The Hidden Agenda Isn't So Hidden

[domer]

With ground wars raging in Afghanistan and Iraq, why would President Bush install a Navy admiral, a former navy aviator, to the top post in Central Command, which includes the Middle East?

[BT]

because the admiral is an excellent manager?

[Amianthus]

because the admiral is an excellent manager?

Well, most people don't realize that Admirals are extensively trained in combined arms strategy (which includes the use of ground troops as well as air and naval assets). I have a couple of friends that were involved in a good bit of that training, including the design of the wargames used... Both of them are graduates of, and former instructors at, the Naval War College.

[domer]

All that is no doubt true, but doesn't distinguish this particular admiral from the scores of Army and Marine generals who can match him in the criteria you cite but best him markedly in the know-how of ground wars where air power and naval power are negligible. Can anyone read the tea leaves?

[BT]

Why don't you tell us the hidden agenda?

Perhaps a naval blockade of some vital seaway necessary for the exportation of bulk oil?

[Plane]

Why don't you tell us the hidden agenda?

Perhaps a naval blockade of some vital seaway necessary for the exportation of bulk oil?

I am all for that!

There is no sea power like ours , if we choose the battlefeild why not the sea?

[domer]

I have in mind a possible air war against Iran.

[BT]

I have in mind a possible air war against Iran.

That would make sense. Costly yet effective and without the icky US casualties on the ground.

[Plane]

I have in mind a possible air war against Iran.

That would make sense. Costly yet effective and without the icky US casualties on the ground.

Yes , just one Carrier has the equal of Irans Air Force , and how hard would it be to persuede Israel to assist ?

[Amianthus]

Yes , just one Carrier has the equal of Irans Air Force , and how hard would it be to persuede Israel to assist ?

Actually, Russia recently delivered an unknown number of air assets to Iran, apparently including a number of MiG-31s. It's currently unknown how powerful Iran's Air Force is.

[Plane]

Yes , just one Carrier has the equal of Irans Air Force , and how hard would it be to persuede Israel to assist ?

Actually, Russia recently delivered an unknown number of air assets to Iran, apparently including a number of MiG-31s. It's currently unknown how powerful Iran's Air Force is.

http://www.globalaircraft.org/planes/mig-31_foxhound.pl




Hmmmm....


Nothing to worry about unless they also have Russian pilots.

 For a while anyway.

The learning curve is shallow , and the requirement is steep.

This may be another reason that sooner is better than later.

[Michael Tee]

I have in mind a possible air war against Iran.

That would make sense. Costly yet effective and without the icky US casualties on the ground.

Yes , just one Carrier has the equal of Irans Air Force , and how hard would it be to persuede Israel to assist ?

Didn't Israel almost lose a ship to an Iranian land-to-ship missile fired by Hezbollah?  Maybe sending in that carrier might not be as casualty-free as you seem to think.  Wouldn't it be a shame to see all those sailors burned up in a fire they had intended for the people of Iran?

[Plane]

I have in mind a possible air war against Iran.

That would make sense. Costly yet effective and without the icky US casualties on the ground.

Yes , just one Carrier has the equal of Irans Air Force , and how hard would it be to persuede Israel to assist ?

Didn't Israel almost lose a ship to an Iranian land-to-ship missile fired by Hezbollah?  Maybe sending in that carrier might not be as casualty-free as you seem to think.  Wouldn't it be a shame to see all those sailors burned up in a fire they had intended for the people of Iran?

I don't think any battle can be without cost , even in Bosnia we lost an aircraft.

But Iran is many times more vunerable , even more vunerable now than it was before it piled so much nuclear materiael outside of eacahand every major city it has.

A horrible defeat of Iran could be done withoutdamage to its bomb makeing plant which is deeply buried and heavyly defended , it would defeat them utterly just to bomb their contaminated waste sites , I bet those are not deep or defended .

[Michael Tee]

<<A horrible defeat of Iran could be done withoutdamage to its bomb makeing plant which is deeply buried and heavyly defended , it would defeat them utterly just to bomb their contaminated waste sites , I bet those are not deep or defended .>>

I wouldn't want to get into a contest with them about who can contaminate whose people more effectively.  You might not like the payback you'd get.

[Plane]

<<A horrible defeat of Iran could be done withoutdamage to its bomb makeing plant which is deeply buried and heavyly defended , it would defeat them utterly just to bomb their contaminated waste sites , I bet those are not deep or defended .>>

I wouldn't want to get into a contest with them about who can contaminate whose people more effectively.  You might not like the payback you'd get.

How could they "payback"?

The reason we are intrested in makeing them extinct is because they are building WMD , and painting a target on our forheads.

If there is no habitable land in Iran there is very little danger of "payback" , but if we leave them alone they may do just what they are constantly saying they will do "Death to America".