Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Iran to hold wargames in Persian Gulf

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Tierra_y_Libertad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 02:11 PM
Original message
Iran to hold wargames in Persian Gulf
Persian Gulf - Gulf of Tonkin?

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/world/20070206-0750-iran-wargames-.htmlI

7:50 a.m. February 6, 2007 Reuters

TEHRAN – Iran's Revolutionary Guards will hold two days of wargames in the Gulf and Sea of Oman this week, focusing on launching missiles, Iranian news agencies reported on Tuesday.

The announcement follows mounting tension with the United States, which has said it will step up pressure on Iran. This has included despatching a second aircraft carrier to the Gulf, a major shipping lane for oil exports.

The exercises will be staged on Wednesday and Thursday by the missile units of the Guards' naval and air forces, the semi-official Fars news agency reported, citing a Guards source. The manoeuvres will 'focus on exercises for launching missiles', Iran's student news agency ISNA said.

The Revolutionary Guards is an ideological wing of the Islamic Republic's armed forces and has a separate command structure to the regular military. Iran's previous exercises in the region have widely been seen as a show of military capacity.

Washington has said it wants diplomacy to resolve the standoff but has not ruled out force if that fails.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. Aww geez...
baaad timing you guys!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. Going to bite my tongue very hard on this news
while trying to keep an eye on rhetoric from our Middle East 'allies'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojorabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 02:29 PM
Response to Original message
3. Dammit
It is like a bunch of kids playing chicken. The results could be disasterous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Donnachaidh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
4. what do you expect? Two psychos in a pissing contest
And our Congressional reps took OFF the fake testicles they were wearing in November.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dos pelos Donating Member (224 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-07-07 04:34 AM
Response to Reply #4
19. Thanks for the laugh,very good and funny post
Edited on Wed Feb-07-07 04:36 AM by dos pelos
I needed a laugh to keep from crying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojorabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
5. There is this from last night
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x134015
mini-aircraft carrier/amphibious/sub group, 6000 men on way to Persian Gulf.


The USS Bataan amphibious assault ship

The United States already has the aircraft carrier Eisenhower and its group there, and the carrier Stennis with its group is on the way. The USS Bataan, with its group, is also joining the force which is menacing Iran. The Bataan is not called an aircraft carrier, but it is substantially bigger than the Yorktown, Lexington and Enterprise aircraft carriers of World War II/Battle of Midway fame.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solo_in_MD Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #5
15. The comment about being larger that WWII Carriers is disengenuous
The Bataan is a multipurpose amphibious assault ship. It carries landing craft, troops, armored vechicles including tanks, and supplies as well as helicopers and a few of the aging AV-8s for ground strike support. It does not carry F-18, EA-6Bs and other aircraft associated with a carrier like the Stennis.

http://www.bataan.navy.mil/tech.htm has a good description of its capabilites
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
6. Ya know, sometimes I suspect
...that all these idiots (Bush**, Ahm'mad, etc) are secretly in cahoots with each other. I mean honestly. How big an idiot do you have to be to decide that holding war games including missile launches while the US fleet is there, spoiling for a fight, is a grand idea?

I know the truth is probably that the arrogant fools in Iran are matching the arrogant fools in DC and laying their dicks out on the table for another thrilling round of Five Finger Fillet -- minus four, er, "digits" -- but christ almighty.

Since Bush** came along, much of the world seems to me like something out of a very poorly contrived fictional novel where everyone does everything possible to prove how deserving humans are of an extinction event.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beer Snob-50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. I am equating this with the Kennedy/Krushef (sp) pissing contests
Who will blink first so the other one can say they are the true big dogs in the region.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. I guess, but it's beyond absurd how childish it is
And most frightening, Bush** is the antithesis of JFK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beer Snob-50 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. jfk used diplomacy to end these standoffs
while shrub does not believe in diplomacy with ones enemy's
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
magellan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Exactly
There has to be one cool head to have a chance at avoiding all out war. There are none in this conflict between Bush** and Ahm'mad. They're two bullies determined to face off, and there's no adult on the playground to stop them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blues90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 03:10 PM
Response to Original message
8.  It just keeps on going the course .
I doubt it will be long before someone fires one off while screwing around and bush will give his orders to begin the attack .

This is just what the cheney /bush are waiting for .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onethatcares Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. and then we'll have the defense budget to beat all
I don't know how long we'll be around to pass the plate for it, but, the fireworks will make the 4th of july look like kid stuff.

And some people wonder I don't have an up beat view of the world today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blues90 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 04:50 PM
Response to Reply #11
13. I am not too up beat about this either
It's really difficult in my life to be up-beat not with all of this going on .

I do wonder how much longer we have if this attack becomes a reality .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-06-07 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
14. k&r, oh geez
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-07-07 02:26 AM
Response to Original message
16. would not rule out force? That decision was made in 2001. WHIG.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radio_Lady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-07-07 02:34 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. Question to Caligirl... what does WHIG mean in this context?
Are you referring to the Whig party or something else? I don't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radio_Lady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-07-07 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. This is really frightening news. I'm holding my breath through Wednesday and Thursday.
I don't believe in the power of personal prayer, but I plan to give it a bit of a go tonight... a prayer for the world. I think that's perfectly in order.

Good night and good luck.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-07-07 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. White House Iraq Group-WHIG I'm not trying tosay WHIG is making defense
Edited on Wed Feb-07-07 05:12 PM by caligirl
dept decisions. Just saying they were tasked to control and manipulate the press and people to put pressure on for the run up to the Iraq invasion. You can google WHIG and get more info. Mary Matalin was a member.

Link to Sourcewatch info on WHIG

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=White_House_Iraq_Group

"Barton Gellman and Walter Pincus, in the August 10, 2003 Washington Post, seem to have broken the story of the White House Iraq Group, with credit to Josh Marshall for keeping the story alive:

The escalation of nuclear rhetoric a year ago, including the introduction of the term "mushroom cloud" into the debate, coincided with the formation of a White House Iraq Group, or WHIG, a task force assigned to "educate the public" about the threat from Saddam Hussein, as a participant put it.

Systematic coordination began in August 2002, when Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card, Jr. formed the White House Iraq Group, or WHIG, to set strategy for each stage of the confrontation with Baghdad. A senior official who participated in its work called it "an internal working group, like many formed for priority issues, to make sure each part of the White House was fulfilling its responsibilities."

"In September 2002, the White House was beginning a major press offensive designed to prove that Iraq had a robust nuclear weapons program. That campaign was meant to culminate in the president's Oct. 7 speech in Cincinnati." <1>

Although similar in name and function, this group is not related to the #1967 White House Information Group."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radio_Lady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-07-07 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Thanks for your response, Caligirl. Sometimes I'm not totally up to date with acronyms!
Good to talk with you on the DU!

Warm regards,

Another Grandmother for Peace

Radio_Lady Ellen in Portland, Oregon
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 11:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC