Uhh… Unless I missed something, there is absolutely nothing out of the ordinary involved with this deployment, nor with wargames. All the quotes about standing up missile systems are status-quo, that kind of thing is always done, war or peace. It’s standard operating procedure.

Do you remember how the escalation of the war in tiny lttle country called Vietnam was accomplished.

The mythical Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Maybe we will hear of an unprovoked attack on a US ship by some mad crazy Iranians that can only be answered with direct difinative military action.

Besides dont you think that carrying out a naval exercise along the coastline of a country that you are currently threatening to invade and/or nuke is just a tad irrisponsible.

“Maybe we will hear of an unprovoked attack on a US ship by some mad crazy Iranians that can only be answered with direct difinative military action.”

And maybe we won’t. If something happens, it will certainly be suspicious. But, the mere presence of two strike groups in the Gulf is so completely routine that it amazes me it even got a mention. By your logic, we can then presume this incident already happened, because other US warships have been there since 1950 or so?

As for carrying out naval exercises in the Gulf, the whole damn thing is along Iranian coastline. The Navy’s job is to prepare for war, so, no, it’s not irresponsible. It’s power projection. They know what we have. We know what they have. We’re making sure they don’t forget, just like they intercept our helicopters with jets to ensure WE don’t forget. If anything is irresponsible here, it’s the “axis of evil” crap coming from Washington and the “wipe Israel off the map” crap from Tehran.

Manus

in the absence of transparency on the part of Bushco and the “‘axis of evil’ crap coming from Washington”, do you really blame anyone for alluding to the possibility that these maneuvers by the Navy are being conducted there, not necessarily to reinforce that the U.S. is powerful, but possibly to give Iran ample opportunity to be provoked?

and these ops also send a message to NK. how it is interpreted by NK is anyones guess, but…

Dub,

I’m not blaming anyone for coming to that conclusion, given what’s in the press about it. Hell, it’s probably the conclusion I’d draw. I’m in no way defending the President or his cabal. I’m saying that pretty much the only difference between this deployment and squillions of others we’ve done over the years is that, somehow, this one made the news, so people are looking at it. Given the timing, that’s understandable, but these same kinds of ships (quite possibly these very same ships themselves) were there last year and the year before that and etc, and it wasn’t a story.

Now that I’m writing this, though, I begin to wonder why a routine deployment suddenly popped on the news radar…

Hmm…

“Now that I’m writing this, though, I begin to wonder why a routine deployment suddenly popped on the news radar…”

Yep. Because they want it to. To increase the fear, to enforce the idea of the mad Iranians that need to be controlled, to help set the stage for war.

Two strike groups means 2 Nimitz Class carriers with more than 100 planes each. Their Guided missile cruisers, frigates and tenders, their subs and the Iwo Jima to top it all. The number of Tomahawks they’re bringing along is tremendous.

The Iwo Jima is able to land an armored brigade with it’s own air cover. No small presence.

A Nimitz class carrier can carry up to 88 planes, not over 100. That said, no, it’s no small presence. But, mike, is it any larger presence than has been there since time out of mind?

It’s always a dangerous military “game”. Remember Iran Air, Flight 655.

...the U.S. government stated in a written answer they believed the incident may have been caused by a simultaneous psychological condition amongst the 18 bridge crew of the Vincennes called “scenario fulfillment” which is said to occur when persons are under pressure. In such a situation, the men will carry out a training scenario, believing it to be reality whilst ignoring sensory information that contradicts the scenario – in the case of this incident, the scenario was an attack by a lone military aircraft. This hypothesis, if true, could explain why the records of the Vincennes’ instruments never indicated a craft resembling an F-14 being detected, whilst a civilian IFF signal was detected.

What is different today than the several previous decades of U.S. naval presence in the Persian Gulf?

The U.S. is now the world’s lone superpower.

In spite of this fact, the current Bush administration is losing sight of its principal strategic goal, the military conquest and stabilization of Iraq.

Plans have already been drawn for an aerial bombardment and invasion of Iran, and are constantly updated in real time, ready to go on moments notice.

Admittedly, there is practically no domestic public support for another war in the Middle East. However, after the mid-terms, there’ll be little political cost for an otherwise “lame duck” sitting president.

Beware “scenario fulfillment”.

“the U.S. government stated in a written answer they believed the incident may have been caused by a simultaneous psychological condition amongst the 18 bridge crew of the Vincennes called “scenario fulfillment” “

Yes the entire bridge crew had a psychological moment.

In fact there are around 200,000 US tourists on a Contiki tour of Iraq that have been having the same psychological “scenario fulfillment” condition for the past three years. Seems to be a condition that Americans, expecially American servicemen, are pre-disposed to.

“Beware “scenario fulfillment”.”

Beware of Americans would be better advice.

Manus, I agree there are probably around 4 task forces in the area. Wargames near Iran may just be naval exercices. I can’t ignore the “gun boat diplomacy” aspect of it. It underscores the failure of face to face US diplomacy.

I’m with manus on this one.

I hope all this talk about war with Iran doesn’t become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Building a Pretext for Waging War on Iran: The US navy has conducted military exercises (30th of October) 20 miles outside Iranian territorial waters in the Persian Gulf. The war games were perceived by Tehran as an act of provocation. Iranian patrol boats came very close to US and coalition warships in the Persian Gulf.

I hope all this talk about war with Iran doesn’t become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

well, i certainly hope it doesn’t happen, but if it does, i won’t say that it happened because we talked about the possibility.

“Iranian patrol boats came very close to US and coalition warships in the Persian Gulf.”

Hhhmmmm/cough/Tonkin/cough

Hhhmmmm/cough/Tonkin/cough

lolz.

I’m disappointed.

What happened to the fun october surprise?

“What happened to the fun october surprise?”

Its so good that they are holding it over till Xmas.

I’m surprised no one has mentioned this yet.

The battle, the largest between surface forces since World War II, sank two Iranian warships and as many as six armed speedboats. It also marked the first surface-to-surface missile engagement in U.S. Navy history.

The U.S. has basically already had one mini-war with Iran.

Second U.S. carrier group to deploy to Gulf: The Pentagon will send a second aircraft carrier and its escort ships to the Gulf, defense officials said on Wednesday, as a warning to Syria and Iran and to give commanders more flexibility in the region.

US media reports say Mr Bush will also name Admiral William Fallon, the top US commander in the Pacific, as the new head of Central Command, which covers Afghanistan as well as Iraq.

The choice of a naval commander for Centcom could signal growing concern over Iran – any move against Tehran would rely heavily on ship-based missiles and carrier-based aircraft.