Are the USA planning to attack Iran on October 21st 2006?

Question

According to news stories, the deployment of a major "strike group" of ships is prepared to head for Iran's western coast. The ships include the nuclear aircraft carrier Eisenhower as well as a cruiser, destroyer, frigate, submarine escort and supply ship. Naval forces already received their formal PTDOs ('prepare to deploy orders') with a date set for being ready to go at October 1st.

http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/2383

Answer 1

No
It's just the Navy's version of Shift change. They are replacing the battle group finishing it's tour. Since my cousin just left the IKE for shore, my intel is not hersay also Read the Navy News.
http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=25883

Answer 2

Your added information says, "Why is united states scheming to attack on Iran, the position Iran has no longer some thing to do with united states's safe practices?" First, the united states isn't scheming to attack Iran. once you've ANY evidence that this kind of scheme is in the works, middle jap Media (Al-Jezeera) and various Western Media might want to like to take heed to about it. 2d, I truly do no longer understand the thanks to assert "Iran has no longer some thing to do with united states's safe practices." even as leaders of a sovreign united states (Iran) brazenly call for the outright destruction of yet another sovreign united states (united states), I call that a risk to the united states's safe practices. The prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him, might want to be appalled on the way the a number of radical extremist leaders have profaned his words to healthful their own applications. what's incorrect with Iran having nuclear skill? because a similar techniques that bring about nuclear skill also bring about nuclear guns? Why is it no longer ok for Iran to have nuclear guns? because Iran is led through radical extremists who're calling for the destruction of different sovreign international locations. even as Iran is in a position to hitch the international community, and quit the self-isolation and radical extremism its present day administration is advocating, then this challenge might want to be revisited. particularly, please keep in mind that the individuals of u.s. don't have any further some thing antagonistic to the individuals of Iran. we seem ahead to an afternoon the position we may be able to have an open change of options, cultures, and understand-how which will earnings all individuals, yet that day can in elementary words come even as each and every of the leaders are prepared to tolerate that which isn't a similar as them.

Answer 3

Covert actions are already being carried out in Iran.

The Bush administraion has already identified over 1,000 bombing targets in Iran.

There is already a Naval blockade in place.

Fake intelligence reports have already been manufactired.

Deja vu?

Bush knows that the American people are fed up with this Iraqi quagmire, and he hopes that if he keeps America involved in perpetual war, that come election time he will be pronounce, by his hand-picked cronies on the Supreme Court, unremovable from office.

He has even said that he desires to be dictator.

Those thick skulled Republicans are still clueless.

Answer 4

All going to the scenario I wrote in a Yahoo! answer a few months ago on the Iran nuke issue - Iran will be attacked by the US - it is inevitable but not on the date mentioned. The US has no other option but the use of military force to halt Iran's nuke program. The world be damned (as always).

Answer 5

No, check your sourse, some blog that does not site any references, and they are supporters of the silly "New World Order" teachings

Most likely the news papers at the grocrey store with the stories of big foot would be more believable

Answer 6

Sounds like a rotation of a naval fleet to me. Now, if the fleet that's already there doesn't set sail home, you could have a point.

That's a whole bunch of fire power!

Answer 7

It would explain all the bad press; obviously the government wants to go ahead with the minimum of fuss. I wouldn't be surprised, but it would still be inexcusable; the US isn't allowed to go around invading country after country, it's what the UN is there for.

Answer 8

i think the ike was already scheduled to deploy.but it was interesting that a high ranking navy official went to congress and talked about blockading iranian ports.

Answer 9

no, you see unlike iraq, iran has nukes, if iran did not have it then the us would invade,attack or whatever else it wanted to do, and iran ain't scared of the us. this one the u.s will leave up to the U.N.

Answer 10

no if we attacked iran they would pull the we have your oil card and every nation would be not willing to help us at all. and if we were going to attack them why would we want to give them advacned warning.