ABC News: U.S. carriers sent “hastily” to Persian Gulf after sailors kidnapped

posted at 9:18 pm on March 27, 2007 by Allahpundit

I thought these exercises had been planned for awhile. Tain’t so, according to the brass.

The U.S. Navy is offering a huge show of military might near the location where Iran seized 15 British sailors and marines five days ago, in what is seen as a clear effort to send a message to Iran, a senior military official told ABC News’ Martha Raddatz in Bahrain.

Twelve ships, 100 aircraft and 12,000 sailors are taking part in the war games designed to get the attention of Iran.

The naval exercise went on all day today and will continue Wednesday, with F-18 fighter jets roaring from the deck of both aircraft carriers in the first appearance of two U.S. carriers in the Gulf simultaneously since 2003.

U.S. naval officials in Bahrain told ABC News that the operation was hastily planned after the 15 Britons were seized Friday, yet the Bush administration would not say publicly that this is the case.

Debka says it was moved up a few days, and that they’re putting on quite a show. On the other hand, look who I’m citing here. Ahem:

Intelligence sources in Moscow claim to have information that a US strike against Iranian nuclear installations has been scheduled for April 6 at 0040 hours. The Russian sources say the US operation, code-named “Bite,” will last no more than 12 hours and consist of missile and aerial strikes devastating enough to set Tehran’s nuclear program several years back.

Update: The Bataan is there too, and the Boxer is in the neighborhood.

Update: An enticing morsel buried in this Telegraph piece about the female Marine being held by Iran: “The Daily Telegraph has learned that a special tracking device showed that their exact location was ‘nowhere near’ Iranian territorial waters.”

Update: Meanwhile in Tehran… Click the image to watch.

khamenei.jpg

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Godspeed and God bless boys. Here’s hoping it is true.

CrimsonFisted on March 27, 2007 at 9:26 PM

You f*** with our British allies, you f*** with us. You f*** with the Royal Navy, you f*** with the U.S. Navy. You f*** with Royal Marines, you f*** with U.S. Marines. And THAT’S somebody you DON’T wanna f*** with!

Tony737 on March 27, 2007 at 9:28 PM

Debka relying on the Russians.
Up next, Rosie O’Donnell channels Jeanne Dixon………

HerrMorgenholz on March 27, 2007 at 9:29 PM

This hemmoroid has been a pain in the arse since 1979. Time to apply the Preparation H.

infidel on March 27, 2007 at 9:35 PM

“John C. Stennis left its homeport of Bremerton, Wash., Jan. 16 for deployment and began operating alongside coalition maritime forces in the region Feb. 19.”

The following reported last fall:

“In September 2006 it was reported that the Eisenhower Strike Group was under orders to depart the United States in early October 2006, slated to arrive in the Persian Gulf on or about 21 October 2006. Some observers were alarmed that this was part of the Bush Administration’s plans to attack Iran’s WMD facilities immediately prior to the November 7th Congressional election. This seems improbable. In recent years the Navy has normally stationed one carrier in the Persian Gulf to support Operation Iraqi Freedom. The IKE will replace the Abraham Lincoln in this role.”

So it looks like the Stennis is there to replace the Eisenhower with a month of overlap. If you figure a 6-month cruise, you have a ship due to rotate back into port in early April. Stennis might have slipped into the Persian Gulf from the Arabian Sea for some exercise, but she was in the neighborhood anyway and is probably due to replace the Eisenhower who should be due to rotate home.

crosspatch on March 27, 2007 at 9:37 PM

This hemmoroid has been a pain in the arse since 1979. Time to apply the Preparation H.

infidel on March 27, 2007 at 9:35 PM

I like the assessment comparing Iran to a hemorrhoid on the rump of our world. I don’t think we should waste our time with Preparation H, though. I’d rather have this hemorrhoid cauterized or otherwise surgically removed. Some precision strikes from our missiles might work. I’d also like to see some action for that highly touted “mother of all bombs.”

flutejpl on March 27, 2007 at 9:43 PM

And the Russians would know this….?

amerpundit on March 27, 2007 at 9:43 PM

Meanwhile, in France:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,261824,00.html

I love the AP’s excuse making.

The violence did not appear directly related to France’s presidential election less than a month away, but it highlighted the social and economic tensions that the country’s new leader will inherit when he or she takes power in May.

Morons.

Darth Executor on March 27, 2007 at 9:49 PM

Look … yes, we have two aircraft carriers in the area and the Charles de Gaulle from France is there too. But Iran knew for weeks that those ships were going to be there. In fact, I fully believe that Iran timed the taking of those Brits for when the number of ships in the area would be greatest just to make it *look* like there is some massive buildup as a response. These ships didn’t just appear there in one week’s time. They were already in the area and Iran knew it. They are doing this to jack the price of oil up by generating this kind of headline.

If we wanted to respond in a military way, our best response, in my opinion, would be to send Eisenhower home as scheduled (basically tells Iran that they are a bunch of wankers), send one single cruise missile to take out an Iranian domestic oil refinery (you are wankers and I fart in your general direction) after having pulled out every employee of every European oil company helping Iran rebuild their energy infrastructure and evacuating all diplomatic staff. Then occupy the Iranian diplomatic offices in the UK and imprison their staff and possibly try them for expionage based on any evidence that might be found in their embassy.

In the meantime, all the ships go home and you offer to trade the Brit sailors and marines for their own diplomats.

Basically you have to show them that you aren’t afraid of them. Big displays of military force just play into their hand by jacking he price of oil up allowing them a financial windfall with every passing day. Send a ship home and take out a refinery forcing them to import even more foreign refined oil products. But with no massive, sustained attack, there will really be nothing for them to shoot back at. One single rather small bang should put them in a world of financial hurt.

crosspatch on March 27, 2007 at 9:52 PM

I bet Diego Garcia is seeing a LOT of action right about now.

SouthernGent on March 27, 2007 at 9:55 PM

Do these people in Iran have nothing better to do than attend these shindigs? For crying out loud, do they do nothing than blame some one? We have never seen a speech that did not include rendition of what a GLORIOUS world Supreme Leader has brought you, no thanks to Moose and Sqvirrel. Nothing remotely inspiring, or provoking, just same old same old. We haf beyotiful world, no go back to your hovel.

CrimsonFisted on March 27, 2007 at 10:00 PM

Up next, Rosie O’Donnell channels Jeanne Dixon………
HerrMorgenholz on March 27, 2007 at 9:29 PM

What makes you certain she hasn’t already?

This story is such good news. Imagine if Carter were President. I wonder…what would Jimmuh do? Well we can thank God he’s not and we’re in a much stronger position to demonstrate that point clearly to the mad mullah’s. What a damper this puts on the Iranian “war games” demonstration. All their little aqua-toys getting tossed about from the waves generated off the bows of our naval vessels. It must really frustrate – not to mention embarrass – them seeing a real navy and all.

thedecider on March 27, 2007 at 10:02 PM

As much as some in Iran have it coming.
We should not let Iran lure us into an armed conflict.
Such would work very much to Iran’s favor at a time when Russia, albeit for their own selfish reasons, is finally showing Iran a bitter pill if they don’t toe the line.
With China on board, Iran is at a miserable disadvantage.
If Iran can incite conflict, sides will be drawn and Iran gains allies by default if not by oil subterfuge.
Let Russia play the benevolent go between and put enough pressure on all three players that either they play through or lose face.

Speakup on March 27, 2007 at 10:08 PM

When the Iranian Air Force is a 1000 plumes of oily smoke rising from the desert then I will believe. Til then call me doubtful.

Limerick on March 27, 2007 at 10:21 PM

Speakup on March 27, 2007 at 10:08 PM

Speakup, I’m curious: do you think the British were right not to resist capture? Just trying to understand your point.

thedecider on March 27, 2007 at 10:25 PM

As much as some in Iran have it coming.
We should not let Iran lure us into an armed conflict.

C’mon! Haven’t you seen, oh, every action/adverture movie every made. The hero KNOWS it’s a trap but goes in anyway and totally kicks ass. I say let’s take the bait and give them a LOT more than they asked for.

Mojave Mark on March 27, 2007 at 10:44 PM

Intelligence sources in Moscow claim to have information that a US strike against Iranian nuclear installations has been scheduled for April 6 at 0040 hours.

Best endorphins release all day!

I watched a bit of “Evil Santa” – note to that dude – it is perfectly democratic to voice opposition, which the American president ignores and moves on. Try doing that in your wonderland…ignoramus!

Serious matter in this hostage case is that it’s not Ahmadinejad’s side which captured them – it’s the mullahs’ contingent who’ve done it. Makes one wonder what’s really going on in Iran and who’s in charge there, and what the outcome will be – could go in myriad directions, and soon…and the Russians will not be told about it.

Entelechy on March 27, 2007 at 10:46 PM

I thought I was watching the anti-American/anti-war protest in Portland…… at least a Democratic National Convention speech.

Would have been a good time to drop a MOAB, and see all the interesting results…….

PinkyBigglesworth on March 27, 2007 at 10:50 PM

TheDecider,

Here is what I think about the Brits not fighting! Not to say that wusses or anything. Just that their current RoE suck!

V5

I am an American Soldier.

I am a Warrior and a member of a team.
I serve the people of the United States and live the Army Values.

I will always place the mission first.
I will never accept defeat.
I will never quit.
I will never leave a fallen comrade.

I am disciplined, physically and mentally tough, trained and proficient in my warrior tasks and drills. I always maintain my arms, my equipment and myself.

I am an expert and I am a professional.

I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy the enemies of the United States of America in close combat.

I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.

I am an American Soldier.

V5 on March 27, 2007 at 11:26 PM

emphasis mine, obviously

V5 on March 27, 2007 at 11:26 PM

When I joined the Army there was something like the current creed, but it was slightly different.

It also had a part about never surrendering and making every attempt to escape if captured.

Trying to find it…

V5

V5 on March 27, 2007 at 11:29 PM

V5, our Nation is forever grateful……… if no one has ever said it before, let me say it now, Thank You!

PinkyBigglesworth on March 27, 2007 at 11:31 PM

What skillful propaganda. The supreme leader of iran went right down the list of leftist talking points, didn’t he? What he said about America is exactly what the democratic party believes and the msm relentlessly preaches.

That assahola kocamaimy speech above should be broadcast on every station in America so the People can see and hear it for themselves. Even though it infuriates me to think of just how many would actually agree with him, and probably cheer him on.

That’s just a suicidal mindset, in my opinion. If they have their way America won’t be America much longer.

Something else I noticed was the date on that speech was the 21st. Just before the Brits were snatched. The iranian leaders are ramping up for the fight they know is coming. The fight they’re absolutely begging for. They need this fight to survive, and we need to be ready for it.

The best option would be for iran to fall from within. I honestly hope things go that way.

When the time comes, I want our Military completely off the leash. Let them fulfill their purpose. Comes down to it, the U.S. Military are the only group of people in the world I’m currently inclined to trust at all. They’ll get it done.

Godspeed, great success, and grateful thanks to our Military.

techno_barbarian on March 27, 2007 at 11:32 PM

I am a guardian of freedom and the American way of life.
I am an American Soldier.
V5 on March 27, 2007 at 11:26 PM

You are indeed, and although you are probably too modest to accept it, it is my absolute pleasure to thank you for your noble service to our country. I don’t believe the Brits are cowards, and I hope my question didn’t come off that way. In fact, I really believe they are very brave. You’re right in that the British government – through it’s liberal, PC politics – have tied their armed forces through the stultifying lack of foresight to the potential and realistic consequences it would bring – and have chosen a path of de-escalation at the humiliating cost to it’s military and world-wide image. Britain is a country which, today, is able to punch above its weight for no other reason than the U.S. This really pains me because my early ancestors were from Britain and I really have a love for that country – perhaps ancestry, perhaps because of their valiant struggles during WWII. I just hate seeing that country bow down to a backward 7th century ideology. They are British – they represent modernity in Europe, and modernity should know better. Thank God I’m an American, but I fear our own country would take this same, humiliating path if liberal voices have their way. I can’t believe the British military is happy with a policy of de-escalation. This is a liberal ideal inconsistent with intelligent military strategy.

thedecider on March 28, 2007 at 12:05 AM

Speakup, I’m curious: do you think the British were right not to resist capture? Just trying to understand your point.

I think just the opposite and that’s why we zinged them for not resisting. Interdiction in Iraqi waters would have been eminently more desirable than the hostage debacle now in progress.
Iran engineered an incident and might continue creating opportunities for a US (or coalition) attack, we’ll see.

C’mon! Haven’t you seen, oh, every action/adverture movie every made. The hero KNOWS it’s a trap but goes in anyway and totally kicks ass. I say let’s take the bait and give them a LOT more than they asked for.

I think you could be exactly the kind of cowboy Iran would love to make policy for the US.
We should not at any time do our enemies the fatal favor of underestimating them.

Speakup on March 28, 2007 at 12:23 AM

Speakup on March 28, 2007 at 12:23 AM

Thanks for the response. I believe it’s a good idea we are there practicing our own “war games”. It reminds them what they’re up against – even if it’s just for show, the visual of what they’re challenging sends a strong message of its own. I also believe it’s important to show solidarity with our British allies. To do otherwise would demonstrate weakness. In addition, I feel it’s important that we not take the military option off the table. Sanctions can only do so much and Iran will be at a “miserable disadvantage” only for as long as Russia and China find it suitable to keep them there. I have no confidence that will last very long. Even our own NATO allies (read: France) found it profitable to deal with Saddam despite U.N. sanctions. Let’s learn a lesson from recent history so we don’t repeat it.

thedecider on March 28, 2007 at 12:41 AM

Remember the Neutron bomb? Would that leave the oil wells standing? We don’t want to be accused of making more work for Halliburton.

Buck Turgidson on March 28, 2007 at 1:11 AM

thedecider on March 28, 2007 at 12:41 AM

I agree, every option is very important in dealing with Iran.
Right now I would opt for the brain option not the armed conflict option.
Iran is Iraq times ten, to expect an Iranian conflict no more difficult than Iraq is foolish.
Russia and even China might break on our side for now but during a push comes to shove situation our avenues for a cold war style of solution with Iran could evaporate quickly and I believe that is exactly what Iran is trying to engineer.

Speakup on March 28, 2007 at 1:21 AM

Iran is much bigger than Iraq and has a larger military. Iran is the only country outside of Egypt and Israel that build their own tanks in the middle east. The best way to react in this situation is in some completely different way than they expect us to. This would discredit Dinner Jacket even more than he already is and leave the Council of Wizards or whatever they are asking if he has any more bright ideas.

They are obviously attempting to provoke us into a military strike. Our choices are either to strike in a way that is completely unexpected by them or to use some other method to secure the release of the sailors and marines and see that it doesn’t happen again.

I would be expecting the UK to go call an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council before taking any significant military action or at least an emergency NATO meeting. So far I have heard of neither.

crosspatch on March 28, 2007 at 2:03 AM

Britain used to be a country, a proud Nation, that stood up for itself (e.g. against the Nazis in the 1940′s). We shall see if they still are. My understanding of past History is that if you were to punch an Englishman in the nose, he is going to punch you right back, and most likely put you in the freaking hospital. Historically speaking, Britain is one of the least-wussiest nations of the past few hundred years. This is/was the Nation that America was spawned from. God help us all if England wusses out now.

(I know they will, I just hope they won’t)

infidel4life on March 28, 2007 at 2:05 AM

Also, any attack on Iran would likely be a NATO action. It would be more than just the US and the UK, it would likely involve nearly the entire continent. In that context, it might be decided that getting rid of Iran now that they have delivered us with the perfect excuse might be easier than dealing with their nuclear games later. Iran might be able hold off the US or the UK or maybe even the US and the UK but not the US, the UK, France, and the other 23 member nations all at once.

This action is unprovoked and illegal and if those troops are placed on trial, against the Geneva conventions. Iran has absolutely no legal ground to stand on and isn’t in a position to withstand an attack from 26 countries at the same time. And those would be 26 countries whose security they have been directly threatening with their nuclear program and intermediate range missiles. Getting NATO together for a party in Iran might be a little easier than in Afghanistan where there is little perception of a direct threat from Afghanistan to Europe.

crosspatch on March 28, 2007 at 2:11 AM

DEBKA: “…fourteen British Seamen and one crew-woman…”

Can you say: ANAL RETENTIVE?

hillbillyjim on March 28, 2007 at 2:48 AM

These maneuvers, I suspect, have been planned for some time, and may have been recently altered by a few knots for effect.

Although relatively speaking, our carriers are fast, they’re not THAT fast. They were scheduled to be in the general area a LONG time ago.

That said, I believe Ahmadickhead is stealing a page from Kim Jung Il’s playbook and playing it for all it’s worth.

Either that, or Khamaneiac is re-asserting his supreme command of all things Iranian, and doing the same.

hillbillyjim on March 28, 2007 at 3:06 AM

…moderators moderating moderately….

…crickets playing the Vienna Waltz quietly in the background, so as to not offend….

hillbillyjim on March 28, 2007 at 3:19 AM

So now it’s off-limits to call Ahmedinejad a d***head? Wonder what happens when I reveal the truth of Khamenei as a ****-******g *** ** * ****h.

hillbillyjim on March 28, 2007 at 3:46 AM

One thing that should be done tomorrow morning: Every single NATO country should order any Iranian diplomatic staff except for a bare minimal skeleton crew out within 24 hours.

crosspatch on March 28, 2007 at 4:03 AM

Second thing: Every single NATO country should order any personnel left behind to wear body armor and side-arms 24/7, and pack their toothbrush.

hillbillyjim on March 28, 2007 at 4:28 AM

These Imams/Mullahs, whatever (I’ll admit, I don’t know the difference) have really got us dancing here in the West. These guys are SO afraid that our culture will influence theirs, that they will go to any extreme to deny their own people an honest look at us (the GREAT SATAN).

And here we are, at a crossroads where we can show them strength, or weakness (read Cut-and-Run) and our illustrious CongressPEOPLE choose to show their yellow plumage.

Is it any wonder that these people are emboldened?

hillbillyjim on March 28, 2007 at 4:37 AM

I’ll trade you one Mufti and two Mullahs for three Imams and a camel to be named later.

hillbillyjim on March 28, 2007 at 4:47 AM

CrossPatch: “26 NATO countries”

I wish I could agree Cross. Most of those 26 countries have teeny tiny little P.C. militaries because for the last 60 years they’ve had the U.S. Military there to protect them. So they spend all that defense money on multi-culti socialist programs and welfare checks for muslim immigrants who now infest their cities. True, some NATO nations have troops in Afghanistan, but even that is alot for them.

I think we’ll see U.S., U.K., Australian and Canadian naval, air and marine forces doing something about this mess. But the Fwenchy Fwenchmen will do nothing with their one carrier “Little Chucky”. The Germans? Too guilt ridden. The Belgians? Too small, too lefty. The Dutch? Too busy in Afganistan. The Turks? Not even on our side anymore. The Greeks? Too busy almost going to war with Turkey. Lichtenstien? HAHAHA! The former Eastern Bloc nations? Trying to catch up to the West and modernize their old Soviet equipped forces. The Poles MIGHT show up too, but it’s pretty much gonna be the English speaking countries who once again will save the rest of the world from a crazy dictator bent on a war of epic proportions.

Tony737 on March 28, 2007 at 5:43 AM

What idiots.

For the record, based on the wording here, if you believe 2 Carrier Strike Groups and 2 Expeditionary Strike groups somehow teleported into the gulf in 48 hours… you get a cookie.

It’s quite possible they were already there…. what with a couple of wars going on and all.

Ringmaster on March 28, 2007 at 7:04 AM

Thank you, Ringmaster.

I, unfortunately, compared Ahmedinejad with a body part we are all familiar with and in doing so got a reasonable post sent to the dumper. Oh well, I knew sometime or another, one of my counterparts out here was bound to hit the nail on the head.

These aircraft carrier groups, no matter how advanced, can only go so fast; therefore, for them to even be in the region, much less at a certain coordinate, was planned not days or weeks, but rather more likely months ago if these are merely exercises, and even if not, they’re only a few knots out of their planned way.

Thank you for your attention.

hillbillyjim on March 28, 2007 at 7:26 AM

My understanding of past History is that if you were to punch an Englishman in the nose, he is going to punch you right back, and most likely put you in the freaking hospital. Historically speaking, Britain is one of the least-wussiest nations of the past few hundred years. This is/was the Nation that America was spawned from. God help us all if England wusses out now.

The trick is to convince the Manchester fans that the Iranians root for Arsenal….

The Monster on March 28, 2007 at 8:36 AM

provocative rhetoric can only be “counterproductive.”

A quote from the Iranian new agency.

Kidnapping people can also be counterproductive. They alway have a threat.

How about no rhetoric and the Brits use a “counterproductive” military strike.

right2bright on March 28, 2007 at 9:06 AM

windows of a sporting goods store and looted boxes of shoes

Talking about a riot in france.

Hmmmm…let’s see…If I wanted to piss off someone with a foot fetish…

I KNOW, GET A B-52 AND BOMB TEHRAN WITH JUST THE LEFT SHOE(100,000,000 1/2 PAIRS), 3 OR 4 TIMES…OUGHTA GET THEIR GOAT…OR SHEEP. Just a thought.

Or, I would gladly foot the bill for 12 or 13 .50 cal rounds for an appropriate target inside tehran’s mullah’s compound.

tormod on March 28, 2007 at 9:41 AM

Or, I would gladly foot the bill for 12 or 13 .50 cal rounds for an appropriate target inside tehran’s mullah’s compound.

tormod on March 28, 2007 at 9:41 AM

I’ll match your contribution..

Viper1 on March 28, 2007 at 10:35 AM

Regarding: “…the operation was hastily planned after the 15 Britons were seized Friday…”

What did they do…BEAM them over?

Blaise on March 28, 2007 at 10:38 AM

ABC News: U.S. carriers sent “hastily” to Persian Gulf after sailors kidnapped

http://hotair.com/archives/2007/03/27/irans-terror-navy/
Bush should station a Carrier group just inside Iraqi waters along the Iranian boarder. I bet the Iranian incursions into Iraqi waters would end immediately. Bush needs to stand up to the maniacs running Iran and say “Enough is enough!. Enter these waters at your own risk!”

RedinBlueCounty on March 27, 2007 at 2:16 PM

Damn, looks like they took my advice. :)

RedinBlueCounty on March 28, 2007 at 11:03 AM

“What did they do…BEAM them over?”

Exactly. Those ships were already in the area. It is theater on the part of Iran. Oil went over $65 a barrel today. Mission accomplished on the part of the Iranians, it would seem.

crosspatch on March 28, 2007 at 12:11 PM

“I think we’ll see U.S., U.K., Australian and Canadian naval, air and marine forces doing something about this mess.”

Nobody is going to do anything about it. It is bluster to puff up the price of oil and generate some extra cash for the Iranians and it appears to have worked. But if you see the UK go to the UN Security Council or call an emergency meeting of NATO, I think the Iranians would have some reason to worry.

crosspatch on March 28, 2007 at 12:15 PM

This most recent aggression from iran is simply a lower level extortion to drive oil prices up and provide them with much needed windfall funding for their jihad.

Imagine what the extortion will be like when they finally get those little nukes they’re busy as beavers trying to create.

But that’s ok, congresscritters. Go ahead and roll over with your tail between your legs and offer them your tender belly. I hope your approval ratings fall even more, you traitorous collection of overwhelmingly democrat cowards.

techno_barbarian on March 28, 2007 at 12:16 PM

crosspatch,

You beat me to it. ;)

Excellent posts recently, btw.

techno_barbarian on March 28, 2007 at 12:22 PM

We have a ship called the USS Bataan?

Tanya on March 28, 2007 at 1:21 PM