Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

second carrier headed to Persian Gulf

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:01 PM
Original message
second carrier headed to Persian Gulf
on the same day that Iran stops accepting dollars for oil? Co-incidence?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mikelgb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
1. frack
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:06 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Wonder what the Vegas odds are on us invading Iran
Pretty high I would guess. Switching to Euros makes our money basically worthless paper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madokie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
3. last december
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I am going by this thread on the front page
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x3290376

I know Iran has been talking of stopping trade in dollars. Maybe the poster there was late.
Whatever. I know stopping trade in dollars gets Cheney riled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
4. Iran's been doing business in Euros for a long time, and this isn't the first time a carrier has
Been moved in. It's about the 20th time, actually. The only difference is that they announced it to the media this time, probably as yet another "hey, look over there!" measure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Maybe this is just part of the ratcheting of belloigerence by us
Getting it out there as it were. I was hopeful we would not attack Iran. Now I am believing it is a matter of when not if.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mrs. Overall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
7. Which carrier is it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rurallib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. didn't give a name. Heard Shuster mention it on Ed Schultz show
then CNN reported it at the hour headlines.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. I believe the two carriers are the Lincoln and the Truman
But notice from my link that the Roosevelt, Enterprise and Eisenhower seem to be available or deployable on short notice from the East coast.

The Kitty Hawk was last reported in Hong Kong so whether it is headed back to Japan is unknown.


http://www.gonavy.jp/CVLocation.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mrs. Overall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Is there a chance it could be the Nimitz?
I went to the gonavy link, and it seems the Nimitz was in the West Pacific as of April 24th.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wuushew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Well the schedule called for a four month deployment starting in Jan.
So I can only assume the Nimitz would be heading back to San Diego.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mrs. Overall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Ok, thanks. I wasn't exactly sure how to read the deployment, decommission part of the chart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
8. "I saw this carrier thing on TV, and thought, 'What the Hell'..." - Commander AWOL
Edited on Wed Apr-30-08 12:30 PM by SpiralHawk
"...with a neat aircraft carrier like that at my disposal, why not send it to Eye-ran, and really get this World War III Armageddon Crusade in high gear? Whoopeee. Shock & Awe, baby. Wait till my republicon homelander cronies see the Massive War Profits that will roll in from this. Smirk."

- Commander AWOL
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikelgb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. He's playing Battleship again...
Edited on Wed Apr-30-08 12:48 PM by mikelgb


lol on edit: notice the dutiful wife and daughter in the background doing their part.... jeebus
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
riverdeep Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 02:23 PM
Response to Original message
15. All the pieces are adding up.
After the disastrous NIE (from the war mongers' point of view) that let truth slip out, the administration has been laying the groundwork of propaganda again. Getting rid of Fallon was the last step. Now, they're free. Put Patraeus in charge, take your offensive positions, get the Congress to fund it, have your lackey's in the media ratchet up the rhetoric, release photo 'evidence' of how Syria engaged in nuclear proliferation and Israel defended itself, continue the lie that the surge worked. All of these pieces and others indicate what's to come. And here we are fighting about candidates' personal connections with controversial figures. Cheney couldn't be more pleased.

Here is a great interview with Scott Ritter on the bombing of the Syrian facility. He points out that even if what the US claimed was taking place, it still wasn't illegal. It was illegal to bomb them, however.

"What we’re talking about here is the violation of a nation’s sovereignty, an act of war, unprovoked, preemptive, by one nation against another. And the United States is remaining not only silent, but we’re actually siding with the aggressor."

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/28/un_nuclear_watchdog_chief_blasts_us

I believe that the final call of when to go to war will be decided jointly between the Pentagon and Israel. Israel realizes this is the best and last chance to get rid of their enemies, and they're going to take it. The American people will play no part in the decision. They'll just pay for it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kip Humphrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-30-08 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. 3 carriers are required to execute the Penatgon's Iran bombing campaign. /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 11:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC