StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Quick Links


Iran blasts mock U.S. carrier in war games


(CNN)Iran blasted its mock-up of a U.S. aircraft carrier during naval drills on Wednesday, swarming the target with 100 speedboats armed with rockets, shoulder-launched missiles and mortars as well as striking it with cruise missiles, according to reports from Iran's semi-official Fars News Agency.

Iran said the aircraft carrier target was a full-size replica of the USS Nimitz.

"Iranian naval forces displayed their skills in targeting enemy vessels and destroyed a mock U.S. aircraft carrier during the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps Navy's massive Payambar-e Azam 9 (The Great Prophet 9) wargames in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz," read a video caption on Fars' website.

When U.S. officials first learned of the existence of the mock carrier last year, one described it as more akin to a Hollywood set than an actual warship.

But the symbolism is clear. Nimitz-class carriers are the centerpiece of U.S. naval forces, and the largest warships in the world.

Mine-laying exercises were also part of the war games, according to the Fars report.

Rear Adm. Ali Fadavi, commander of the Iranian naval forces, described that portion of the games as "the most important concern of the Americans."

"We have the most advanced sea mines which cannot be imagined by the Americans," he is quoted as saying in the Fars report.

Brig. Gen. Hossein Salami, lieutenant commander of the Revolutionary Guard, said Iran wasn't showing off all its capabilities during the games, according to a Fars report.

"We have capabilities which will remain covert and hidden before being used in action and we will merely use them in the battlefield," Salami said in the report.

A U.S. Navy spokesman in Bahrain told the Associated Press that the United States "was not concerned about this exercise."

"We're quite confident of our naval forces' ability to defend themselves," Cmdr. Kevin Stephens said.

link

Yeah I read about this. They're proud that they were able to sink what was essentially a cardboard cutout in 50 seconds. Idiots.

Meh, the US navy is quite proud of being able to sink its own targets as well. Doesn't make them idiots, just business as usual.

Oh noes, I's scared.
Who was this brought to us by, the Office of the Prime Minister of Israel?

Hey now Flagg this kesploding of what if I remember correctly is a dressed up barge clearly shows that Iran is a threat and we need to give more money to Israel to protect America......somehow.

Thanas wrote:Meh, the US navy is quite proud of being able to sink its own targets as well. Doesn't make them idiots, just business as usual.

I think the US usually either sets its training exercises at something more challenging than "sink a cardboard cutout," or doesn't waste time issuing huge press releases about how badass it makes them.

If only because people would ask pointed questions about why you need a hundred billion dollar budget to sink cardboard cutouts.

It's not just Israel, this may be the Iranian military's way of objecting to the Nuclear talks:

Insanity Continues to Build Around Prospect of Iran Nuclear Pact

Published February 25, 2015 By Jim WhiteFrom the nature of the political feeding frenzy surrounding the ongoing P5+1 negotiations with Iran on Iran’s nuclear technology, it is hard to believe that the Joint Plan of Action under which the countries are now operating was extended last November through the end of June of this year. At the time of that extension, the US announced a goal of having the political framework of the final agreement worked out by March 1. That date has now slipped to March 31, but current negotiations are still aimed at getting the political framework in place before the final details get ironed out. But with Benjamin Netanyahu making a speech to a Joint Session of Congress next week and other assorted madness, one would think that we are in the last few hours of the negotiating window.

Of course, one of the groups most upset by the possible outcome of removing the US sanctions against Iran is the MEK. Their latest tantrum, yesterday, in which they tried to claim that they had discovered a new, secret uranium enrichment site, was mostly ignored by the world. Jeffrey Lewis was quick to dismiss the accusation.

I had noted yesterday that Dianne Feinstein and Richard Durbin had tried to give Netanyahu some bipartisany-ness during his visit by inviting him to a closed-door meeting with Senate Democrats, but Netanyahu declined the invitation, inexplicably claiming that meeting would lend a partisan nature to his nonpartisan appearance before Congress. Bibi also got slapped down, though, as his bid to get several Arab ambassadors to show up for his speech has been rejected outright.

Just as the US military hates to see peace break out somewhere where they could otherwise be arming and training freedom fighters, Iran’s military seems especially upset by the prospect of a deal with the West. The IRGC is so upset about what is going on that today they broke one of their biggest toys in a fit of rage. Just under a year ago, word came out that );]Iran was building a replica of a Nimitz-class US aircraft carrier:

Intelligence analysts studying satellite photos of Iranian military installations first noticed the vessel rising from the Gachin shipyard, near Bandar Abbas on the Persian Gulf, last summer. The ship has the same distinctive shape and style of the Navy’s Nimitz-class carriers, as well as the Nimitz’s number 68 neatly painted in white near the bow. Mock aircraft can be seen on the flight deck.

The Iranian mock-up, which American officials described as more like a barge than a warship, has no nuclear propulsion system and is only about two-thirds the length of a typical 1,100-foot-long Navy carrier. Intelligence officials do not believe that Iran is capable of building an actual aircraft carrier.

/snip/

Navy and other American intelligence analysts surmise that the vessel, which Fifth Fleet wags have nicknamed the Target Barge, is something that Iran could tow to sea, anchor and blow up — while filming the whole thing to make a propaganda point, if, say, the talks with the Western powers over Iran’s nuclear program go south.

Marcy had a bit of fun with the barge at the time, comparing it to our F-35 program.

But now, instead of waiting for the P5+1 talks to “go south”, the IRGC has chosen to destroy their target barge in war games that were launched today. And, just as predicted a year ago, the destruction of the barge was televised. From AP via the Washington Post:

State TV showed footage of missiles fired from the coast and the fast boats striking the mock U.S. aircraft carrier. The drills, which also included shooting down a drone and planting undersea mines, were the first to involve a replica of a U.S. carrier.

“American aircraft carriers are very big ammunition depots housing a lot of missiles, rockets, torpedoes and everything else,” the Guard’s navy chief, Adm. Ali Fadavi, said on state TV, adding that a direct hit by a missile could set off a large secondary explosion. Last month Fadavi said his force is capable of sinking American aircraft carriers in the event of war.

Here is a PressTV segment on the war games, complete with some footage of torpedoes hitting the barge:
Additional footage with more direct hits on the barge can be seen in this PressTV story.

The US Navy has now been sternly warned not to tow any barges into the Strait of Hormuz. [AN: ]

Meanwhile, more negotiations are scheduled for Monday.

https://www.emptywheel.net/2015/02/25/i ... lear-pact/

Iran and Israel are basically two sides of the same coin, after all.

To be fair, it actually does make sense for the Iranian Navy to dress up a barge and use it for target practice- otherwise, how do they practice blowing stuff up?

It's the drama and chest-puffing and "yeah, you BETTER not come over here!" crap that makes the whole thing ridiculous.

Simon_Jester wrote:I think the US usually either sets its training exercises at something more challenging than "sink a cardboard cutout," or doesn't waste time issuing huge press releases about how badass it makes them.

Yes, indeed..

“This exercise provided an important opportunity for realistic at-sea training with live ordnance, in conditions that could not be duplicated otherwise,” said U.S. Navy Rear Adm. Russell Allen, the U.S. Pacific Fleet Valiant Shield exercise lead. “This particular event enhanced our collective combat readiness and allowed us to improve our interoperability by working together to achieve specific training objectives.”

[...]"It provides an excellent opportunity for all three services and all the elements of the carrier strike group to work jointly to flex their firing chains and demonstrate their ability to release weapons accurately, safely and in an efficient manner."

The only difference between this and the Iranians is that the Iranians actually spell out who they are training against, unlike all the US promo material that totally does not show (but not tell) the hostile forces as Soviet/Iranian/Chinese.

Thanas wrote:The only difference between this and the Iranians is that the Iranians actually spell out who they are training against, unlike all the US promo material that totally does not show (but not tell) the hostile forces as Soviet/Iranian/Chinese.

And that the Iranians do not have decommisioned vessels (in this case Aircraft carriers) they can afford to sink in training, so they need to be creative.

Thanas wrote:

Simon_Jester wrote:I think the US usually either sets its training exercises at something more challenging than "sink a cardboard cutout," or doesn't waste time issuing huge press releases about how badass it makes them.

Yes, indeed..

“This exercise provided an important opportunity for realistic at-sea training with live ordnance, in conditions that could not be duplicated otherwise,” said U.S. Navy Rear Adm. Russell Allen, the U.S. Pacific Fleet Valiant Shield exercise lead. “This particular event enhanced our collective combat readiness and allowed us to improve our interoperability by working together to achieve specific training objectives.”

[...]"It provides an excellent opportunity for all three services and all the elements of the carrier strike group to work jointly to flex their firing chains and demonstrate their ability to release weapons accurately, safely and in an efficient manner."

1) They sank a real ship, which is slightly more challenging than sinking a Hollywood set, although not necessarily MUCH more challenging.

2) The Iranian comments released to the press use phrases like "the most important concern of the [foreigners]," and "we have the most advanced [weapons] which cannot be imagined by the [foreigners]." The US press release does not contain such phrases; it focuses on phrases like "important opportunity for realistic at-sea training" and "excellent opportunity for... all three services... to demonstrate their ability to release weapons accurately, safely, and in an efficient manner."

The only difference between this and the Iranians is that the Iranians actually spell out who they are training against, unlike all the US promo material that totally does not show (but not tell) the hostile forces as Soviet/Iranian/Chinese.

...So no, that's not the only difference.

The other difference is that the Iranians do press releases that are full of "THE FOREIGNERS MUST FEAR OUR MIGHT" chest-beating, while the US does a press release that focuses on "this is how we train, this is some good practice."

Now, there are many reasons the Iranians might want to strut a little and beat their chests about their naval capabilities. I don't begrudge them that right. But it is a difference.

1) They sank a real ship, which is slightly more challenging than sinking a Hollywood set, although not necessarily MUCH more challenging.

Dude, you think the US is not using target dummies or old oil drums for target practice as well?

2) The Iranian comments released to the press use phrases like "the most important concern of the [foreigners]," and "we have the most advanced [weapons] which cannot be imagined by the [foreigners]." The US press release does not contain such phrases; it focuses on phrases like "important opportunity for realistic at-sea training" and "excellent opportunity for... all three services... to demonstrate their ability to release weapons accurately, safely, and in an efficient manner."

The US does plenty of such chest-beating as well. Did you miss the stuff like "The F-22 is the most advanced interceptor in the whole world"?

Simon_Jester wrote:The other difference is that the Iranians do press releases that are full of "THE FOREIGNERS MUST FEAR OUR MIGHT" chest-beating, while the US does a press release that focuses on "this is how we train, this is some good practice."

Now, there are many reasons the Iranians might want to strut a little and beat their chests about their naval capabilities. I don't begrudge them that right. But it is a difference.

I don't know in what world you live in but the US does plenty of chest-beating. If you think the US conducting exercises like RIMPAC does not have a propaganda value or sends the same message it is not worth it to talk to you any further about this, because clearly we live in different bubbles.

Is it not the most advanced interceptor in the world? Are you incapable of making a post that doesn't in some way shit on the US for no reason?

Block wrote:Is it not the most advanced interceptor in the world?

Of course it is. That doesn't make the statement any less bragging, especially when it is used to sell that fighter to the public.

Are you incapable of making a post that doesn't in some way shit on the US for no reason?

Are you incapable of not making personal attacks?

Thanas wrote: Of course it is. That doesn't make the statement any less bragging, especially when it is used to sell that fighter to the public.

Yeah it does, since one is a statement of fact and the other is baseless blustering. As a tax payer who paid for that F22 I am quite happy that the military has decided to confirm a factual return on investment vice spouting made up bullshit that is false on its face.

As for the carrier target the difference between the US exercise and the Iranian one is that in the US case the results of the training line up with the circumstances of the training while the other does not. If you really wanted to test your ability to sink a carrier target why does the target you re using to evaluate this capability have exactly one characteristic (size) that will let you effectively do this while the bulk of your time and effort when into irrelevant window dressing? The only thing that barge target did was test Iran's ability to hit a defenseless carrier sized target. Congratulations, your have demonstrated that in a vacuum you weapons can physically hit the easiest target possible (a couple oil tankers and mega cruise ships might be a bit easier) under ideal conditions. That's not useless, but given the bulk of this exercise's effort was to make the barge LOOK like a carrier visually, not look like a carrier tactically or sensor wise nor replicate any other detail relevant to war fighting capacity its pretty obvious demonstrating war fighting ability was not the point of the whole episode.

There is a reason the US uses hulks which are expensive to set up and transport to target ranges when they can, and that's because they react to weapons fire like a real ship because they are a real ship. Penetration through bulkheads, braking of keels, flooding from penetration, propagation of fires through spaces and hulls. All of these can be measured in realistic conditions and indeed most of the times these ship do not sink right away so this can be examined in detail. This doesn't matter to evaluating the firing ships ability to hit the right sized target, its more to evaluate the effectiveness of the ordinance. Making them look like a likely Chinese, Russian, or Iranian target is irrelevant unless you are specifically doing visual recognition training (which is why we use likely enemy airframes sometimes where that is relevant). We don't do this as for obvious reasons the effort and expense are not a good return on investment, yet the Iranians spent all their time doing so.

So to recap this was not militarily useless for Iran. They have demonstrated their ordinance has the ability to hit a target yay big and that their operators can utilize this capability. Most of the effort around building this target, however, had no bearing on that meager demonstration and pretending it was in any way something more significant than that is stupid. That includes the stupid USN responses to it to placate to the stupid people who think that.

Thanas wrote:Meh, the US navy is quite proud of being able to sink its own targets as well. Doesn't make them idiots, just business as usual.

Well except that the USN would use a target which was either as utterly cheap as possible aka plywood on a raft, or operationally realistic with an actual ship, not an expensive mockup that doesn't represent an actual ship target in any useful manner. The Iranians for the most part didn't even fire live weapons at this thing, they planted explosives alongside to make more desirable tacticool effects for film. They've done this before too, but smaller scale mockup.

This is 100% propaganda at work reflecting the rather pathetic manner in which the Iranian Revolutionary Guards constantly operates to suppress Iran's conventional military politically while generally pimping themselves out as an excuse as to why they should happen to own a large portion of Iran's entire economy.

Thanas wrote:

1) They sank a real ship, which is slightly more challenging than sinking a Hollywood set, although not necessarily MUCH more challenging.

Dude, you think the US is not using target dummies or old oil drums for target practice as well?

When the US sinks a cheap dummy, they don't brag about how badass it makes them and how other countries need to fear their almighty cheap-dummy-sinking abilities.

When the US sinks an expensive practice target they still don't turn it into a huge excuse for propaganda and looking good for the cameras.

2) The Iranian comments released to the press use phrases like "the most important concern of the [foreigners]," and "we have the most advanced [weapons] which cannot be imagined by the [foreigners]." The US press release does not contain such phrases; it focuses on phrases like "important opportunity for realistic at-sea training" and "excellent opportunity for... all three services... to demonstrate their ability to release weapons accurately, safely, and in an efficient manner."

The US does plenty of such chest-beating as well. Did you miss the stuff like "The F-22 is the most advanced interceptor in the whole world"?

Aside from this being an credible candidate for 'objective fact,' as opposed to being an empty boast...

It is not contained in the press release you quoted.

So basically, the Iranians made a boastful press release about their target practice, and the Americans made a non-boastful press release that you saw fit to cite. And when I pointed out that the American press release was not boastful, you're saying that doesn't matter because Americans boast in other places. Which invites the question, why didn't you yourself quote one of those other places?

Oh, right, because it probably wouldn't have been from a press release about a training activity, and would thus not have been a straightforward analogy to the Iranian press release. And then I could point out that while the US does boast in press releases, it seldom uses its super-amazing ability to sink a cardboard cutout as justification for those boasts.

It is this, the boasting about sinking a cardboard cutout, that creates an element of farce in the proceedings.

I don't know in what world you live in but the US does plenty of chest-beating. If you think the US conducting exercises like RIMPAC does not have a propaganda value or sends the same message it is not worth it to talk to you any further about this, because clearly we live in different bubbles.

Thing is, said US exercises tend to speak for themselves, without the US having to constantly lecture foreign media about how badass they are. Thus, they are more than a hollow propaganda exercise, and the US is free to use them for other purposes like actually giving their soldiers good training.

Whereas the Iranians are compromising the training value of their activity in order to make themselves look and sound more badass. That is not a good idea for a professional military of ANY country; this isn't just about US-versus-Iran.

And honoring your compulsion to dump on the US whenever anyone posts about anything will not change matters.

Thanas wrote:

Block wrote:Are you incapable of making a post that doesn't in some way shit on the US for no reason?

Are you incapable of not making personal attacks?

But wait- he's right! And I can prove it.

You were responding to Borgholio, who said of the Iranians: "Yeah I read about this. They're proud that they were able to sink what was essentially a cardboard cutout in 50 seconds. Idiots." Borgholio said nothing about the US or any other specific country.

Then you, nobody else, brought up the US Navy and called it "business as usual" when a country massively boasts about a training exercise that is minimally accurate and wasteful, with the implication that the US does that too.

Either you don't know enough about military affairs to have a useful opinion on what constitutes a good training exercise that a country has a right to feel proud of...

Or you're so busy comparing everything to the US in an attempt to denigrate the US, that you don't stop to take note of cases where the US might actually be doing something correctly, that some other nation happens to do incorrectly.

Simon_Jester wrote:And honoring your compulsion to dump on the US whenever anyone posts about anything will not change matters.

You will apologize for and cease making that accusation or prove it. Go on, prove how I dump on the US whenever anyone posts about anything. I will put up with your smarmy shit but I will not put up with you accusing me of pointless anti-americanism.

Then you, nobody else, brought up the US Navy and called it "business as usual" when a country massively boasts about a training exercise that is minimally accurate and wasteful, with the implication that the US does that too.

Either you don't know enough about military affairs to have a useful opinion on what constitutes a good training exercise that a country has a right to feel proud of...

Or you're so busy comparing everything to the US in an attempt to denigrate the US, that you don't stop to take note of cases where the US might actually be doing something correctly, that some other nation happens to do incorrectly.

You can go fuck right off with your "oh no Thanas insults the US at every turn" bullshit. Every nation boasts of manoeuvres. The US does it. Germany does it. As I was responding to an American I brought up what I felt to be the most valid example. If that insults you or makes your dick feel especially small today, then that is your problem, not mine.

The fuckwitism is strong with this thread. Iran did what the US does all the fucking time, the only difference is resources and technology. Oh, and the abject racism of "Hurr hurr dem sand monkeys caint blow stuff up like we cahn!" chest thumping of stupid Americans.

Oh and do you know why Iran might do such things? It's probably because one of the two major parties in the US that controls 2/3 of the government as well as Ben Nuttyahoo want to go to war with them. But fuck Iran for not wanting to be stomped on by the US and Israel only for it to get the Iraq treatment.

Flagg wrote:The fuckwitism is strong with this thread. Iran did what the US does all the fucking time, the only difference is resources and technology. Oh, and the abject racism of "Hurr hurr dem sand monkeys caint blow stuff up like we cahn!" chest thumping of stupid Americans.

Oh and do you know why Iran might do such things? It's probably because one of the two major parties in the US that controls 2/3 of the government as well as Ben Nuttyahoo want to go to war with them. But fuck Iran for not wanting to be stomped on by the US and Israel only for it to get the Iraq treatment.

Good God you're a dumb, biased fuck.

It is not racism to say that Iran does not match the military capability of the US and I very much doubt that anyone here has referred to Iranians as sand monkeys, so stop projecting your own hateful assumptions onto others.

The Romulan Republic wrote:

Flagg wrote:The fuckwitism is strong with this thread. Iran did what the US does all the fucking time, the only difference is resources and technology. Oh, and the abject racism of "Hurr hurr dem sand monkeys caint blow stuff up like we cahn!" chest thumping of stupid Americans.

Oh and do you know why Iran might do such things? It's probably because one of the two major parties in the US that controls 2/3 of the government as well as Ben Nuttyahoo want to go to war with them. But fuck Iran for not wanting to be stomped on by the US and Israel only for it to get the Iraq treatment.

Good God you're a dumb, biased fuck.

It is not racism to say that Iran does not match the military capability of the US and I very much doubt that anyone here has referred to Iranians as sand monkeys, so stop projecting your own hateful assumptions onto others.

Every time someone posts about an "American Enemy" doing something involving war games or technological achievements already made by the US some American asshat will always show up and mock them, especially if it's NK or Iran. If it's NK it's "wow Crazy Kim does it again!",but if it's Iran? They laugh at their technological inferiority or brag about how the US would stomp them into dust. And as far as I'm concerned, it's racist bullshit, especially since the US spent a good part of the 00's doing just that to Iraq.
That's why I want Iran to get nukes. Because suddenly all of those rock hard micro-Penises in the Pentagon shrink and go flaccid when presented with trying to invade a country with nukes and invasion becomes a non-option.


And seriously, given your conduct of hair on fire lunacy in other threads based on your total ignorance of how other countries work, I don't think you have the right to call anyone "dumb".

Really? Are you going to drag shit from other threads in here to try to insult me with Ad hominems?

Also, if you want a theocratic regime to have nuclear weapons simply because they're against America and you hate America, then you are blinded by your hostility to America to the point of illogic and moral bankruptcy.

The Romulan Republic wrote:Really? Are you going to drag shit from other threads in here to try to insult me with Ad hominems?

That wasn't an ad hominem you stupid asshole. It was pointing out your utter ignorance on pretty much every subject you've posted about that I've participated in.

Also, if you want a theocratic regime to have nuclear weapons simply because they're against America and you hate America, then you are blinded by your hostility to America to the point of illogic and moral bankruptcy.

No, stupid. Try to concentrate when reading this (with hair fully put out, please): I want Iran to have nuclear weapons to 1) Provide stability to the region so that the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel don't get to swing their dicks around like they are king of shit mountain and 2) To prevent the US (The country I live in) from invading Iran and spending 10 years there wasting money and soldiers lives just so we can get chased out with our tail between our legs like what happened last decade, further destabilizing the region and leading to further ethnic cleansing and all that fun stuff.

But I guess not wanting a ton of innocent Iranian civilians to die makes me morally bankrupt? And who gives a fuck if they are a theocracy? Only country to ever actually use atomic weapons on actual people was a Republic. Can you guess which one?

I considered it Ad hominems because you defended yourself against an accusation of stupidity by essentially saying "You're stupid so you have no right to your opinion." It is possible I have misdefined Ad Hominems (attacking the person rather than the argument, basically), but I don't really think so.

It is true that, like all human beings, their are some subjects on which I am not well-informed, and I sometimes engage in hyperbole and jump to false conclusions- I am, after all, a fallible human being. That does not equate to me being stupid, nor does daring to disagree with you.

Your insistence on throwing tired insults at me can hardly have much effect. Anyone with a properly functioning brain can look at your posts and see that you are a fanatic who is motivated by irrational hatred of the United States.

And not wanting Iranian civilians to die obviously does not make you morally bankrupt, and rewording what I said in that way is not only dishonest (the mark of a coward without the courage to advance an honest argument) but also implies that I support the deaths of Iranian civilians, which is, needless to say, a lie (unless you're crazy enough to actually believe that's what I think). Wanting a very dubious regime to have nuclear weapons, however, is not a good idea. And before you accuse me of hypocrisy, no, I don't want America to have them either, or at least not for any purpose that's not related to the space program.

I don't want a war with Iran either, but I would like to think that their are ways to avoid that other than nuclear proliferation.