If you are a neocon warmonger, and you REALLY want to set off WW3, this would be a great way to do it. Send an old CVN [about to be scrapped anyway] and 5,000 Navy sailors to the bottom of the sea.
In the coming days or weeks, Iran, with its own oil industry very likely to be wrecked and its oil exports shut down by that point, may close the Strait of Hormuz. 20% of global oil shipping will stop when the strait is closed. The global economy will crash as the price of crude oil soars. Industry in China, Japan and South Korea will grind to a halt.
The US Navy “will be forced to intervene,” in order to open the Strait of Hormuz and save the global economy. We will very likely lose ships in this effort. Does anybody remember the USS Stark? In 1987 during the “tanker war” in the Persian Gulf, one “accidentally fired” Iraqi Exocet missile almost sent her to the bottom, and 37 of her crew were killed.
During the Falklands War, the British Navy lost six ships to enemy action, including the Sheffield, sunk by an Argentinean Excoct missile.
But how can we stop hundreds or thousands of truck-launched mobile anti-ship missiles from being fired at ships attempting to sail through the Strait of Hormuz? Anti-ship missiles that are hidden in caves across thousands of square miles? Will the US Army and Marines put boots on the ground in Iran? Across an area a hundred times larger than Okinawa and Iwo Jima?
It took the combined US Navy, Army and Marine Corps three months just to subdue Okinawa, an island that was cut off from resupply by Japan. Our military was vastly more powerful in 1944 and 1945 than it is today.
So if U.S. airpower alone can’t stop the Iranians from firing anti-ship missiles, is it realistic to send in ground forces to do it “the hard way?” Ponder this map I created, which compares the invasion of Okinawa to a potential CCP invasion of Taiwan, then extrapolate the forces required for a successful ground invasion of Iran meant to eliminate all the mobile missile launchers concealed within range of the strait. It’s absurd to even consider it.
But would Trump order our naval ships into “harms way” in order have them attacked by Iran, and possibly sunk?
Well, it's not as if great powers have not used this strategy before. The Lusitania was sent directly through "U-Boat Alley" below Ireland to generate enough anti-German outrage to bring the USA into WW1. This was even after the Germans had placed notices in American newspapers warning potential passengers heading across the Atlantic that a state of war existed between Germany and Great Britain, and that all ships heading to Britain were “fair game.”
By now, everyone is familiar with the concept of the "false flag operation." I believe the Israeli attack on the Liberty in 1967 was intended to be blamed on the Egyptians. Unfortunately for the Israelis, the Liberty didn't sink.
The crew, under heavy and sustained Israeli fire, managed to jury-rig a radio antenna, and were finally able to alert the US Navy (100s of miles west) about the ongoing attack. Only then were the ongoing attacks by sea and air called off, and the Liberty was saved. Of her crew, 34 were killed, and 171 were wounded. The entire incident was swept under the rug by President Lyndon Johnson, under heavy pressure from the Israel lobby.
Generals and politicians justify false flag attacks in the same way they justify sending battalions of soldiers to their doom in "diversionary attacks." They think to themselves, "It was for the greater good. It saved more lives than were sacrificed."
Somewhere on the false flag spectrum lies the "green flag operation." This is when political shot-callers know that an enemy attack is coming, and they let it play out. They believe the outrage over the attack will result in enough anger being generated among their citizens to support going to war. I'd count Pearl Harbor and October 7 as likely "green flag operations." And maybe 9-11 as well.
The Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964, which was used to justify a massive U.S. ground-force intervention in Vietnam, resulted from US Navy destroyers being used as pawns to draw fire from the North Vietnamese. For months, CIA patrol boats had been dropping off saboteurs in rubber boats to conduct land demolition raids along the coast of North Vietnam. This was intended to draw North Vietnamese patrol boats out, in order to create a confrontation with the USN destroyers lurking just out in international waters.
It worked.
And this is why I’m worried about another false-flag or green-flag operation being ginned up to provoke so much outrage in America that the neocons will finally get their full-scale war against Iran. Even though it will be an absolute catastrophe.
Bracken Out.
My books have over 9,000 Amazon reviews, with an average 4.7 out of 5 stars rating.
You can also snail-mail a check or the cash to the PO Box below.
The fastest way to get them is to use PayPal, also see below.
There is no single goal, not even regarding Russia, that has obsessed the Zionist neocons in this century quite like a shooting war with Iran. It is their brass ring and They will do anything, sacrifice anyone, to get that war. If you believe as many do that our government at best looked the other way and let 9/11 happen, do you think that allowing a carrier to be sunk or at least disabled is beyond them?
We have been told by the neocons and Israelis that Iran was days from a deliverable nuke. The US DNI Gabbard calls BS on that. Bibi was just on FOX and now says a year away, which we have been told for 30 years. So what is it? I don't want them to have one but something else is afoot here. How about getting access to the southern border of Russia from Persia? Ability to attack or subvert from the west with Ukraine and the south from Persia at the same time? All the usual suspects whether neocons, Atlantacists, WEF, have this wet dream of breaking up Russia and seizing all of its resources which are enormous. Destruction of yet another mostly Christian, Caucasian nation would be icing on the cake for this crowd.