Iran to take action if US aircraft carrier returns

[anon45]

Its just another disinformation tool for the West against its "enemies". There were countless articles on Reuters which were lies/spins/propaganda, same as CNN, and any other West mass media.

Reuters is rather respected as a source, far more so than CNN, partially because as a European paper it has less of a stake in US politics. If you believe it is a tool to spread disinformation just because it is one of the more established 'Western' newspapers, we will have to agree to disagree.

You are partially right, China cares about its interests foremost, however preventing Iran becoming another West puppet is a part of its interest. Thats why China denied additional sanctions, supplies advanced weapons and its tech, etc.

There was a recent threat by Chinese general they would protect Iran even if it means WW3. I personally doubt that, but Iran would get a lot of support under the table if war happens. China achieves its goals - helps Iran, harms West/EU, and even though higher oil prices would harm its economy short term, think what happens after the war with broke or near-broke US/EU - they would come to China begging for cash, and China would again use it to its advantage.

Considering the state of things it isn't high on the list of priorities to nation build Iran, and I think China knows this. Any action will be with the goal of keeping the straits secure for shipping, not occupying Iran, and it is in China's interest to make any period of disruption as short as possible. If China was to supply Iran during wartime, not only would it harm its relations with the US and EU further, it would prolong the disruption and increase the damage to China's economy, as well as the world's. This wouldn't make countries outside the western world think better of China, certainly not the major countries in Asia, who have somewhat of a dependence on the oil flowing through the strait.

Basically China can't only think of the pain such a move would cause itself, but what it would cause to the rest of the world, and how that might effect relations with other countries, particularly in Asia.

Once the war is over, the strait is secure, and Iran has to pick up the pieces of its country China can use its own reserves to rebuild Iran, securing a rather cheaper source of oil, positive propaganda, and a greater eye into Iran's structure so as to make sure such a disruption doesn't happen again.

Or it doesn't have to and can stick to its stated policy of non-interference. Either way, it isn't the US that's going to be rebuilding Iran and keeping our soldiers vulnerable to any farmer with a rifle.

 

[Indian Tiger]

The warships are only useful to fight Somali pirates. However, thousands of underwater mines, hundreds/thousands of anti ship missiles, and ballistic anti ship missiles, in the lake called Persian Gulf, will wreak havoc on any invading navy. Most of the anti-ship missiles are mobile and hidden, hence can't be taken out that easily.

I hope there is no war ... both sides will lose. But hell, if there is one, the invaders will pay big time. Perhaps their only resort will be nukes to win back the war. Yes, USA has used nukes against Japanese, and if they loose big time, they might use them again. Hope not.

Any nation in this world will definitely like to have such super carriers and many might be jealous of the US Navy.

I am Jealous honestly!!! LOL.... Let's hope for peace.

 

[yyetttt]

Yes they are so old for the US Navy, but when comparing with the other nations they are miles ahead and far superior.

They have a better navy than most inland countries like Afghanistan or Tajikistan.

 

[FriendOfPakistan]

Well, don't be so jealous. Those are huge dinosaurs floating on water ... works fine against helpless 3rd world countries ... but they are the best targets in close proximity in the persian gulf for total demolition ... no doubt they are useless except as targets for total demolition ... The problem is once the US has its useless dinosaurs sunk, it might get so humiliated as to use a nuke to get back its pride.

Any nation in this world will definitely like to have such super carriers and many might be jealous of the US Navy.

I am Jealous honestly!!! LOL.... Let's hope for peace.

 

[Indian Tiger]

They have a better navy than most inland countries like Afghanistan or Tajikistan.

Ignorance at its height!!! can't do anything for that...

 

[Indian Tiger]

Well, don't be so jealous. Those are huge dinosaurs floating on water ... works fine against helpless 3rd world countries ... but they are the best targets in close proximity in the persian gulf for total demolition ... no doubt they are useless except as targets for total demolition ... The problem is once the US has its useless dinosaurs sunk, it might get so humiliated as to use a nuke to get back its pride.

Your assumptions are absolutely correct if the carrier fights alone, but when with the carrier group(Nuclear subs, Destroyers, Frigrates) and the 80+world class aircraft on board its really a nightmare for any Navy.

Anyway US is not in position for another Mishap... They already got enough for their economy from the Afghan and Iraq war.

 

[yyetttt]

Ignorance at its height!!! can't do anything for that...

It's the truth... Would you call a cat a lion?

 

[Indian Tiger]

It's the truth... Would you call a cat a lion?

Dude, more than half the countries are getting defence support from US directly or indirectly. If US is a cat, who is the lion then?

 

[FriendOfPakistan]

What would the aircraft do against anti-ship missiles and mines ?

Your assumptions are absolutely correct if the carrier fights alone, but when with the carrier group(Nuclear subs, Destroyers, Frigrates) and the 80+world class aircraft on board its really a nightmare for any Navy.

 

[Indian Tiger]

What would the aircraft do against anti-ship missiles and mines ?

What the Anti-ship missiles will do against the Anti-ballistic missile systems(BMD)?

Thanks for a healthy conversation, it's time for me to move. will catch you today night again.

 

[FriendOfPakistan]

With good jamming - as seen with RQ-170 - large numbers of missiles overwhelming defenses, and torpedoes such as Hoot/Skhval ... most will reach target. So far, all real world anti-ship missiles have had little or no defense from ships ... check the record, i am not making this up.

What the Anti-ship missiles will do against the Anti-ballistic missile systems(BMD)?

 

[yyetttt]

Dude, more than half the countries are getting defence support from US directly or indirectly. If US is a cat, who is the lion then?

I meant that Iran is the cat. You shouldn't call someone a heavy weight wrestler when they are only 60 pounds.

And yes, I know alot of countries are getting defense support from US, but that is because they either do not have a good governance system that is independent (i.e Pakistan) or they do not have oil in their soil bulging up by the gallons like Iran.

 

[Indian Tiger]

With good jamming - as seen with RQ-170 - large numbers of missiles overwhelming defenses, and torpedoes such as Hoot/Skhval ... most will reach target. So far, all real world anti-ship missiles have had little or no defense from ships ... check the record, i am not making this up.

US jamming systems are known for its best mate , Yes BMD systems dont have a great record. All your missiles will not hit them due to that BMD. But their missiles will cost you.

Thanks.. bye..

 

[Harry_Thomason]

Iran may have the guts to act against US, but they don't have the technology to act against the mighty US carrier.
They are already having BMD system(STANDARD Missiles) in their warships to defend them.

RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have to account for two more things:

a) batteries are limited. For example 26 missiles battery is exhausted after 13 intercepts (two missiles per target). Iran could easily spare 50 missiles per warship, but its way overkill, ~30, and warship is screwed, even if they used one missile per target.

b) there is no 100% interception against many incoming missiles, the more flying, the lesser the accuracy. Lets say 20 incoming, even the best defenses with 80-100% interception rate drops significantly, its expected to be <40%. However in US case, they never even tried to intercept more than 2 at the same time with the latest SM-3.

 

[gambit]

You have to account for two more things:

a) batteries are limited. For example 26 missiles battery is exhausted after 13 intercepts (two missiles per target). Iran could easily spare 50 missiles per warship, but its way overkill, ~30, and warship is screwed, even if they used one missile per target.

b) there is no 100% interception against many incoming missiles, the more flying, the lesser the accuracy. Lets say 20 incoming, even the best defenses with 80-100% interception rate drops significantly, its expected to be <40%. However in US case, they never even tried to intercept more than 2 at the same time with the latest SM-3.

So how many moving/maneuvering sea targets has Iran successfully hit?