 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Kirnwaffen
|
 |
Tryin' hard to chill in the city of Dis
Jul 2000
time: 22:36
|
|
The diesel subs, while they would not be a viable long term threat, could very easily inflict relatively severe casualties on the USN in the short term. Modern diesel subs do run more quietly than most, if not all, nuclear subs, and, operating in a pack, could probably be quite successful at taking out a carrier or two. The problem would be when they needed to get air, which would make them visible to some extent. The question is really how long they could hide.
I'm relatively surprised at the good perception of US intelligence and war capabilities posted in this thread. I would have thought that the Iraq fiasco had exposed the weaknesses of both to everyone by now.
The real problem for the US would be when OPEC cut off oil supplies. At that point, with Iraqi oil infrastructure in the state that it is currently in, the US would be utterly screwed, which is why we would never be so stupid as to support Israel in a preemptive strike against Iran, or defend it when Iran struck back.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Oncle Boris
|
 |
Once in a brown moon
Aug 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Who cares about your opinion, honestly?
|
So how long would it take for the US navy to sink four submarines? Answer the question. I don't know the exact answer, but I doubt it would be long.
quote:
And the subs are just icing-a couple of guys in a little boat can cokme up to a tanker and blow themselves up. Not very high tech. |
My turn to 
There are things such as escorts, navigation permits, mines, air surveillance, etc. Trust me, if the oil needs to get through, it will.
quote:
Right....just look at our experience with Pakistan and India testing nukes without us having a clue..and the whole NK weapons program...and our claims about Iraq, AND Iran. |
That's why I said "unless Iran has some allies". Getting all the stuff for a nuclear bomb BY YOURSELF is absolutely impossible to hide.
As for India and Pakistan, I know Americans keep banging on these... well I don't know how they did it exactly, and can we really be sure that America had no idea at all that it would happen? For sure they knew there was something nuclear underway. The bomb might have been a surprise, but you need to prove that America didn't even know that Pakistan and India had some sort of nuclear stuff.
What I know however is that I read a book by the president of the IRSN (a French institute specialized in nuclear research) that said that Saddam would not have been able to hide nuclear research unless given some serious help (i.e. receive stuff instead of making it himself).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Oncle Boris
So how long would it take for the US navy to sink four submarines? Answer the question. I don't know the exact answer, but I doubt it would be long. |
There is no answer to such a question-it could be immidtaely, cause they are all caught in port, or it could be weeks. What is difficult to fathom is that you think there is a canned answer to such a question.
quote:
There are things such as escorts, navigation permits, mines, air surveillance, etc. Trust me, if the oil needs to get through, it will. |
Trust yopu? Base on what?
quote:
That's why I said "unless Iran has some allies". Getting all the stuff for a nuclear bomb BY YOURSELF is absolutely impossible to hide. |
Yup, just ask NK. Or study the run-up to Israel getting nukes...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Oncle Boris
|
|
Once in a brown moon
Aug 2001
time: 00:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by GePap
There is no answer to such a question-it could be immidtaely, cause they are all caught in port, or it could be weeks. What is difficult to fathom is that you think there is a canned answer to such a question.
|
The point is that they would be detected as soon as they went into action. It's easy: you shoot, you reveal your position. You don't shoot, you're not disrupting anyone.
Besides, I'm sure military commanders have a relatively precise answer to that.
quote:
Trust yopu? Base on what?
|
Such as in 'phrasal expression' or whatever you call them. So tell me, you think that the US Navy would not be able to effectively protect convoys? What world do you live in? You think that a bunch of dudes in suicide ships would get around satellite detection, radars, missiles.
The answer is simple really. America organizes convoys for oil ships. Then declares the area a no-sail zone. Any unidentified object that enters their screen is destroyed. And if the submarines come close, well, you may lose a ship or two but overall the battle will be over really soon.
quote:
Yup, just ask NK. Or study the run-up to Israel getting nukes... |
NK was an obvious case. I had a talk with a political science teacher just two years ago and he told me that NK was known to be very close to have nuclear weapons. So if he knew it, do you think American intelligence didn't? Hopefully their incompetence does not extend that far.
As for Israel, they got it from France, which pretty much demonstrates that you've not understood my point: "UNLESS SOMEONE GIVES IT TO YOU". I don't like caps but that's the third time I'm repeating it now, I'm losing patience.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sikander
|
 |
Boulder, Colorado, United Snakes of America
Jan 2000
time: 22:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kirnwaffen
The diesel subs, while they would not be a viable long term threat, could very easily inflict relatively severe casualties on the USN in the short term. Modern diesel subs do run more quietly than most, if not all, nuclear subs, and, operating in a pack, could probably be quite successful at taking out a carrier or two. The problem would be when they needed to get air, which would make them visible to some extent. The question is really how long they could hide.
I'm relatively surprised at the good perception of US intelligence and war capabilities posted in this thread. I would have thought that the Iraq fiasco had exposed the weaknesses of both to everyone by now.
The real problem for the US would be when OPEC cut off oil supplies. At that point, with Iraqi oil infrastructure in the state that it is currently in, the US would be utterly screwed, which is why we would never be so stupid as to support Israel in a preemptive strike against Iran, or defend it when Iran struck back. |
I seriously doubt that they could take out a carrier, much less two. Do we even have a carrier in the Gulf to take out these days, or have we pulled it back to the Indian Ocean? Anyway there is a big difference between (maybe) being able to survive for a while and being able to locate, approach and destroy a well-escorted enemy target. They could pose a danger to tankers of course which is more to the point of their existence anyway.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kirnwaffen
... the US would be utterly screwed, which is why we would never be so stupid as to support Israel in a preemptive strike against Iran, or defend it when Iran struck back. |
Um, I rather doubt this. If a country doesn't consistently back its allies, then it rapidly loses credibility. The US would be in a no win situation - I just hope Israel realises this and doesn't start something that neither side can finish without immense damage.
Blood causes blood, you see.
quote:
Originally posted by Plato
It doesn't matter how quiet you are when sonar goes active. If their was any chance of an Iranian sub near a US Carrier you would have a halfdozen destroyers banging away in a heartbeat. Chance of Iranian sub surviving=0. |
Always assuming the DE sub isn't hiding below a thermal layer...
... also, if the minefields are already in place, killing the sub won't remove the minefield. It also won't help any tankers that have already found out the hard way that a minefield is in place.
Placing a minefield is relatively easy compared with removing it. Thanks to the poster (Kirnwaffen?) who told me about the Avenger class in the USN - I was unaware of US minesweepers' capabilities.
EDIT: No, not Kirnwaffen. Thank you Plato.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
JimmyCracksCorn
|
|
Macedonia - Sovereign country north of Greece.
Dec 2002
time: 05:36
|
|
I read this thread as "Imran promises retaliation if Israel attacks".
He always seemed like a moderate kind of guy to me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
|
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:36
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by panag
hi ,
take a look at a map , ..... you can fly over water also , ....
have a nice day |
Oh, Of course: lets see, take off near tel Aviv- head to the med...then.......Fly over egyptian airspace to get to the Red sea, then fly several thousand miles around Arabia, which of course will give plenty of time for the saudis to know you are headed Iran's way, and then finally get accross the Arabian peninsula to strike at Iran.. and then what? Cause I assume you want them to be able to fly back, right?
Or go over the mediterranean, then fly over turkey yo get to the black sea, then either fly over turkey again to hit iran, or fly over Armenia and Aizerbaijan to get to Iran..ypu, another quicky....
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:36.
Apolyton Time is 00:36. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
12-05-2004 08:41
:doevidencenow:
|
|