• Guests may view all public nodes. However, you must be registered to post.

US - Iran - Israel | Hostilities May Breakout Shortly | Feb. 2nd-28th | Discussions

Status
Not open for further replies.
RiffRaff said:
Israel has never confirmed they possess nuclear weapons, of course, but it is presumed they have approximately 80. My understanding is they are all plane-delivered, but that's older information, so don't quote me on it.

What aircraft carrier rescue situation question did you ask? I didn't see it.
Click to expand...
Israel has the Jericho ballistic missile (developed in the 70-80's ish) that are absolutely capable of carrying a nuclear payload. Also rumored that Jericho ballistic missiles since their development and production many decades ago have gone through multiple upgrades.

Israel launches its own satellites I believe, all home grown stuff, and once you can develop your own rocket that can launch a satellite into space you're literally one skip away from being able to put a nuclear device in it and call it an ICBM... so Israel already has rocket technology regardless & more than capable of launching a nuclear weapon anywhere in the world via their Jericho ballistic missile arsenal I would presume.

The Wikipedia would tell you that Jericho ballistic missile is still a medium intermediate range ballistic missile... HOWEVER if the rumors that they have been upgraded are true, then I would assume that those Jericho ballistic missiles are now truly intercontinental. BUT even if they are not intercontinental (which let's face it they probably are) the range is still way more than suffice to reach Iran, or China for that matter for medium range. 🤔
 
NuclearID said:
Israel has the Jericho ballistic missile (developed in the 70-80's ish) that are absolutely capable of carrying a nuclear payload. Also rumored that Jericho ballistic missiles since their development and production many decades ago have gone through multiple upgrades.

Israel launches its own satellites I believe, all home grown stuff... so Israel already has rocket technology regardless & more than capable of launching a nuclear weapon anywhere in the world via their Jericho ballistic missile arsenal I would presume.

The Wikipedia would tell you that Jericho ballistic missile is still a medium intermediate range ballistic missile... HOWEVER if the rumors that they have been upgraded are true, then I would assume that those Jericho ballistic missiles are now truly intercontinental. BUT even if they are not intercontinental the range is still way more than suffice to reach Iran, or China for that matter. 🤔
Click to expand...
Yep don't see any issues there.🙄🫣😉
 
DEFCON Warning System said:
I've never personally looked that up.


They've never said. And their programme is so opaque that no one knows.


Depends on who is attacking them.
Click to expand...
Did get a good laugh with some here comparing a aircraft carrier shell used as target practice by US then setting charges to sink it as some kind of comparison to my question about saving thousands of sailors. Ridiculous attempt considering there was no weapons, fuel or load onboard ,yet they thought it would apply to a real case scenario 🤣😂🤣 . Eg. Mines,torpedos and built for purpose missiles.🙄🤣😂🤣
 
The U.S. military bombed the USS America for 4 weeks with missiles and bombs, and it STILL didn't sink. They had to blow it up from the inside. Yet Islamic Republic, with old weapons, threatens to sink the USS Abraham Lincoln.
Click to expand...
https://twitter.com/x/status/2023749667218210929

Yes it is funny. This aircraft carrier wasn't protected by a usual flotilla of anti-air, anti-mine, ant-sub support vessels and batteries. And with ZERO defenses, immobile, & being bombed for weeks, it still wouldn't sink. Really is funny to think Iran could sink one.

STAFF EDIT: Personal attack comment removed from post.

AIRCRAFT CARRIERS ARE DESIGNED TO WITHSTAND A NUCLEAR BLAST WITHOUT SINKING.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
NuclearID said:
Yes it is funny. This aircraft carrier wasn't protected by a usual flotilla of anti-air support vessels and batteries. And with ZERO defenses, immobile, & being bombed for weeks, it still wouldn't sink. Really is funny to think Iran could sink one.
Click to expand...
Your still missing the point , no doubt on purpose. Should a missile get through defences which is entirely possible through saturation or speed and maneuverablilty it could penetrate a section with fuel and weapons . That = massive internal explosions and fires ontop of original missile warhead capacity. Now missiles aside you still have exterior hull threats such as mines and torpedos. Several real war games amoungst countries at sea not on a computer in the office has resulted in US carriers beaten through US defences by deisel / electric subs using torpedos. I understand why you are this way and others like you.
Unfortunately life just isn't like that. Anything is possible.
 
Yingyang said:
Like i said unsinkable titanic they said. First voyage glug glug glug. UNSINKABLE 🙄😉
Ww2 US CARRIERS SUNK .
NONE SINCE SIMPLY BECAUSE YOU HAVN'T RISKED IT. 🤣😂🤣
I'll be kind should worst case it ever happens again feel free to reference these possible reasons.
1. Tired over worked crew well passed scheduled shore leave.
2. Overdue maintenance
3. Depleted defense capacity through support ships sunk or badly damaged .
4. Depleted defense capacity due to expenditure before replenishment.
5. Who,what,where,when fuck!
6. Etc etc etc
Click to expand...
I don’t think you’re baiting anyone but NuclearID does do his research and he’s pretty well informed. But I think the comparison with the Titanic or WW2 carriers to today’s American nuclear carriers is not even close. It’s like comparing paper to titanium. So let’s hit your list:
1. I was in Desert Storm and everyone was always tired…but it never held up or delayed our jobs in any way. Trust me when you are in harms way your being tired or overworked went away pretty fast when crap hits the fan.
2. No such thing as overdue maintenance on modern day aircraft carriers….they don’t leave port unless everything is up to date including flushing toilets.
3. A carrier group pretty much would know if a mosquito was getting close but even if the unthinkable happened unlike their ancestors from WW2 these carriers have enough defensive capabilities(and not just the aircraft on board) to protect themselves.
4. A modern day American carrier packs enough expenditures to keep up a sustained attack for weeks on end. And replenishment from stockpiles are never really that far away anywhere in the world and can replenish rather quickly. But they rarely need to as usually theyve taken care of most threats within a day or two.
5. Anyone, Anything, Anywhere, Anytime and the last word is what our enemies say when a carrier gets on station.
6. Etc, etc, etc

And we have risked it since WW2…many many times. Our carriers have been in dangerous waters more times than you’ve had hot meals. But no one has tested them really because they know what they’re capable of and the superior defenses they have. The crews have also trained for that worst case scenario you and Nuclear ID hit upon. But the rescue effort would be difficult but today’s American military has trained for it over and over again (every possible scenario) trust me…but it wouldn’t take long to initiate I can tell you that.
 
Braver911 said:
I don’t think you’re baiting anyone but NuclearID does do his research and he’s pretty well informed. But I think the comparison with the Titanic or WW2 carriers to today’s American nuclear carriers is not even close. It’s like comparing paper to titanium. So let’s hit your list:
1. I was in Desert Storm and everyone was always tired…but it never held up or delayed our jobs in any way. Trust me when you are in harms way your being tired or overworked went away pretty fast when crap hits the fan.
2. No such thing as overdue maintenance on modern day aircraft carriers….they don’t leave port unless everything is up to date including flushing toilets.
3. A carrier group pretty much would know if a mosquito was getting close but even if the unthinkable happened unlike their ancestors from WW2 these carriers have enough defensive capabilities(and not just the aircraft on board) to protect themselves.
4. A modern day American carrier packs enough expenditures to keep up a sustained attack for weeks on end. And replenishment from stockpiles are never really that far away anywhere in the world and can replenish rather quickly. But they rarely need to as usually theyve taken care of most threats within a day or two.
5. Anyone, Anything, Anywhere, Anytime and the last word is what our enemies say when a carrier gets on station.
6. Etc, etc, etc

And we have risked it since WW2…many many times. Our carriers have been in dangerous waters more times than you’ve had hot meals. But no one has tested them really because they know what they’re capable of and the superior defenses they have. The crews have also trained for that worst case scenario you and Nuclear ID hit upon. But the rescue effort would be difficult but today’s American military has trained for it over and over again (every possible scenario) trust me…but it wouldn’t take long to initiate I can tell you that.
Click to expand...
As you can see my questions are valid regardless of peoples opinions. Your right about tiredness and worn out i've spent most of my life surviving on adrenaline and constant functioning with 4hrs sleep possibly 5 rarely 6 and heaven forbid 8hours i wake up feeling more tired and shit than before i fell asleep. I saw a report from the navy chief requesting not to send a aircraft carrier due to maintenance and shore leave required hence the mentions. 👍🤝
 
Perhaps the next New forum section should be “ thoughtful debate on sinking ships”
There we could debate Ad nausieum the subject.

the topic is kinda useful as China thinks it too can sink aircraft carriers,
Not a wonder why Iran concepts this too,
There, my 2 cents, there are no more pennies, so inflation, my 5 cents,,,
😂😂😂😂
 
I was wondering.....with the speech to the Knesset from Netanyahu, does he think that Iran might -do- something on Purim? I was wondering that myself when this started. I know it's not -as- big of a holiday as Pesach, but it's still very important. And Iran/Hezbollah etc. seem to like to do things on holidays that Israel/Jewish people celebrate.
 
StormyCat said:
I was wondering.....with the speech to the Knesset from Netanyahu, does he think that Iran might -do- something on Purim? I was wondering that myself when this started. I know it's not -as- big of a holiday as Pesach, but it's still very important. And Iran/Hezbollah etc. seem to like to do things on holidays that Israel/Jewish people celebrate.
Click to expand...
My hunch is that he is seeing the signals that either Iran attacks an US base preemptively or the US strikes first, with embassy evacuations and Rubio seemingly delaying his trip to Israel today, I think it's clear that Netanyahu is all but certain some kind of violence is far more likely to happen than a last-minute diplomatic effort, so he is preparing the nation for the scenario that's more likely.
 
Cilvilt_beredskap said:
My hunch is that he is seeing the signals that either Iran attacks an US base preemptively or the US strikes first, with embassy evacuations and Rubio seemingly delaying his trip to Israel today, I think it's clear that Netanyahu is all but certain some kind of violence is far more likely to happen than a last-minute diplomatic effort, so he is preparing the nation for the scenario that's more likely.
Click to expand...
Well said.
 
Sentry said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/2025829366765383685
Click to expand...
Not an uncommon problem on a huge new ship design and it must be more pronounced with a huge Flattop. Show or duty times are in large part synchronized. This puts great stress on the systems. I question the judgement, even a year back of scheduling a long and distant sail in her first days. Of course now (or even six weeks ago) it was far too late)

However the Navy will surely “soldier on” and accomplish its missions.
 
Last edited:
Clarity needed,
a post on Reports
“Iran’s state run Fars News Agency reports that the country has ruled out an interim deal with the United States. Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Esmail Baqaei ruled out the speculation about an interim agreement between Tehran and Washington, and announced that the drafting and preparation of positions for the next round of nuclear talks is currently underway.”

Ok so meeting this Thursday, there will be no “interm deal”
My direct take is they are messaging they are ready to say deal or no deal…
No further talks after that.

Best guess they will ask Israel and USA to surrender😂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom