| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq |
| U.S. may order missile-firing ships to Red Sea |
| 2003-03-13 |
| The U.S. Navy may order about a dozen ships equipped with surface-to-surface missiles from the Mediterranean Sea to the Red Sea as part of preparations for a possible war with Iraq, U.S. military sources said Thursday. U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld could sign the order as soon as Thursday, sources said. Ummm. does he mean today, or next week? The ships then would begin moving through the Suez Canal and into the Red Sea. Anyone got the time it takes to transit the suez canal? The ships include cruisers, destroyers and submarines, all of which fire satellite-guided Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles — precision weapons with a range of about 1,000 miles. Pentagon officials declined to say how many ships might be involved, but it is understood that 10 to 15 Tomahawk-capable vessels may shift position. Once the ships are in the Red Sea, any missile launched would fly over Saudi Arabia on the way to targets in Iraq. My guess is the Persian gulf is so full of US Navy ships that you could walk from bahrain to iran without getting your feet wet. I would also think that they could park a couple in the gulf of aqaba to cut down on the overflight transit time, and allow overflight over Jordan. The shift in position was required because of Turkey's refusal to grant overflight rights. I knew that they were letting us have land based troops, but I didnt know we were going to get overflight rights. |
| Posted by:Frank Martin |
| #7 For about a dozen reasons, the war will probably start on March 23, and not because 3-23 has a nice ring to it. Yesterday, CBS reported that the only mechanized Division with troops fully equipped with protections from friendly-fire, is trapped in Turkey, by the Islamist government. 3-23 will allow moonlight' advantages for co-ordination, and time for re-equipment. There will be zero-tolerance for front-line jumpers in this war. This isn't Anzio. |
| Posted by: Anonon 2003-03-13 15:40:03 |
| #6 I heard from a buddy a Suez transit is about 9-11hrs. |
| Posted by: Yosemite Sam 2003-03-13 14:20:31 |
| #5 "My guess is the Persian gulf is so full of US Navy ships that you could walk from bahrain to iran without getting your feet wet." Well, not quite. It's a big piece of water. Getting there, though. |
| Posted by: mojo 2003-03-13 13:47:46 |
| #4 Fox News just reported that the Pentagon has told them that US ships transiting Suez Canal would be on station in the Red Sea within 24 hours. |
| Posted by: Steve 2003-03-13 13:17:27 |
| #3 Yes, on the fast attack subs having SLCM capabilities, it would be safe to assume that they have full weapons load out including SLCMs. |
| Posted by: pj 2003-03-13 13:15:33 |
| #2 This sort of thing is why I'm not getting too upset at all of the "delay" in attacking Iraq. We had to reset after Turkey bailed out on us. That's taking time. |
| Posted by: Patrick Phillips 2003-03-13 13:05:30 |
| #1 Aren't there Subs attached to each of the CAGs? and don't they each carry SLCMs? I guess the difference is not having to fly missiles over Jordan, Israel, Lebanon or Syria? I would think Syria might get a message from a few buzzes over Damascus |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-03-13 12:31:20 |