White Culture

[webfact]

B-52 bombers to be part of U.S. forces sent to Middle East over Iran concerns

 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. bomber B-52 flies over during the final day of NATO Saber Strike exercises in Orzysz, Poland, June 16, 2017. REUTERS/Ints Kalnins

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military said on Tuesday that B-52 bombers will be part of additional forces being sent to the Middle East to counter what the Trump administration says are "clear indications" of threats from Iran to U.S. forces there.

 

White House national security adviser John Bolton said on Sunday that the United States was deploying a carrier strike group and a bomber task force to the Middle East.

 

Captain Bill Urban, a spokesman for U.S. Central Command, said that the bomber task force would consist of B-52 bombers.

 

U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said four B-52s would be deployed, though that number could change. The United States has regularly maintained a bomber presence in the region, and B-1 bombers were there as recently as last month. The B-52 is a long-range, nuclear capable bomber.

 

The military also confirmed that the Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group had already been scheduled to go to the Middle East, but that its movement was "expedited" due to heightened tension with Iran.

 

Iran's top security body dismissed the U.S. plan to send forces to the region as "psychological warfare."

 

Announcing details of the force on Tuesday, the U.S. military did not provide specific details of intelligence it may have about an Iranian threat.

 

U.S. Central Command, which is responsible for U.S. military operations in the Middle East and Afghanistan, requested additional forces following "recent and clear indications" that Iranian and proxy forces were making preparations to possibly attack U.S. forces in the region, Urban said.

 

He said the credibility of those threats was based on sources and methods through which the information was obtained, something the U.S. military was not able to discuss.

 

The military has said the threat to U.S. forces was on land and at sea, but declined to provide further details.

 

"U.S. Central Command continues to track a number of credible threat streams emanating from the regime in Iran throughout the CENTCOM area of responsibility," Urban said.

 

U.S. officials have told Reuters that the intelligence was based on specific and "credible" threats to U.S. forces in Iraq, Syria and the broader region.

 

One U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said there were indications that Iran appeared to be moving short-range ballistic missiles on boats in the Middle East.

 

The United States has previously accused Iran of providing parts of such missiles to Houthi rebels in Yemen fighting a Saudi-led coalition backed by the United States. It is unclear how this intelligence was different.

 

(Reporting by Idrees Ali; editing by Alistair Bell and Bill Berkrot)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-05-08

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[PhonThong]

Trump is able to do all this because Congress is too occupied with the wanted Barr testimony. The world is coming apart but Congress is numb to it.  

[Spike1938]

The Iranian government along with the rest of the world knows that an attack on the USA or it's forces employed around the world, would be just plain stupid. Given the size and capability of the USA armed forces, no other nation could come out in a good way let alone be a winner. The reality is that the American administration, led particularly by John Bolton, is hoping to goad them into something like the Gulf of Tonkin non-provocation. All of this is really about oh-eye-el. Bolton even included a remark in one of his speeches that when the Iranian government collapses American oil companies would rush in to help restore the Iranian oil industry so that the people would benefit. If ever there was an oxymoron it is oil companies doing something to benefit the people.

 

[rskdev]

Don't forget about the B2. Someone has to be in charge of the Goxt lovers!

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by rskdev
WRONG JEPG

[toenail]

I am sure Kingdom of Saudi Arabia loves this drama since they cannot stand Iran. Again... Republicans love wars as long as the  politicians’ kids aren’t sent.  ( Will Captain Bone Spurs lead the pack?)

[Morch]

11 hours ago, PhonThong said:

Trump is able to do all this because Congress is too occupied with the wanted Barr testimony. The world is coming apart but Congress is numb to it.  

 

Do what?

As much as I don't like his Iran related policies and the way he goes them, doubt there was a procedural or legal issue involved.

[Morch]

11 hours ago, candide said:

There were also clear indications that Irak had weapon of mass destruction......

 

That's the go to line.

Iraq, therefore anything is a hoax.

Granted, Iran doesn't have them (and there aren't serious claims that it does). As far as ambitions of going down that road, maybe a different matter. But regardless, the present  context (or pretext) here isn't directly referencing that.

Edited May 8, 2019 by Morch

[Morch]

9 hours ago, Spike1938 said:

The Iranian government along with the rest of the world knows that an attack on the USA or it's forces employed around the world, would be just plain stupid. Given the size and capability of the USA armed forces, no other nation could come out in a good way let alone be a winner. The reality is that the American administration, led particularly by John Bolton, is hoping to goad them into something like the Gulf of Tonkin non-provocation. All of this is really about oh-eye-el. Bolton even included a remark in one of his speeches that when the Iranian government collapses American oil companies would rush in to help restore the Iranian oil industry so that the people would benefit. If ever there was an oxymoron it is oil companies doing something to benefit the people.

 

 

I doubt that the Iranians do not have their own Boltons.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, whimsicalmike said:

That must be where Sadam hid his stockpiles

 

During the Gulf War, most of the Iraqi air force's aircraft were moved to Iran. 

[metisdead]

Posts containing memes of a trolling nature have been removed.

 

Off topic trolling posts were removed as well. 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by metisdead

[rabas]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

6 hours ago, whimsicalmike said:

That must be where Sadam hid his stockpiles

 

During the Gulf War, most of the Iraqi air force's aircraft were moved to Iran. 

 

Iraqi chemical weapons and stocks were moved to Syria, later used to help Obama practice drawing lines in the sand as Syrians died.  Unfortunately Saddam's scuds went to Israel. Nice quy.

[janinbkk]

No to war 

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by janinbkk

[MaxYakov]

4 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Of course, Iran could be playing the Mouse that Roared on us now then.....we bomb them back to the stone age, occupy them, then go in and make their s***hole country a modern nation with nice roads and airports and hospitals and ways to make money like we have been doing to the rest of the world. Except India, the Brits did them.

You can wake up now. The Duchy of Grand Fenwick was not Islamic besides the US has already "been there done that" in the mideast with not the best results.

 

I'm sure the Iranians are quaking in their boots over the B-52s - they would love to test their surface to air missiles on non-stealth bombers or stealth bombers for that matter.

 

 

 

Edited May 8, 2019 by MaxYakov

[Nyezhov]

45 minutes ago, MaxYakov said:

You can wake up now. The Duchy of Grand Fenwick was not Islamic besides the US has already "been there done that" in the mideast with not the best results.

 

I'm sure the Iranians are quaking in their boots over the B-52s - they would love to test their surface to air missiles on non-stealth bombers or stealth bombers for that matter.

 

 

 

I be awake dude. The standoff range on the B-52s with AGM158 is IIRC 900KM as compared to the paltry 50KM of semi obsolete Iranian SAMs.  The only shot the B52s have using the missle at least to Tehran and Qom is dead smack in  the middle of the Gulf since thats the International Airspace available.  each B52 carries 20 AGM158s so I assume that no more than 2 planes would be needed. Im quite sure that by the time the F-35s start coming in stealthy waves towards RG hard assetts, Iranian C&C will be gone as will their Air Defense system.

 

I surmise that the Plan, which never survives of course the first bang, would be to destroy all hard assets of the Iranian military, including all planes on the ground, all tanks and armoured vehicles, all radars, air defense units, bunkers, supplies, C&C. Once that is done, all they can do is pinprick the unwary or unprepared.

 

Tell the Mullahs to quit, make the UN run a free election, guarantee their security. 

 

Iraqs GDP is up .06, which is effective growth rate of like 3% since they contracted last year. 

[OneEyedPie]

I surmise that the Plan, which never survives of course the first bang, would be to destroy all hard assets of the Iranian military, including all planes on the ground, all tanks and armoured vehicles, all radars, air defense units, bunkers, supplies, C&C.

Don’t forget the uranium enrichment plant.

[Nyezhov]

7 minutes ago, OneEyedPie said:

 

Don’t forget the uranium enrichment plant.

 

Nah, they got those buried. Taking all the other stuff will soften em, we can then starve them out if they dont play nice. Iranians can be cool folks if they arent bearded meideval barbarians, so hopefully they can put the Mullahs up against the wall...

[Traubert]

Iran has allies too.

 

Most of whom are getting tired of American dick swinging.

 

Pack up your toys and go home. You're last century's news.

[OneEyedPie]

Nah, they got those buried. Taking all the other stuff will soften em, we can then starve them out if they dont play nice. Iranians can be cool folks if they arent bearded meideval barbarians, so hopefully they can put the Mullahs up against the wall...

Ground penetrating cruise missiles might as well be used otherwise they’ll go rotten after a few years even if they miss. Good for TV cameras too.

I loved it when the US bombed Baghdad. I put on a Stetson and Stevie Wonder tunes and cracked open a Bud.

[Nyezhov]

1 hour ago, OneEyedPie said:

 

Ground penetrating cruise missiles might as well be used otherwise they’ll go rotten after a few years even if they miss. Good for TV cameras too.

I loved it when the US bombed Baghdad. I put on a Stetson and Stevie Wonder tunes and cracked open a Bud.

 

Hell yeah! Die Valkure!

 

If I was an IRG Id be watching the skies constantly

Edited May 8, 2019 by Nyezhov

[candide]

7 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Of course, Iran could be playing the Mouse that Roared on us now then.....we bomb them back to the stone age, occupy them, then go in and make their s***hole country a modern nation with nice roads and airports and hospitals and ways to make money like we have been doing to the rest of the world. Except India, the Brits did them.

Lol. It worked so well in Irak. ????

[Nyezhov]

1 minute ago, candide said:

Lol. It worked so well in Irak. ????

Oh plenty was screwed up there, but these things take time...especially when you are dealing with a primitive barbarian culture mired in the past, but GDP is up .06% there so things are coming along. If Iran stops its meddling, things will get even better.

[candide]

8 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Oh plenty was screwed up there, but these things take time...especially when you are dealing with a primitive barbarian culture mired in the past, but GDP is up .06% there so things are coming along. If Iran stops its meddling, things will get even better.

You have no idea of how Irak was (apart the fact that it was a bloody dictature, we all agree on it).

About GDP, it's completely linked to the volume and price of oil and gas.

One additional consequence of the Irak war is that it boosted Iran's influence. Lol.

[PhonThong]

10 hours ago, oilinki said:

Actually it's the opposite.

 

Now that the Muller report is out and going to be fully accessed by the Congress, Trump is vulnerable to listen suggestions from Bolton's and his military / oil friends to start a war with Iran. 

 

"Hey Don, a war with Iran would make your internal USA troubles to go away."

 

That's the oldest and dirtiest trick in the politics. When in trouble internally, start a war, which hopefully will unite the nation.

 

 

I think it is more "Wag the Dog".

[Nyezhov]

29 minutes ago, simple1 said:

S300s / S400s paltry? Though one hopes warfare will not commence, never underestimate your enemy.

I doubt the have modern long range ones, which is ony 400 klicks anyway.

 

The Buffs in the gulf are untouchable. In fact, I daresay that two Buffs and a Carrier Group are more than enough to leave Iran as a smoking precision bomb crater with minimal civilian casualties and hopefuly new freedom for their oppressed people.

[metisdead]

Posts containing off topic baiting comments have been removed as well as the off topic replies. 

[rabas]

9 hours ago, Traubert said:

Iran has allies too.

 

Most of whom are getting tired of American dick swinging.

 

Pack up your toys and go home. You're last century's news.

Yes, Iran has powerful allies. 

 

Russia (I mean Putin). And North Korea, (wait, that's Putin's nuke puppet), and then there is Venezuela, oh, Putin again.  Then there is  Syria, where Putin put his S200/S300 missiles. Cuba, but not so much now.  And. then ... nada. Just Putin.

 

So yes, Putin is getting tired. US/Trump is pushing him everywhere on the globe, Ukraine, Iran, Syria, N. Korea, Venezuela, Cuba, Putin's missile treaty cheating, sanctions, the ruble, natural gas, and the price of oil.  Putin told Trump "If you dare fire on Syria again, we will shoot down all your missiles and the [planes and ships] that launch them. Trump tweets "Yo Putin, here they come and they are very smart".  All missiles hit their targets. 

 

Edited May 9, 2019 by rabas

[Morch]

12 hours ago, Traubert said:

Iran has allies too.

 

Most of whom are getting tired of American dick swinging.

 

Pack up your toys and go home. You're last century's news.

 

What allies? Who you imagine will actually fight the US if it comes to that? Who will choose trading with Iran if it implies dropping US trade and facing US sanctions?

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, oilinki said:

Generally Russia and China would fight against USA if it comes to that.

 

For Iran, it depends. If Russia sends troops to protect Iran, then it could become quite bad situation. 

 

Either Russia, or China, directly risking a military confrontation with the US on behalf of Iran is nonsense.

 

For reference, there are Russian troops and heavy Russian military involvement in Syria. Didn't stop the US from attacking Syrian forces, nor did it cause any direct Russian retaliation.

 

Iran is pretty much isolated.

Edited May 9, 2019 by Morch

[Assurancetourix]

11 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

especially when you are dealing with a primitive barbarian culture

I guess you're talking about the American culture because Iran's is multi-millennial;

[Morch]

10 minutes ago, Assurancetourix said:

I guess you're talking about the American culture because Iran's is multi-millennial;

 

Many countries, nations and people had a glorious past. This doesn't necessarily reflect how they are at present.