[stuar]

Originally Posted by namloc1980

Wow you make it seem like it should be pretty easy to sink a carrier....so how many have been in sunk in say the last 50 years??

Here's one.



http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_could_...rcraft_carrier

How could you sink an aircraft carrier?


As one USN torpedo pilot stated, "if you wanna fill the ship with air, you bomb it; if you wanna fill it with water...you torpedo it!"


CHINA PROGRAM TOUTS ITS ABILITY TO SINK US AIRCRAFT CARRIERS
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010...op+Stories+2))

Kind of a trick question wasn't it, well heres a few sunk a little longer than 50 years ago, but you know weapons have come a long way since then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...craft_carriers

[weisses]

Originally Posted by stuar

CHINA PROGRAM TOUTS ITS ABILITY TO SINK US AIRCRAFT CARRIERS
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010...op+Stories+2))

And if not countered properly, this and other “asymmetric” systems — ballistic and cruise missiles, submarines, torpedoes and sea mines — could potentially threaten U.S. operations in the western Pacific, as well as in the Persian Gulf

A quote from that piece ...... Thats the whole problem in your theory imo ... The Us is well capable of countering anything Iran throws at them ....

Originally Posted by stuar

well heres a few sunk a little longer than 50 years ago, but you know weapons have come a long way since then.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...craft_carriers

So did the strategy and tactics to protect carriers (they are the command centres )

[Tzar Chasm]

This would be truly Asymetric Warfare if the Iranians could sink a ten billion dollar Carriers with a ten thousand dollar truck. if the Iranians were to attack a Carrier I have no doubt that they would sink it, if the Americans have this fancy defense system then they might not hit with the first shot or even the hundreth shot, but eventually the americans wll run out ammo.

[stuar]

Uproar after Jewish American newspaper publisher suggests Israel assassinate Barack Obama

NEW YORK - The owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, Andrew Adler, has suggested that Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu consider ordering a Mossad hit team to assassinate U.S. President Barack Obama so that his successor will defend Israel against Iran.
http://www.haaretz.com/news/internat...obama-1.408429

Just shows some zionists mentality, although if it were carried out the US would probably still support Israel and in 10 years time some new villan would be blamed with evidence supplied by Israel.

Funny story all the same.

[davoxx]

Originally Posted by stuar

Uproar after Jewish American newspaper publisher suggests Israel assassinate Barack Obama



Just shows some zionists mentality, although if it were carried out the US would probably still support Israel and in 10 years time some new villan would be blamed with evidence supplied by Israel.

Funny story all the same.

doubt he'll get arrested as a terrorist though ... funny that if he had a turban on he'd be dead before you can say "usa f*ck yeah!!!"

[Jonny7]

Originally Posted by Tzar Chasm

This would be truly Asymetric Warfare if the Iranians could sink a ten billion dollar Carriers with a ten thousand dollar truck. if the Iranians were to attack a Carrier I have no doubt that they would sink it, if the Americans have this fancy defense system then they might not hit with the first shot or even the hundreth shot, but eventually the americans wll run out ammo.

hmmm

it appears the most potent weapon the Iranians have for dealing with that situation are the sunburn anti-ship missiles, opinion seems to be divided on their effectiveness, looks like the carrier group as a whole has the countermeasures to deal with them

I think Iran would most likely focus elsewhere, softer targets

[stuar]

Originally Posted by davoxx

doubt he'll get arrested as a terrorist though ... funny that if he had a turban on he'd be dead before you can say "usa f*ck yeah!!!"

http://www.google.com/m?client=mobil...ed=0CAcQvwUoAA

[Jaafa]

Originally Posted by Jonny7

hmmm

it appears the most potent weapon the Iranians have for dealing with that situation are the sunburn anti-ship missiles, opinion seems to be divided on their effectiveness, looks like the carrier group as a whole has the countermeasures to deal with them

I think Iran would most likely focus elsewhere, softer targets

I honestly believe Iran would target the carrier above all else in the the event of a war. Think about it this way.

Even if Iran had to throw every single small boat, sub, anti ship missile, drone, and say 50% of it's cruise/ballistic missiles at the carrier, the financial cost of those losses would still outweigh the cost of just that one ship. Then factor in the human cost, over 5000 servicemen are aboard one of these carriers. When is the last time the US lost even close to 5000 men in a single day?

Even factoring in the loss of all Iranian surface vessels as retaliation (which aren't many tbh), the benefit to Iran would still be significant, in terms of military and propaganda.

Attacking soft targets would make no sense, your more likely to kill civilians and the damage is easily repaired compared to a Super-carrier and you'd still lose all your surface vessels in retaliation. I think the Iranian mentality would be to go for broke.

[maddragon]

Originally Posted by Danpad

I don't even think it's much of a CT now, it's going to happen. If Iraq(1+2), Afghanistan, and all of the Arab 'spontaneous uprisings' (I know, sounds silly when you say it out loud doesn't it!) are anything to go by, the untied nations of USA, UK and Israel are itching to reduce Iran back to the stone age and can't wait to do so.

As soon as the other chess pieces are on board, coerced and assured slices of the pie the end game will commence.

By the way, I intially spelled 'united' wrong and then looked at it. I thought it quite apt to leave the word as it is.

Time to stock up on coal and briquettes I think.

Which is why I am filling a 3000 litre diesel tank so I can still drive when it happens...

[weisses]

Originally Posted by Jaafa

Even factoring in the loss of all Iranian surface vessels as retaliation (which aren't many tbh), the benefit to Iran would still be significant, in terms of military and propaganda.

Do you really think that they only retaliate by attacking some surface vessels ?

1 Military benefit is none existent (because they would be wiped off the face of the earth by Tomahawks and other missiles)

2 What propaganda ?? there will be nothing left to broadcast their propaganda ... besides smoke signals

[Jaafa]

Originally Posted by weisses

Do you really think that they only retaliate by attacking some surface vessels ?

1 Military benefit is none existent (because they would be wiped off the face of the earth by Tomahawks and other missiles)

2 What propaganda ?? there will be nothing left to broadcast their propaganda ... besides smoke signals

Don't be so dramatic, wiped off the face of the earth? Get real.This isn't Iraq or Afghanistan, this is a country 3 times the size of either, with bunkers and tunnels stretching hundreds of kilometers. Anything of value on land would well hidden by the time they'd launch such an attack.

[weisses]

Originally Posted by Jaafa

Don't be so dramatic, wiped off the face of the earth? Get real.This isn't Iraq or Afghanistan, this is a country 3 times the size of either, with bunkers and tunnels stretching hundreds of kilometers. Anything of value on land would well hidden by the time they'd launch such an attack.

There is Nothing dramatic about that scenario

Iran is on the radar for a long time now ..US knows where to hit and have the capabilities to do so fine its 3 times larger then other country's so it only takes a few minutes more for the missiles to reach their targets

[Jaafa]

Originally Posted by weisses

There is Nothing dramatic about that scenario

Iran is on the radar for a long time now ..US knows where to hit and have the capabilities to do so fine its 3 times larger then other country's so it only takes a few minutes more for the missiles to reach their targets

I don't depute their ability to hit targets, I just wonder how many targets they could find that are worth anything and which aren't several dozen meters below ground.

I would also wonder about the US willing to continue a such a war after losing more men in a day than the last 10 years of Afghanistan.

[stuar]

Meanwhile:
The US-based Wired magazine says Washington has stationed a special team of highly trained commandos near Iran's border for possible sabotage operations.
http://www.tehrantimes.com/politics/...ndos-near-iran

Iran have known for years that US and Israeli and others crosshairs were all focused on them, they overcame sanctions and now domestically produce a lot of their own weaponry through ingenuity and reverse engineering, the number and variety are unknown.
They are a proud nation and a lot of their military would happily be martyred, unlike their enemies.
Iran no matter what is thrown at it will not bow down, the US and Israel are militarily stronger, but guerilla tactics can win battles and wars and that is how I see Iran fighting this one.
Hezbollah fought Israel's superior IDF in 2006 and who went running with tails between their legs?, it wasn't Hezbollah.
Irans homemade weaponry would be a 24/7 operation for the past so many years and the number, variety and storage locations would be enormous, so I can't ever see Iran being a walk over like the Iraqi regime, and if the US or Israel plan on putting soldiers in there the amount of returning corpse's would dwarf Iraq and Afghanistan combined.

[namloc1980]

Originally Posted by stuar

Here's one.

That was scuttled and sunk to form an artificial reef. It didn't exactly have any defences or put up a fight. Try again.