Menu

Home › Forums › Other › OT- USS Carrier Harry Truman just off Iran

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 91 total)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
  • Author
    Posts
  • June 29, 2010 at 4:29 PM #574056
    CDMA ENG
    Participant

    Why would Allan care what the Navy does unless he was calling for air support?

    😛

    CE

    June 29, 2010 at 4:36 PM #574046
    Eugene
    Participant

    I believe we had a bunch of ships there all along. Before Truman, it was USS Eisenhower and her strike group (continuously since January). She was deployed there for 6 months, now she’s headed home and USS Truman is there to take her place.

    Also, I don’t see how a single strike group with 6,000 sailors and around 80 aircraft (presumably, mostly F-18’s, not heavy bombers), can have much impact on any war between Israel and Iran. When we invaded Iraq, we had 500,000 ground troops. I’m not sure how many aircraft carriers were involved, but it had to be more than one. And Iran is bigger and better defended than Iraq was.

    June 29, 2010 at 4:36 PM #573431
    Eugene
    Participant

    I believe we had a bunch of ships there all along. Before Truman, it was USS Eisenhower and her strike group (continuously since January). She was deployed there for 6 months, now she’s headed home and USS Truman is there to take her place.

    Also, I don’t see how a single strike group with 6,000 sailors and around 80 aircraft (presumably, mostly F-18’s, not heavy bombers), can have much impact on any war between Israel and Iran. When we invaded Iraq, we had 500,000 ground troops. I’m not sure how many aircraft carriers were involved, but it had to be more than one. And Iran is bigger and better defended than Iraq was.

    June 29, 2010 at 4:36 PM #574152
    Eugene
    Participant

    I believe we had a bunch of ships there all along. Before Truman, it was USS Eisenhower and her strike group (continuously since January). She was deployed there for 6 months, now she’s headed home and USS Truman is there to take her place.

    Also, I don’t see how a single strike group with 6,000 sailors and around 80 aircraft (presumably, mostly F-18’s, not heavy bombers), can have much impact on any war between Israel and Iran. When we invaded Iraq, we had 500,000 ground troops. I’m not sure how many aircraft carriers were involved, but it had to be more than one. And Iran is bigger and better defended than Iraq was.

    June 29, 2010 at 4:36 PM #573526
    Eugene
    Participant

    I believe we had a bunch of ships there all along. Before Truman, it was USS Eisenhower and her strike group (continuously since January). She was deployed there for 6 months, now she’s headed home and USS Truman is there to take her place.

    Also, I don’t see how a single strike group with 6,000 sailors and around 80 aircraft (presumably, mostly F-18’s, not heavy bombers), can have much impact on any war between Israel and Iran. When we invaded Iraq, we had 500,000 ground troops. I’m not sure how many aircraft carriers were involved, but it had to be more than one. And Iran is bigger and better defended than Iraq was.

    June 29, 2010 at 4:36 PM #574451
    Eugene
    Participant

    I believe we had a bunch of ships there all along. Before Truman, it was USS Eisenhower and her strike group (continuously since January). She was deployed there for 6 months, now she’s headed home and USS Truman is there to take her place.

    Also, I don’t see how a single strike group with 6,000 sailors and around 80 aircraft (presumably, mostly F-18’s, not heavy bombers), can have much impact on any war between Israel and Iran. When we invaded Iraq, we had 500,000 ground troops. I’m not sure how many aircraft carriers were involved, but it had to be more than one. And Iran is bigger and better defended than Iraq was.

    June 29, 2010 at 5:21 PM #573580
    NeetaT
    Participant

    A sharp spike in oil prices usually follows this type of news. I think the news reflects more of a supposition.

    June 29, 2010 at 5:21 PM #574506
    NeetaT
    Participant

    A sharp spike in oil prices usually follows this type of news. I think the news reflects more of a supposition.

    June 29, 2010 at 5:21 PM #573485
    NeetaT
    Participant

    A sharp spike in oil prices usually follows this type of news. I think the news reflects more of a supposition.

    June 29, 2010 at 5:21 PM #574101
    NeetaT
    Participant

    A sharp spike in oil prices usually follows this type of news. I think the news reflects more of a supposition.

    June 29, 2010 at 5:21 PM #574207
    NeetaT
    Participant

    A sharp spike in oil prices usually follows this type of news. I think the news reflects more of a supposition.

    June 29, 2010 at 7:35 PM #574546
    Aecetia
    Participant

    Maybe we are there to protect Iran from Israel?

    June 29, 2010 at 7:35 PM #573620
    Aecetia
    Participant

    Maybe we are there to protect Iran from Israel?

    June 29, 2010 at 7:35 PM #574141
    Aecetia
    Participant

    Maybe we are there to protect Iran from Israel?

    June 29, 2010 at 7:35 PM #573525
    Aecetia
    Participant

    Maybe we are there to protect Iran from Israel?

  • Author
    Posts
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 91 total)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.