Iran says they can send their navy near the coast of the United States.

[powderman]

      Iran says could deploy navy near U.S. coast: report Reuters September 27, 2011, 11:29 pm              Reuters © Enlarge photo     TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran raised the prospect on Tuesday of sending military ships close to the United States' Atlantic coast, in what would be a major escalation of tensions between the long-standing adversaries.
"Like the arrogant powers that are present near our marine borders, we will also have a powerful presence close to American marine borders," the head of the Navy, Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari said, according to the official IRNA news agency.
Speaking at a ceremony marking the 31st anniversary of the start of the 1980-1988 war with Iraq, Sayyari gave no details of when such a deployment could happen or the number or type of vessels to be used.
The declaration comes just weeks after Turkey said it would host a NATO early warning radar system which will help spot missile threats from outside Europe, including potentially from Iran. The decision has angered Tehran which had enjoyed close relations with Ankara.
And it comes a few months after Iran sent warships through the Suez canal, after the fall of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the first time the Islamic Republic had deployed navy vessels in the Mediterranean.
The United States and Israel have not ruled out military action against Iran if diplomacy fails to stop it getting nuclear weapons. Tehran denies it is developing nuclear arms saying its atomic program is for purely peaceful purposes.
Iran has dismissed the threats, warning that it will respond by hitting U.S. interests in the Gulf and Israel if any such attack happened.
Analysts say Tehran could retaliate by launching hit-and-run strikes in the Gulf and by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway where about 40 percent of all traded oil passes.
The Islamic state often launches military drills in the country to display its military capabilities amid persistent speculation about a possible U.S. or Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities.
(Writing by Hashem Kalantari; Editing by Rosalind Russell)     I read where they said they are now arming their warships with cruise missles. They just love kicking the sleeping lion don't they?? POWDERMAN. 

[briarpatch]

I would not worry about Iran and its navy. To small to far.
If the clown allows them to arm with nukes that will change the picture for sure.
Something Iran must surly think about is the fact that slick willie has the clowns ear. When slick was dealing with his brand of filth and Monica. He bombed what later turned out to be a lot of Innocent people.(Murdered) But- it got the media off his back and had the desired results. ( the same people that put this together is still giving advice)

The American people showed their ignorance by getting behind the bombings even ole storming norman was dancing in the streets about the perfect timing ( what don't look  like perfect timing to a military man when you bomb something.) and slick got off.
The clown needs votes and at the right time with Israel as a partner (Jewish vote, support) he would look good to --fools, if he dropped a few tactical bombs.

With the media in the right places to fawn over him for a few weeks it would improve his numbers.
With fools everthing is possible. 

[yellowtail3]

We've got no reason to be miffed or offended at Iranian navy ships off our coast - we put warships off their coast ALL THE TIME. What's the big deal? We're a hell of a lot more threatening to them, in terms of military posture, than they are to us. We've got more navy than the rest of the world combined, or close to it, if you're counting major combatants. Iran is no naval threat, and for us to act like they are is... not credible.

that's a fact.

[gypsyman]

As long as they stay in international waters, not much we can do about it. Not sure how much experience they have in the open seas, they'll probably get lost and we'll have to escort them home. gypsyman

[SwampThing762]

Let the Iranians come with their warships.  Deny them access to our waters, and send out a few Spruance class or Arleigh Burke class destroyers to meet them on "maritime exercises".   The Iranians will rattle their saber.  Maybe they fire on a US warship and we create another offshore artificial reef complete with shark bait and fish food.      That many less Iranians to face on a battlefield or to train suicide bombers.

ST762

[Cabin4]

Let them come. We'll send out Capt. Chompers and Eagle Eye 2 to get them......

[OldSchoolRanger]

The Iranian navy really doesn't rate any worry.  I don't think they have more than 50 seagoing ships in their entire navy.  The rest would probably sink if they entered the Atlantic.

[jlwilliams]

  Sounds like a great way for them to waste resources coming all the way over here.

[Shu]

Iran is not a credible maritime threat. It will take at least 30 years for them to be. This really isn't a concern. The leadership in Iran like to saber rattle. It is posturing for attention. That is what they do.

[yellowtail3]

Let the Iranians come with their warships.  Deny them access to our waters, and send out a few Spruance class or Arleigh Burke class destroyers to meet them on "maritime exercises". 

You're further out of date than I am - the Spruances are all long gone.

Much ado about nothing; Iran's navy is no danger to us. The same cannot be said of the USN; we've strutted off their coast for decades, and have attacked them ON THEIR COAST numerous times. I remember when Vincennes shot down and airline, murdering 290 Iranian citizens. I think we paid out a hundred million in claims, something like that. No good excuse for that - how would the US react if the Iranians shot down a USAir flight?

[no guns here]

Whatever... according to Jane's and a couple other sources.  The Iranian navy consists of several older (30+ years) "destroyers" which are equivilant in size to our frigates.  Most of their development and acquisition efforts have focused on coastal patrol boats and fast boats all able to fire guided missiles.  They have about 250 such craft supposedly.  Of more concern is their purchase of 3 kilo class subs from Russia.  Not sure how good the crews are but the boats themselves are designed to be and are known to be some the quietest subs ever made.  My guess is that across the board, their training and abilities are not up to western standards especially in their submarine service.  Since they have NO fixed wing naval combat aircraft, any stupidity on their part would result in fish food and new artificial reefs rather quickly.  No problems unless somehow they have managed to produce or procure a nuke to fit on one of their smaller guided missiles that could be fired from a frigate.  I say we just spend a leisurely night making the majority of their surface combatants dissapear and then we tell that jackwad in charge over there to get back in his hole and shut the heck up.
 
NGH

[yellowtail3]

Of more concern is their purchase of 3 kilo class subs from Russia.

Why should that concern us? That they might be able to fight back next time we shoot down an airliner, and shoot up a few oil platforms IN THEIR OWN WATERS?

I say we just spend a leisurely night making the majority of their surface combatants dissapear and then we tell that jackwad in charge over there to get back in his hole and shut the heck up.

Should that happens... we'll have no reason to complain, should they detonate a nuke over here. None. I'm imagining the reaction here, if Iran were to, say, sink a couple of our destroyers that are RIGHT OFF THEIR COAST, to tell us to crawl back to our hole...

[Casull]

Should that happens... we'll have no reason to complain, should they detonate a nuke over here. None.

 
Are you insane?  Nobody can be that ignorant.   

[blind ear]

Iranian navy, Islamic innocents? Either place looks to be appropriate to begin to defend ourselves against the future they prescribe for usl. ear

[powderman]

Should that happens... we'll have no reason to complain, should they detonate a nuke over here. None.

 
Are you insane?  Nobody can be that ignorant.   

 
CASULL. YES, they can, and are. BTW, another example,  I read somewhere that our ships off iran are there to protect iran from Israel, did you know that?? Isn't that nice of us?? Musta read that on some hate America, Israel and Jews site, can't remember.  POWDERMAN. 

[yellowtail3]

Should that happens... we'll have no reason to complain, should they detonate a nuke over here. None.

Are you insane? 

That's a personal question, but I'll make an except and answer: No.

Let's work through this scenario, and you can stop me if I've mis-understood or mis-construed. It was recommended by another poster that the USN spend a leisurely night sinking Iranian navy ships - we're not at war with Iran. Now, what would be the appropriate response to that, on the part of Iran? What would you expect them to do? How about if we did it to the Chinese navy?

Let's turn it around. Say Iran - tired of US ships close off their coast? - decides to sink a couple US destroyers. What would be the likely US response? What would some of the posters calling for sinking Iranian ships - for exercising their navigational right to innocent passage? - what might they want to see done, should Iran sink a couple US ships?

The whole issue here is non-issue. The Iranian navy might deploy a few ships into the Atlantic; big deal. They might approach the east coast. Big deal. We approach their coast all the time.
 USN ships within sight of Iran have killed Iranians, including civilians in an airliner, in an incident fomenting by Captain Rogers of the Vincennes. No Iranians have ever shot at Americans off US coast.
Nothing to worry about. But start shooting just to show who is boss? That will cause up problems. Blowback, baby - I think we can do without more of that.

Nobody can be that ignorant.   

Sure they can; some even think it's a good idea to commit acts of war against a nation we're not at war with. Imagine that?
 

[no guns here]

Aaarrgh...
 
The Kilo class subs if properly maintained, armed and crewed are more than capable of sitting mid-atlantic or just outside the Med and while drifting along almost silently... sinking several major surface combatants.  It would be a suicide run, but then the muzzies are known for that crap.  We run our naval task forces and groups with a submarine escort.  Do you think that if they were going to send their navy into a blue water situation that they would not do the same?  So now you could have a couple old frigates and a couple silent subs sitting just outside US waters waiting for fun, jihad and their 71 virgins.
 
In that case, or if a credible threat exists, I advocate sending the Air Force, not the navy to spend a "leisurely night" destroying their naval assets.  The AF has more range, more assets, more payload and more options than our naval assets.  What would you have us do?  Wait it out?  Ignore it?  Perhaps a political discussion?
 
Why would we wipe out their navy just for fun?  Get real.
 
ANYONE who would say that we would have NO reason to complain about a pre-emptive nuclear strike against our homeland is just plain nuts.
 
Of course, I wouldn't complain if I were President.  I just execute a "two-key turn response" against them.  If they really want to come out and play with the big boys, they have to realize what the consequences can and will be.
 
NGH
 
 

[BBF]

As long as they stay in international waters, not much we can do about it. Not sure how much experience they have in the open seas, they'll probably get lost and we'll have to escort them home. gypsyman

 
 
When Chinese illegals showed up on the Canadian westcoast in decrepit fishing trawlers with a hand held GPS bringing them across the Pacific, I'm fairly confident the Iranian Navy knows how to get back.

[SHOOTALL]

They can send their navy to our coast and we can send it to the bottom nuff said who will blink ?

[SHOOTALL]

As long as they stay in international waters, not much we can do about it. Not sure how much experience they have in the open seas, they'll probably get lost and we'll have to escort them home. gypsyman

 
 
When Chinese illegals showed up on the Canadian westcoast in decrepit fishing trawlers with a hand held GPS bringing them across the Pacific, I'm fairly confident the Iranian Navy knows how to get back.

might be a long swim see above 

[yellowtail3]

Aaarrgh...

Indeed, matey.

The Kilo class subs if properly maintained, armed and crewed are more than capable of sitting mid-atlantic or just outside the Med and while drifting along almost silently... sinking several major surface combatants.  It would be a suicide run, but then the muzzies are known for that crap.  We run our naval task forces and groups with a submarine escort.  Do you think that if they were going to send their navy into a blue water situation that they would not do the same?

Yes. A diesel sub would be hard pressed to keep up with surface ships moving along at fourteen knots or so, and still be quiet. They'd probably ren-deees-vous somewhere for your scenario.

   So now you could have a couple old frigates and a couple silent subs sitting just outside US waters waiting for fun, jihad and their 71 virgins.

so what? We steam just outside other nations' waters all the time. Where is it written that only the USN can do this?
 

In that case...

What - a foreign power is exercising right of free passage, and you want to sink them? What the hell kind of nutcase reasoning is that?

, or if a credible threat exists, I advocate sending the Air Force, not the navy to spend a "leisurely night" destroying their naval assets.  The AF has more range, more assets, more payload and more options than our naval assets.  What would you have us do?  Wait it out?  Ignore it?  Perhaps a political discussion?

Depends on what a 'credible threat' is. A few ships off the US coast is not 'credible threat', unless we're going to hold the world to a much diff standard than we hold ourselves to.

ANYONE who would say that we would have NO reason to complain about a pre-emptive nuclear strike against our homeland is just plain nuts.

no one here has suggested that.

again, all silliness. Iran's navy isn't going to attack the US. All navies are perfectly within their rights to steam wherever they'd like, so long as they're in international waters. Iran has a lot more to complain about the conduct of our navy, than we do about theirs. Imagine how we'd react if one of their cruisers (they don't have any) steamed into Chesapeake Bay and shot down one of our airliners.

who here would be bothered?

[billy_56081]

be neat to se, well kinda a secret weapon when they are out in one of the deepest parts of the ocean. Basically a giand gas bubble bursts underneath the group of ships, the whole convoy falls intothis void and instant and total disapearance. t would be a great test. AN oil slick and some loose items would be the only clues. 

[no guns here]

Pay attention here... I'm only going over this ONE last time.
 
OLD Frigates... not under the best of care.  Maybe they can steam to the western Atlantic at 20 knots, maybe not.  But they PROBABLY don't have the range to do so without an at-sea refueling or a port call in CA/SA.  Same for the KILO.  The older ships would probably transit at a reduced speed to avoid mechanical issues.  Rendevous at port call and then proceed as a unit.  However they got off our coast, they would most likely be together.  Doesn't matter how, just matters that they are there.  Of course an Los Angeles class fast attack boat or three would most likely be in the area too...
 
You're right, we DO steam just outside of other nation's waters all the time.  Most of the time this is to prove and protect freedom of the seas for everyone.  For the most part, there are few if any Americans who are willing to conduct a suicide mission if not absolutely necessary.  It has been proven time and again that muslims will do so.  An American naval prescence is NOT going to attack someone without provocation.  Who knows WHAT an Iranian ship might do under ANY circumstances.  They have not, as a nation proven themselves to be the most mature, level-headed people in the world.  We KNOW how to play the game.  They play a different game by different rules.  We don't know what that game is or the rules.
 
Freedom of the sea's/freedom of passage.  I don't think you sink anyone for just being there (unless a kilo sufaces in NY harbor... or something like that).  However, if they attacked, said they were going to attack, acted like they were going to attack or targeted one of our vessels or planes, then yes, they should go to the bottom.
 
A "credible threat" does not necessarily mean a "credible threat" to our overall national security.  It could be a credible threat to shipping, vessels of the USN or allies, US air assets, US personnel or whatever the Iranians can come up with.  Even a small guided missile frigate could do a LOT of damage to US assets if it got a few missiles off.
 
 
Of course if we had filled that airliner full of dead bodies and sent it over their warship on purpose and on a trajectory designed to mimic an attacking aircraft... oh wait, that was the Iranians that did that.
 
Aaaah yes... I see the post by Yellowtail3 earlier today must not have been posted by you or maybe you just didn't see it.  Someone DID suggest that we would have no reason to complain about an Iranian nuclear strike against us.  Not sure who it was since you deny it though...
 

Should that happens... we'll have no reason to complain, should they detonate a nuke over here. None.

Basically, the Iranian leadership does not necessarily operate according to the "rules" that civilized nations operate under.  Muslims do not operate under the same rules that civilized people operate under.  Iran's leader has voiced his desire to wipe Israel and the US off the map.  Iran is developing nuclear weapons.  Iran has purchased and has developed indigeniously some fairly long range ballistic missiles and guided missiles.  Threats to put platforms off our shores that are possibly capable of tossing those missiles onto US soil must be at least considered.  Nuclear weapons and advanced delivery systems do not belong in the hands of madmen who have avowed to destroy other nations, and whose culture supports jihad, and martyrdom through suicide.  Yeah, I know, we nukes too.  But our leadership hasn't advocated the destruction of Iran nor does our national culture does not support irrational suicide and martyrdom as a way to glory.
 
Basically, western nations have proven to be careful with their WMD's.  Iran hasn't proven to be rational at all.
 
Watch carefully, watch closely... If provoked or threatened then our Navy/AF should do what it is manned, trained and equipped to do...
 
 
done and no more
 
 
NGH

[Casull]

NGH, very well said.  What the USA might do in certain circumstances does NOT equate to what Iran or any country run by a lunatic may do.

[Cabin4]

I would not focus on the specific leadership of a country in this debate. Our country has about the worst thing going for it in that department.....

[Casull]

Well Cabin4, you do have a point there.  But, I think Obama only poses a threat to this country.

[powderman]

NGH. Good post Sir.
CASULL. True. POWDERMAN. 

[yellowtail3]

Pay attention here... I'm only going over this ONE last time.

Oh... okay, Cap'n!

A "credible threat" does not necessarily mean a "credible threat" to our overall national security.  It could be a credible threat to shipping, vessels of the USN or allies, US air assets, US personnel or whatever the Iranians can come up with.  Even a small guided missile frigate could do a LOT of damage to US assets if it got a few missiles off.

so? same could be said of the USN worldwide, and few others. Big deal. What's the fuss?
 

Of course if we had filled that airliner full of dead bodies and sent it over their warship on purpose and on a trajectory designed to mimic an attacking aircraft... oh wait, that was the Iranians that did that.

Did they? Is that what Iran Air 655 was?  A plane full of corpses? Here I was thinking it was a flight full of living, breathing humans, on a steady course climbing gradually through 13K feet, poking along at 300 knots in a straight line only ten miles out, on a commonly-used, established flight corridor.

BUT IS SOUNDS LIKE maybe you might have some unique knowledge, here - give us some details? Then we can square it with the US agreeing to pay Iran and victims of Flight 655 US$61.8 million in compensation ($300,000 per wage-earning victim, $150,000 per non-wage-earner) for the 248 Iranians killed by the USS Vincennes.

Watch carefully, watch closely... If provoked ...

somebody been readin' Tom Clancy!

[SHOOTALL]

they rattle a pen knife we rattle a saber . It would be like a bee stinging an elephant .

[powderman]

BOY, glad to see there are still a few Americans on here not supporting our enemies and making excuses for those committed to killing us. POWDERMAN.