http://www.cuttingedge.org/News/n2026.cfm --------------------
16 U.S. NAVAL SHIPS AT THE BOTTOM OF THE PERSIAN GULF! INCLUDES ONE AIRCRAFT CARRIER DESTROYED -- Recent War Games Disaster ----------------
During the summer of 2002, in the run-up to President Bush's invasion of Iraq, the US military staged the most elaborate and expensive war games ever conceived. Operation Millennium Challenge, as it was called, cost some $250 million, and required two years of planning. The mock war was not aimed at Iraq, at least, not overtly. But it was set in the Persian Gulf, and simulated a conflict with a hypothetical rogue state. The "war" involved heavy use of computers, and was also played out in the field by 13,500 US troops, at 17 different locations and 9 live-force training sites. All of the services participated under a single joint command, known as JOINTFOR. The US forces were designated as "Force Blue," and the enemy as OPFOR, or "Force Red." The "war" lasted three weeks and ended with the overthrow of the dictatorial regime on August 15.
At any rate, that was the official outcome. What actually happened was quite different, and ought to serve up a warning about the grave peril the world will face if the US should become embroiled in a widening conflict in the region.
As the war games were about to commence on July 18 2002, Gen. William "Buck" Kernan, head of the Joint Forces Command, told the press that the operation would test a series of new war-fighting concepts recently developed by the Pentagon, concepts like "rapid decisive operations, effects-based operations, operational net assessments," and the like. Later, at the conclusion of the games, Gen. Kernan insisted that the new concepts had been proved effective. At which point, JOINTFOR drafted recommendations to Gen. Richard Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, based on the experiment's satisfactory results in such areas as doctrine, training and procurement.
But not everyone shared Gen. Kernan's rosy assessment. It was sharply criticized by the straight-talking Marine commander who had been brought out of retirement to lead Force Red. His name was Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper, and he had played the role of the crazed but cunning leader of the hypothetical rogue state. Gen. Van Riper dismissed the new military concepts as empty sloganeering, and he had reason to be skeptical. In the first days of the "war," Van Riper's Force Red sent most of the US fleet to the bottom of the Persian Gulf.
Not all of the details about how Force Red accomplished this have been revealed. The Pentagon managed to keep much of the story out of the press. But a thoroughly disgruntled Van Riper himself leaked enough to the Army Times that it's possible to get at a sense of how a much weaker force outfoxed and defeated the world's lone remaining Superpower.1
The Worst US Naval Disaster Since Pearl Harbor
The war game was described as "free play," meaning that both sides were unconstrained, free to pursue any tactic in the book of war in the service of victory. As Gen. Kernan put it: "The OPFOR (Force Red) has the ability to win here." Much of the action was computer-generated. But representative military units in the field also acted out the various moves and countermoves. The comparison to a chess match is not inaccurate. The vastly superior US armada consisted of the standard carrier battle group with its full supporting cast of ships and planes. Van Riper had at his disposal a much weaker flotilla of smaller vessels, many of them civilian craft, and numerous assets typical of a Third World country.
But Van Riper made the most of weakness. Instead of trying to compete directly with Force Blue, he utilized ingenious low-tech alternatives. Crucially, he prevented the stronger US force from eavesdropping on his communications by foregoing the use of radio transmissions. Van Riper relied on couriers instead to stay in touch with his field officers. He also employed novel tactics such as coded signals broadcast from the minarets of mosques during the Muslim call to prayer, a tactic weirdly reminiscent of Paul Revere and the shot heard round the world. At every turn, the wily Van Riper did the unexpected. And in the process he managed to achieve an asymmetric advantage: the new buzzword in military parlance.
Loading...
12:47
Iranian Built Tanks (Tank Sakhte Iran)by Ayyash1234590,421 views
@PersianPimp31 fuck you.
CommonSense0695 14 minutes ago
Iranian People are very Cool, but fuck the dirty islamic Regime-Motherfuckers !
Fuck Islam & Mohammad !!
FREE IRAN
PersianPimp31 48 minutes ago
We don't even use battleships anymore the ones we had were built in World War II. The United States has counter-measures and much better technology. If the USN has the power to destroy the Imperial Japanese Navy it'll do the same for the Iranian Navy if they attack Israel.
toadtanker 9 hours ago
i would love to see a decreased u.s battleship :-D
moradi82 14 hours ago
ooh nooo the have technology that the US has had for years...... so scared -_-. there is enough coubter measures in a us battle fleet to take down at least 75% of all incoming misles. they show it off cause thats the most advance weapons they have
kono6 2 days ago
Go Iran
wclaeys 4 days ago 3
@lunafringe10: Iraq didn't have the best of our equipment. We gave them just enough to cause trouble. Majority of the equipment in the Iraqi army at the time was still 1950's/1960's era Soviet.
SWZ32TT 5 days ago
LOOK WE HAVE CRUISE MISSLE WE ARE SO AMAZING. SO SO SO SOS SO SO SO AMAZING.
watcher102030 5 days ago
@SWZ32TT all the US weapons in Saddams hand didn't hurt Iran. For 8 years. Think of it, And then, iran was stone age. What abt now?
lunafringe10 6 days ago
@SWZ32TT it was the iranian radars.
yuppa396 1 week ago