Iranian general: War with the US would be ‘no big deal’

[Little-Acorn]

Oh, really?

Japan thought the same thing, on Dec. 6, 1941. About a country that had only a small Army and Air Force at the time, and a populace that definitely didn't want to go into any foreign wars. A decent Navy, so Japan tried to knock that out at the very start (they missed the carriers and the submarines, oops).

Remind me how that worked out for them in the end?

If Iran wants to go down that same road again, as the best President of the 21st Century said, "Bring it on."

--------------------------------------------

http://www.timesofisrael.com/iranian-general-war-with-the-us-would-be-no-big-deal/

Iranian general: War with the US would be ‘no big deal’

By Stuart Winer May 7, 2015, 8:39 pm 13

Two top Iranian generals on Thursday taunted the United States, saying the much-discussed military option to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities is “ridiculous,” that Washington knows it can’t be done, and that their country “welcomes war with the US.”

[jimnyc]

First we had Baghdad Bob, now we have Jerky Jafari. And the generals name is Salami. They're propagandist nitwits, who are even more bold now that we have a clueless shithead in office.

[LongTermGuy]

First we had Baghdad Bob, now we have Jerky Jafari. And the generals name is Salami. They're propagandist nitwits, who are even more bold now that we have a clueless shithead in office.

`:clap:Well said...to the point and accurate...

[Drummond]

Just imagine what Iran would be saying, today, if the US had never tackled Saddam ?

[Gunny]

Just imagine what Iran would be saying, today, if the US had never tackled Saddam ?

One of the first things to being a grunt is to know your enemy. The Persians haven't had their asses kicked in centuries. They're not a joke. Underestimating them has gotten us WHERE so far?

Saddam didn't win the Iran-Iraq War even with our support. They fought him to a stalemate.

Taking Saddam out was idealistically great, and geopolitcally stupid.

[revelarts]

they do sound like Bagdad Bob.


...Taking Saddam out was idealistically great, and geopolitcally stupid.Agreed



Just imagine what Iran would be saying, today, if the US had never tackled Saddam?
True and...
Just imagine what Iran would be saying, today, if the US had never deposed Mossadegh.

[red state]

Oh, really? Japan thought the same thing, on Dec. 6, 1941.
Remind me how that worked out for them in the end? If Iran wants to go down that same road again,
as the best President of the 21st Century said, "Bring it on.”


//////////////////Which "BEST" president would that be? B.O. Obama or B.O. Oh-Bush?////////////////////

[aboutime]

Of course It would be No Big Deal (that's how propaganda is supposed to sound from idiots).

That General must have taken lessons from Obama on LYING, and PRETENDING to be important.

As a rather seasoned, still informed navy veteran of 30 years. I am not afraid to laugh at people
like the Iranian's, or this General.
I do wonder how many of us here...AS AMERICANS, on this forum know, or understand how JUST ONE

U.S. Navy Warship like our newest class of destroyers like the one in this video....HAVE THE POTENTIAL

to wage, and single-handedly...DESTROY Every Iranian warship....at a Picnic in the Persian Gulf, from

300 miles away???

Somebody should show the GENERAL how stupid he sounds.

http://youtu.be/eH8RD8C-ffw

Published on Dec 15, 2013

The United States Navy (USN) is the naval warfare service branch of the United States Armed Forces and one of the seven uniformed services of the United States. It is larger than the next 13 largest navies combined in terms of battle fleet tonnage, according to one estimate.[5][6] The U.S. Navy also has the world's largest carrier fleet, with 10 in service, one under construction (two planned), and two in reserve. The service has 317,054 personnel on active duty and 109,671 in the Navy Reserve. It operates 283 ships in active service and more than 3,700 aircraft.[3]
The Arleigh Burke class of guided missile destroyers (DDGs) is the United States Navy's first class of destroyer built around the Aegis Combat System and the SPY-1D multi-function phased array radar. The class is named for Admiral Arleigh Burke, the most famous American destroyer officer of World War II, and later Chief of Naval Operations. The class leader, USS Arleigh Burke, was commissioned during Admiral Burke's lifetime.

They were designed as multi-role destroyers[8] to fit the AAW (Anti-Aircraft Warfare) with their powerful Aegis radar and anti-aircraft missiles, ASW (Anti-submarine warfare), with their towed sonar array, anti-submarine rockets, and ASW helicopter, ASUW (Anti-surface warfare) with their Harpoon missile launcher, and strategic land strike using their Tomahawk missiles. Some versions of the class no longer have the towed sonar, or Harpoon missile launcher. Their hull and superstructure were designed to have a reduced radar cross section[9] The first ship of the class was commissioned on 4 July 1991. With the decommissioning of the last Spruance-class destroyer, Cushing, on 21 September 2005, the Arleigh Burke-class ships became the U.S. Navy's only active destroyers; the class has the longest production run for any postwar U.S. Navy surface combatant.[10] The Arleigh Burke class is planned to be the third most numerous class of destroyer to serve in the U.S. Navy, after the Fletcher and Gearing classes; besides the 62 vessels of this class (comprising 21 of Flight I, 7 of Flight II and 34 of Flight IIA) in service by 2013, up to a further 42 (of Flight III) have been envisaged.

With an overall length of 505 feet (154 m) to 509 feet (155 m), displacement ranging from 8,315 to 9,200 tons, and weaponry including over 90 missiles, the Arleigh Burke-class ships are larger and more heavily armed than most previous ships classified as guided missile cruisers.[11]
The Arleigh Burke class is among the largest destroyers built in the United States. Only the Spruance and Kidd classes were longer (563 ft). The Burke class are multi-mission ships with a "combination of... an advanced anti-submarine warfare system, land attack cruise missiles, ship-to-ship missiles, and advanced anti-aircraft missiles,"[12] The larger Ticonderoga-class ships were constructed on Spruance-class hullforms, but are designated as cruisers due to their radically different mission and weapons systems. The Burke class on the other hand were designed with a new, large, water-plane area-hull form characterized by a wide flaring which significantly improves sea-keeping ability. The hull form is designed to permit high speed in high sea states.[9]
The Arleigh Burke's designers incorporated lessons learned from the Ticonderoga-class guided-missile cruisers; with the Arleigh Burke class, the U.S. Navy also returned to all-steel construction. An earlier generation had combined a steel hull with an innovative superstructure made of lighter aluminum to reduce topweight, but the lighter metal proved vulnerable to cracking. Aluminum is also less fire-resistant than steel.[13] A 1975 fire aboard USS Belknap gutted her aluminum superstructure.[14] Battle damage to Royal Navy ships exacerbated by their aluminum superstructures during the 1982 Falklands War supported the decision to use steel. Another lesson from the Falklands War[12] led the navy to protect the ship's vital spaces with double-spaced steel armor (creating a buffer for modern rockets), and kevlar spall liners.
The Ticonderoga-class cruisers were deemed too expensive to continue building and too difficult to further upgrade.[citation needed] The angled rather than traditional vertical surfaces and the tripod mainmast of the Arleigh Burke design are stealth techniques,[15][16] which make the ship more difficult to detect, in particular by anti-ship missiles.

A Collective Protection System makes the Arleigh Burke class the first U.S. warships designed with an air-filtration system against nuclear, biological and chemical warfare.[17]
Their Aegis radar differs from a traditional rotating radar that mechanically rotates 360 degrees for each "sweep" scan of the airspace which allows continual tracking of targets.[9] The system's computer control also allows centralization of the previously separate tracking and targeting functions.[9] The system is also resistant to electronic counter-measures.[9]

Category
Autos & Vehicles
License
Standard YouTube License

[DLT]

Oh, really?

Japan thought the same thing, on Dec. 6, 1941. About a country that had only a small Army and Air Force at the time, and a populace that definitely didn't want to go into any foreign wars. A decent Navy, so Japan tried to knock that out at the very start (they missed the carriers and the submarines, oops).

Remind me how that worked out for them in the end?

If Iran wants to go down that same road again, as the best President of the 21st Century said, "Bring it on."

--------------------------------------------

http://www.timesofisrael.com/iranian-general-war-with-the-us-would-be-no-big-deal/

Iranian general: War with the US would be ‘no big deal’

By Stuart Winer May 7, 2015, 8:39 pm 13

Two top Iranian generals on Thursday taunted the United States, saying the much-discussed military option to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities is “ridiculous,” that Washington knows it can’t be done, and that their country “welcomes war with the US.”

Yeah....but......Japan didn't have one of their own sitting in the WH as the Commander/Usurper-In-Chief like we have now. Big difference. Iran could take us right now....since I just can't imagine that Obama would ever give that order to US forces for retaliation. Valerie wouldn't let him, even if he wanted to.

[aboutime]

Yeah....but......Japan didn't have one of their own sitting in the WH as the Commander/Usurper-In-Chief like we have now. Big difference. Iran could take us right now....since I just can't imagine that Obama would ever give that order to US forces for retaliation. Valerie wouldn't let him, even if he wanted to.


DLT. Mentioning the idiot in the white house plays a part, but AMERICANS out there in the ships WANT TO STAY ALIVE, and their ROE's Rules of Engagement OUTWEIGH what Obama might direct, or prevent them from doing. U.S Navy ships are U.S. Possessions, like our STATES, and they are Territory with their own ZIP CODES as well.
I am very confident...There isn't ONE Commanding Officer on any U.S. Ship who would Intentionally Ignore orders from Obama UNLESS...their lives, and the lives of their crew's were danger. Then..all bets are off. Even from the UNLIKED, WANNABE commander-in-chief of the Muslim Brotherhood Wing of HATE AMERICA.