majority of Iranian people like the U.S?
No, and 31 Congressmen tried to sue him over that action. However the Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal from the Court of Appeals, which had ruled that the Congressmen had no standing to sue in that case. They also said Congress could cut off funding for that action if they wished, an observed that a vote to do that had failed in Congress (as had one to authorize the bombing, which did pass the Senate).
But that was BJ, this is President Bush. Bush actually read the Constitution, in spite of not being a lawyer.
Lieberman will come in handy when the decision is made.
The islamofacists have won the toss and have elected to receive.
Very good point.
"We don't consider the Iwo and Boxer to be carriers, though they have flight decks for helos and VTOL."
I got into this on another thread. With the Osprey coming and the VTOL fighter, it's getting hard to distinguish the two. And the Iwo and Boxer displace around 44,000 tons, so they are small carrier size.
That's the freaking point! Japan attacked us you numb nuts! We do NOT attack the ships of those that we are not at war with in the open ocean. How would we prevent a Chinese sub from approaching in international waters? Ram them? That's an attack, which we DON'T do!
Maybe you'd like to hear it from a more current submariner than I.
http://bubbleheads.blogspot.com/2006/11/uss-kitty-hawk-and-chinese-sub.html
Update 0513 13 Nov: Here's the article, from the Washington Times' Bill Gertz. It's even lamer than I thought; the Song-class diesel boat was spotted on the surface about five miles from the Kitty Hawk. So, either the Chinese were trying desperately to let us know that they could get that close to us, or this is another of a series of attempts by the Chinese to send their submarines farther afield where they just can't seem to stay undetected and/or submerged. Since they have nothing to gain by taunting us like that, I vote for the second option.
And a brain is obviously not needed in this discussion, you've already proven that. I would urge you to look into getting one, however.
I think Germany declared war on us on dec.10 of 41.
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.