Huge NATO Naval Armada Assembled in Eastern Med

Everyone is ONLY looking at our fleets in the Persian Gulf.

You have Tunnel vision Folks

Try a bit WIDER focus

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=NAZ20061001&articleId=3361

The Eastern Mediterranean, a “Second Front” guarded by NATO?

There has been a significant build-up of military force, including naval power, in Lebanon and the waters of the Eastern Mediterranean. This force is composed of troops and naval vessels from several NATO countries including Italy, Spain, France, Turkey, Germany, and the Netherlands.

NATO's “Operation Active Endeavor,” implemented in the wake of 9/11 is fully integrated into the U.S. sponsored “War on Terrorism”. The Operation is overseen by the Commander of “NATO Allied Naval Forces, Southern Europe” based in Naples.

In this context, a NATO naval task force of warships has been monitoring the Eastern Mediterranean since late 2001, years before the Israeli aerial siege of Lebanon (2006). This task force of NATO warships has been “trained and prepared for a prolonged operation in the Eastern Mediterranean since 2001.”45

According to one Israeli source, the NATO military presence in the Eastern Mediterranean is part of the war plans pertaining to Syria and Iran:

“This expectation has brought together the greatest sea and air armada Europe has ever assembled at any point on earth since World War II: two carriers with 75 fighter-bombers, spy planes and helicopters on their decks; 15 warships of various types – 7 French, 5 Italian, 2-3 Greek., 3-5 German, and 5 American; thousands of Marines – French, Italian and German, as well as 1,800 U.S. Marines. It is improbably billed as support for a mere 7,000 European soldiers who are deployed in Lebanon to prevent the dwindling Israeli force of 4-5,000 soldiers and some 15-16,000 Hezbollah militiamen from coming to blows as well as for humanitarian odd jobs. (…) So, if not for Lebanon, what is this fine array of naval power really there for? First, according to our military sources , the European participants feel the need of a strong naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean to prevent a possible Iranian-U.S.-Israeli war igniting an Iranian long-range Shahab missile attack on Europe; second, as a deterrent to dissuade Syria and Hezbollah from opening a second front against America and Israel from their Eastern Mediterranean coasts.” 46

In the case of a war with Syria and Iran, NATO forces in the Eastern Mediterranean would no doubt play a decisive role. The Eastern Mediterranean would become one of several fronts, which could include Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the Persian Gulf.

Much BIGER PICTURE, HuH?

Europe has a substantial ME population. Would the British stand for this? The French? How do they justify and how do they benefit from starting another unprovoked and unethical war? NATO training is one thing, moving to a full-scale war is quite another.

They are there to "prevent a possible Iranian-U.S.-Israeli war igniting an Iranian long-range Shahab missile attack on Europe"...

This gives me comfort - the Europeans are there to prevent Idiot boy from starting World War III. That is my hope...

:(

they're there to protect their interests, not Cheneys.

This is not a good thing.
If the neocons are crazy enough to attack Iran,
then we will see massive troop casualties in the region.
Of course the neocons know this fully well and
don't give a damn.
BHN

is that often they simply have no clue what they are talking about. They call a carrier a battleship, a frigate a cruiser, don't seeem to know about the normal doubling up of ships at change of station and this bit

“This expectation has brought together the greatest sea and air armada Europe has ever assembled at any point on earth since World War II."

is more hyperbole. Great Britain had a much larger armada for the Falklands War and grouping of this size are not commmon, but are not rare either, and have occurred many times since WWII.

One crackpot site reports on what it says are suspicious ship movements (but provides no background on where they got the information on the movements, or why they might be suspicious) and suddenly every two-bit conspiracy crackpot or internet pseudo-news distributor is a fucking military historian.