| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| US Naval Update: CVN 65 Enterprise Abandons Libya, Reinforces CVN 70 Vinson In Straits Of Hormuz |
| 2011-03-27 |
| Source: Stratfor |
| Posted by:Uncle Phester |
| #5 So true, Joseph. And Iran is accelerating the pace of their actions in attempt to make their Shiite crescent. Syria is the fulcrum. Wargame accordingly. |
| Posted by: newc 2011-03-27 21:26 |
| #4 Again, IRAN will prefer to stay on the geopol defensive + let Radical Islam + Iran-controlled Militant-Terror, Political etc. proxies take the lead in support of pro-Iran, pro-Shia regional or international policies. Unless Iran does sonething stupid like try to unilater mil attack USN + other Allied ships in the Gulf or major land targets, IMO THE US WILL ITSELF TAKE NO MILACTION ON ITS OWN AGZ IRAN UNLESS IT BECOMES CRYSTAL CLEAR THE MILTERRS + ISLAMIST JIHAD IS GOING NUCLEAR WID SERIOUS THREAT TO US-ALLIED INTERESTS. Again, NUC WANNABE IRAN = RISING CHINA = is not going to wait until 2050 or 2080, 2100 = 2200?, to achieve its desired "great power" ambitions = "Manifest Destiny" - they want it ASAP AMAP ALAP despite any Media, Diplomatically-correct rhetoric to the contrary. "2012", or very shortly after. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2011-03-27 20:58 |
| #3 Yes, it is almost 45 years since the British abandoned Aden and left us with responsibility for the Land of Nod, which is east of Aden. |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2011-03-27 17:45 |
| #2 More likely than not the presence of two carriers in the Arabian Sea near the Straits is simply overlap. In that region at least, the Navy in the past has had a replacement carrier and a departing carrier overlap their missions by a couple weeks or so to ensure a smooth handover in responsibility. However (the all-encompassing however), given the instability in Bahrain, Kuwait and Oman, having two carrier groups there allows us to make clear to the Mad Mullahs™ of Iran that they’d best not do anything overly stupid in the Gulf. Add to this the recent riots in Syria, demonstrations in Jordan, the Hezbullah putsch in Lebanon, and the events across North Africa, and one can see that having more firepower near the nexus of all the instability (Tehran) is a good idea. There is no compelling need for a carrier group off Libya now -- three weeks ago there was, and parking one there THEN would have sent Qadaffy a message, and I advocated that back then. Now that the Europeans are engaged and bases in Crete, Cyprus, Sicily, and Italy are available for coalition/NATO aircraft, and the Charles de Gaulle has arrived on station with its strike aircraft, the need for a US fleet carrier is less. Indeed, a heavy amphibious assault ship (e.g., USS Bataan) with Harriers, helicopters, Ospreys, and Marines is very useful, not just to rescue downed pilots but also to put in the assets needed for effective targeting of Libyan heavy military forces. The Navy only has so many ships (an argument for another day), and the Joint Chiefs clearly don’t see a compelling need for a fleet carrier in the Med right now. In simple terms: we (the US and the Euros) have Libya covered. It’s up to America to cover the Persian Gulf. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2011-03-27 17:27 |
| #1 in response to Iranian mischief in Bahrain? Lord knows Obama won't smite the Iranians, so it's probably a "message" from President Rodham |
| Posted by: Frank G 2011-03-27 16:25 |