General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNavy Chief: U.S. to Bring 'Sawed-Off Shotgun' to Persian Gulf
<snip>
Adm. Jonathan Greenert, the chief of naval operations, told reporters on Friday that he plans to double the number of mine-sweeping vessels in the Gulf from four to eight, add four additional mine-hunting helicopters, and deploy next-generation underwater mine-neutralizing drones.
Greenert said all U.S. ships that pass through the Strait of Hormuz, one of the worlds most important oil-shipping routes, would also be given new infrared surveillance equipment and short-range guns and missiles for potential use against smaller Iranian vessels.
The admiral, a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that existing U.S. armaments--which were designed for long-distance fights against other powerful vessels--wouldnt necessarily work in the narrow waterway. Pentagon strategists have long worried that Iran would try to swarm U.S. vessels with small, fast-moving attack boats as a way of countering the stronger and larger American warships.
Its like having this high-powered great rifle, but youre in a small area, Greenert said. Maybe what you need is a sawed-off shotgun.
<snip>
http://www.nationaljournal.com/nationalsecurity/navy-chief-u-s-to-bring-sawed-off-shotgun-to-persian-gulf-20120316
Yeah, this is the way to calm things down. Put MORE people and assets in this sensitive area.
I understand the need for different types of forces if they are there, but this can't help the tension.
I'll bet we have spent more money per person in that region than we are spending for some people in the US.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)KG
(28,752 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)The MIC must be fed.
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)gratuitous
(82,849 posts)If Iran would just hand over that sweet, sweet crude to the oil companies, there wouldn't be a problem. If war is to come to Iran, we will style it as all their fault in the best tradition of bullies the world over. Meanwhile, at home, we'll continue to persuade our citizens about the nobility of our cause and the honor and glory of sending more sons and daughters to kill and die for the health of the bottom line of ExxonMobil, Chevron and Shell. There's a shiny medal in it for you!
MikeOlsen
(62 posts)is called on the carpet in the oval office by the CiC and told that the military is under civilian control for a good reason?
It's the way the Constitution has set things up.
This rogue will be cashiered by the end of the weekend!
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)I'll bet you a $10 donation to DU that Adm. Greenert is still in his job come Monday.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)'Cause all I see is him describing why he wants to use different weapons for the task assigned to him by the civilians in control of the military.
So you think the Admiral sent these ships against orders? Why would the President not give the commander of a Mission HE authorized the resources and authority to use assets in accomplishing a mission the President wants done?
Or are you seriously suggesting the Admiral thought this all up on his own, without any authorization and the President is staying silent?
If the Admiral was a rogue the President would have shortstopped this ship deployment before it left CONUS, he does get briefings you know
saras
(6,670 posts)OPOS
(73 posts)Minesweepers are defensive weapons systems. They have no job unless the Iranians dump Mines into the waters (an act of war by the way). Then those minesweepers find and neutralize the mines for ALL shipping, Military and Civilian. If the Iranians dont dump mines or attack ships outside their waters then there is no problem.