Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Iran Is Readying A 'Nightmare Scenario' For The US Navy
Business Insider ^ | 7-27-12 | Robert Johnson

Posted on 07/27/2012 1:11:47 PM PDT by Dysart

It's getting easy to overlook the tired rhetoric and hollow tension surrounding Iran, the U.S. and Israel.

It's been months, and months since the back-and-forth began. First, Iran's shutting the Strait of Hormuz, then its saying it'd never shut the strait. Then Israel's planning a solo attack. No, they're not.

It's frustrating, but that doesn't mean the situation couldn't turn ugly at the drop of a hat.

Joby Warick at The Washington Post reports improved Iranian weapons and an enhanced plan of attack could nail the U.S. fleet parked in the Gulf and there may be little Navy officials can do about it.

From The Post:

[Iran's] emerging strategy relies not only on mobile missile launchers but also on new mini-submarines, helicopters and hundreds of heavily armed small boats known as fast-attack craft. These highly maneuverable small boats, some barely as long as a subway car, have become a cornerstone of Iran’s strategy for defending the gulf against a much larger adversary. The vessels can rapidly deploy Iran’s estimated 2,000 anti-ship mines or mass in groups to strike large warships from multiple sides at once, like a cloud of wasps attacking much larger prey.

“This is the scenario that is giving people nightmares,” said [an] official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity in discussing strategy for defending against a possible Iranian attack.

We recently wrote on one strategy for thwarting a multi-pronged attack against a naval task force, but Raytheon's new system isn't up for handling the hundreds of heavily armed small boats officials believe Iran would send against the U.S. fleet.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: iran; navy; nightmare; waronterror
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

1 posted on 07/27/2012 1:11:50 PM PDT by Dysart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dysart

Iran said to have hundreds of these babies ready to attack in waves

2 posted on 07/27/2012 1:15:11 PM PDT by Dysart (You didn't post that. Someone else made that happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

I’d be interested to know where those boys are planning on hiding once they try it.


3 posted on 07/27/2012 1:15:19 PM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart
Iran Is Readying A 'Nightmare Scenario' For The US Navy

Isn't that similar to what Sadam Hussein and Osama said?

4 posted on 07/27/2012 1:15:46 PM PDT by publius911 (Formerly Publius 6961, formerly jennsdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

Do it so we can send their technology level back to the 7th century.


5 posted on 07/27/2012 1:15:55 PM PDT by wastedyears ("God? I didn't know he was signed onto the system.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

“there may be little Navy officials can do about it”

Somehow I doubt it.


6 posted on 07/27/2012 1:16:41 PM PDT by Hugin ("Most times a man'll tell you his bad intentions, if you listen and let yourself hear."---Open Range)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart
Iran said to have hundreds of these babies ready to attack in waves

U.S. said to know exactly where all of them are stored.

7 posted on 07/27/2012 1:17:48 PM PDT by publius911 (Formerly Publius 6961, formerly jennsdad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dysart
Meh.


8 posted on 07/27/2012 1:19:45 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart
Cautiousness is not necessarily a bad thing. The Japanese thought that the PT boats were nothing but nuisances until the PT boats sank a couple of destroyers.
9 posted on 07/27/2012 1:21:45 PM PDT by vetvetdoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dysart
Iran said to have hundreds of these babies ready to attack in waves

Attack aircraft carry thousands of rounds of ammo. Lil' boats ought to blow up reeeeal good.

10 posted on 07/27/2012 1:22:41 PM PDT by Slings and Arrows (You can't have IngSoc without an Emmanuel Goldstein.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: publius911
Isn't that similar to what Sadam Hussein and Osama said?

I guess we're in trouble now.

Hey, an online publication's got to get pageviews.

11 posted on 07/27/2012 1:23:03 PM PDT by Dysart (You didn't post that. Someone else made that happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

GMTA!


12 posted on 07/27/2012 1:23:55 PM PDT by Slings and Arrows (You can't have IngSoc without an Emmanuel Goldstein.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

October surprise?

Is a carrier going to disappear under an Iranian mushroom?


13 posted on 07/27/2012 1:24:28 PM PDT by hattend (Firearms and ammunition...the only growing industries under the Obama regime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

The meat of this article is that we learn that subway cars are a tad longer than the Iranian Navy gun boats. It gives the unwashed ignorati a true perspective of the danger


14 posted on 07/27/2012 1:28:19 PM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... Present failure and impending death yield irrational action))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hugin
Sayyy hellooo to my little friend.... S


15 posted on 07/27/2012 1:29:10 PM PDT by Daus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

... and here is Saddam’s “Victory over America Palace”...

http://www.shootmeplease.net/?p=103


16 posted on 07/27/2012 1:29:55 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Too many thinking Freepers have left the building...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: vetvetdoug
Cautiousness is not necessarily a bad thing. The Japanese thought that the PT boats were nothing but nuisances until the PT boats sank a couple of destroyers.

Point taken. Somehow I don't think any ship Captains are dismissing the threats entirely. That's a lot easier for us. Not sure how a big ship would counter them other than maintaining adequate distance at all times. They only have to be lucky once if they're packed with explosives.

17 posted on 07/27/2012 1:30:23 PM PDT by Dysart (You didn't post that. Someone else made that happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Daus


More SeaRAM porn...
18 posted on 07/27/2012 1:31:38 PM PDT by Daus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Daus

Unless Iran is only sending 11 boats, that RAM system might be a tad under-gunned.


19 posted on 07/27/2012 1:35:18 PM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE

Don’t worry. We’ll make more.


20 posted on 07/27/2012 1:38:19 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

what a crock. you really think the USN is going to sit there and wait? 30 minutes after the war starts 80% of the Iranian assets will be slag.

Reminds me of Dan Rather on the eve of the Iraq war going on and on about how powerful Iraq was, how their artillery was so much better than ours blah da lib blah blah. How did that work out ?


21 posted on 07/27/2012 1:38:27 PM PDT by beebuster2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SJSAMPLE

A carrier would have a couple launcher pods of RAM missles plus 3 more Phalanx gun pods. Ya gotta hope the screening force would thin the herd a bit before the carrier would need to worry about them. :)


22 posted on 07/27/2012 1:40:12 PM PDT by Daus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Daus

I would hope so, but I have no doubt that Iran is able to muster a virtually unlimited number of suicidal conscripts. Better safe than sorry.


23 posted on 07/27/2012 1:41:31 PM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: gov_bean_ counter

“shootmeplease.net”?!

:-D


24 posted on 07/27/2012 1:44:01 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

I’m looking for a “Persian Gulf of Tonkin Incident” long about October, at the latest.


25 posted on 07/27/2012 1:44:35 PM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

They are planning to get 72 virgins on eternal R&R.


26 posted on 07/27/2012 1:45:37 PM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

Funny but those boats don;t look like they can stand up against a tactical nuke....


27 posted on 07/27/2012 1:45:50 PM PDT by SECURE AMERICA (Where can I sign up for the New American Revolution and the Crusades 2012?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Cool tour. The stairs were a little spooky though.


28 posted on 07/27/2012 1:46:09 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Too many thinking Freepers have left the building...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

We should never underestimate an enemy. The military knows that, but I’m not sure that Obambi knows it. If the imams manage to inflict significant damage/casualties on a major US warship I would think that Iran’s economy for the immediate future would be, as another freeper once put it, “measured in cave paintings.”


29 posted on 07/27/2012 1:49:31 PM PDT by rex regnum insanit (falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

Waves of dead rag heads pal... that is all that you are seeing here.

LLS


30 posted on 07/27/2012 1:54:19 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Don't Tread On Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

During the first Iraq war our A-10s and F-16s and the Navy Hornets went on a virtual cost free killing spree. They created the “Highway of Death for Sadamn’s tanks” Boats are a lot easier to kill than tanks.

Our AWACs will know where each and everyone boat is when they leave port. Those small boats will die on the ocean and there will be no port for them to return to.

I think this is the October surprise planned by Obama to win re-election. Obama is a despicable man.


31 posted on 07/27/2012 1:58:26 PM PDT by cpdiii (Deckhand, Roughneck, Mud Man, Geologist, Pilot, Pharmacist. THE CONSTITUTION IS WORTH DYING FOR!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Daus; SJSAMPLE
A carrier would have a couple launcher pods of RAM missles plus 3 more Phalanx gun pods. Ya gotta hope the screening force would thin the herd a bit before the carrier would need to worry about them. The SeaRAM and CIWS are only of use if they can "see" to shoot.

The traffic lane in the SOH is narrow enough that a disguised vessel(s) outside the lanes but inside Iranian waters armed with a hidden Russian made gatlin gun could within a few seconds preemptively blind the radar sets of every port, or starboard looking SeaRAM and CIWS on a carrier.

32 posted on 07/27/2012 2:01:43 PM PDT by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rex regnum insanit
If the imams manage to inflict significant damage/casualties on a major US warship I would think that Iran’s economy for the immediate future would be, as another freeper once put it, “measured in cave paintings.”

The reaction wouldn't be pretty, and would afford Obama The Oppressive to look god again. I have to wonder if the reaction would be the same were the damage inflicted by their mines. Can think of no reason why the method would matter in the response. They must recognize that.

33 posted on 07/27/2012 2:02:42 PM PDT by Dysart (You didn't post that. Someone else made that happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

“Iran said to have hundreds of these babies ready to attack in wave”

We have a few of these that might be able to stop a couple of them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zdp9llrBLnA


34 posted on 07/27/2012 2:12:12 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (ABO 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
Waves of dead rag heads pal

They aren't rags, they are sheets.

35 posted on 07/27/2012 2:12:17 PM PDT by Dan(9698)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: rex regnum insanit
We should never underestimate an enemy.

Correct. The naval battles during the Russo-Japanese War prove your point. No one expected the Russian fleet to be humiliated by a supposedly inferior Asian power.

America is not Russia, and Iran is not Japan. But still the lesson is there.

36 posted on 07/27/2012 2:14:33 PM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I carrying this lantern? you ask. I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: hattend

I put on the swami’s turban and predict—some limited success from Shore Launched Rockets and such and maybe a little from a few attack boats. They may sink a capital ship or two but then the full might of the USA will hit them like a steel monsoon of death. The Iranian coast will be occupied—in the end the Mullahs will be swept from power and a new Monarchy set up. The war—will be a full one and have several fronts—even including actions in the USA. One year of fighting at most—if anything—it will resemble the Spanish -American war of 1898.


37 posted on 07/27/2012 2:15:47 PM PDT by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*ll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

A few points:

1) Quantity has a quality all its own. Just like with an assassination, if you’re not too worried about a successful egress, then all they need to do is get a few of those boats close enough to a carrier or a cruiser, and we lose the PR war even if we take out 95% of those floating subway cars.

2) I’m sure that they have a few tricks up their sleeve that we don’t know about, or don’t take seriously enough. Just remember, the Israelis were completely surprised in 1973, and though they eventually won (with a lot of material help from us), their reputation took a beating and they ended up losing territories in negotiations. Again, it is the PR war that matters the most in the end, because Iran isn’t going to defeat us any more than the NVs were going to.

3) Yes, I know, our Navy is the very best out there, and not by a small margin. I take nothing away from the Navy, esp. since my father was a vet. We, too, have things up our sleeves that the Iranians don’t know anything about.

4) I am far more concerned about what Iran is capable of doing away from the Gulf. These range from massive terrorist attacks nationwide (or, for that matter, worldwide), to unleasing Hezbollah and its 60,000+ rockets on Israel (and starting a general Mideast War), to sending a nuke from a cargo ship stationed off our shores up in a rocket and exploding it 100-200 miles above our territory - the resulting EMP would devastate our electrical grid for YEARS, possibly leading to literally millions of deaths in short order (think: no working refineries, fuel pumps, hospitals, food delivery, refrigeration, etc.). Yes, we could turn large parts of their nation into a parking lot, but that wouldn’t help much with the damage at home.

Bottom line - though we could easily devastate their armed forces or country if sufficiently provoked, we should not underestimate them. Bluster might feel better, but taking an enemy seriously is far more rational.


38 posted on 07/27/2012 2:26:17 PM PDT by Ancesthntr (Bibi to Odumbo: Its not going to happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart
Never underestimate an enemy.

History is full of small ships doing damage and winning battles against larger, more sophisticated ships. Prepare for any attack you can imagine.
39 posted on 07/27/2012 2:26:31 PM PDT by Nepeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dysart; Allegra; big'ol_freeper; Lil'freeper; TrueKnightGalahad; blackie; Larry Lucido; Diplomat; ..
What is troubling to me is that The Obamanation... would happily expend one or two of our carriers and many thousand servicemen's lives to get re-elected.
40 posted on 07/27/2012 2:26:40 PM PDT by Bender2 ("I've got a twisted sense of humor, and everything amuses me." RAH Beyond this Horizon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beebuster2000
what a crock. you really think the USN is going to sit there and wait? 30 minutes after the war starts 80% of the Iranian assets will be slag.

Given who we have as Commander-in-Chief, I wouldn't bet on a statement like yours. The possibility is greater that we will try to reach out to the Iranians, try to figure out why we made them mad, and attempt to forego violence.

41 posted on 07/27/2012 2:30:31 PM PDT by webheart (King of the Run-On Sentence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Bender2
would happily expend one or two of our carriers and many thousand servicemen's lives to get re-elected.

I fear that he might forbid them to strike back.
42 posted on 07/27/2012 2:31:49 PM PDT by Nepeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill

if the iranians are willing to incur heavy loses they HAVE THE CAPABILITY to overwhelm a carrier battlegroup defenses. the chinese PLAN has been studying this fir years. here are some considerations. the gulf is crap for ASW, especially against diesel boats. they don’t have to be as good as ours; consider what havoc just the threat of a submarine caused n the falklands. it is an integrated defense system for the carrier. ignore the carrier and take out a couple of DDGs or CGs and the defense integrity of the battle group will have seriously compromised. given a large number of SSMs launched from boats and land approaching on multiple axis, coupled with the threat of a submarine attack and some airlaunched SSMs and there will be leakers. you don’t have to sink a ship, just mission cripple her. this is okinawa all over again with the “kamikazes” bases really close. mines are always a problem, especially if they are just allowed to float free on the currents. add to this tactical consideration political restrictions on rules of engagement and a fear of losing even one sailor or marine or a ship and there could be command paralysis by analysis.
of course those little boats probably don’t have the range to get to a carrier group 250 miles off the straits and the SSMs look like exercets or some chinese variant with a range of less then 100 miles and things look much better. doubt the iranian air force would be a huge threat at that distance nor the submarines. IF WE HAVE THE WILL TO FIGHT AND THE COMMON SENSE TO FIGHT TO WIN.


43 posted on 07/27/2012 2:35:55 PM PDT by bravo whiskey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Bender2

Yes...I have been concerned about that sort of scenario for a while now. His internal polls in September will show him the election is lost...landslide numbers. He will not go gently into the night.


44 posted on 07/27/2012 2:37:08 PM PDT by Pharmboy (Democrats lie because they must.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Ancesthntr

Excellent points, especially #4. Their terror network is far reaching and Persians aren’t stupid and nothing if not calculating. The EMP threat is closer to a true nightmare scenario than that tendered in the article. I just don’t know if they can manage to move a cargo ship close enough to pull it off. You wouldn’t think so.


45 posted on 07/27/2012 2:39:00 PM PDT by Dysart (You didn't post that. Someone else made that happen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

All Obambi has to do is order the Navy not to shoot back.


46 posted on 07/27/2012 2:39:47 PM PDT by Rikki Doxx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bravo whiskey
if the iranians are willing to incur heavy loses

They were willing to send young boys into minefields by the thousands, equipping them with plastic keys to paradise.

They are unconcerned with their losses.
47 posted on 07/27/2012 2:44:45 PM PDT by Nepeta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

Limited wars might make sense between superpowers and their proxies. A limited war with terrorists does not. Killing them half dead won’t work. Take them down all the way and insist what rises in their place cannot be an enemy. This should have been done after Iraq fell. If you can get a coup to do it great, if not use the power needed to do it right.


48 posted on 07/27/2012 2:57:48 PM PDT by Williams (No Obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: fso301
Two Apaches engage Taliban Platoon

We are pretty helpless alright.

49 posted on 07/27/2012 3:44:47 PM PDT by itsahoot (Old people cost too much money. They make lots of typos too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dysart

Target rich environment.......


50 posted on 07/27/2012 3:50:27 PM PDT by njslim (St)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson