Won't it be too coincidental that 3 carrier strike groups just happen to be parked off the coast of Iran?

Question

when they get blamed for the next US gov't sponsored, false flag, INSIDE JOB "terror attack"?

Or will you shift into group-think and swallow the ridiculous fairytale like you did about 9/11.

Answer 1

Is this a followup to your previous question: "Doesn't the US gov't NEED to stage another "terror attack" to achieve their goal of enacting MARTIAL LAW?"

Why not just reread the answers you got there? Most of them would apply to this question too...

Answer 2

As a taxpayer I don't want the air craft carriers I bought in port or off the coast of Bermuda. It is the president of Iran who said that the Yank American dogs must be destroyed. Seems like a good place to park a few carriers to me.

"There is a scheduled swap of carriers that is part of the routine deployment of the Enterprise,"

The U.S. Navy said in a statement that the Enterprise would provide "navy power to counter the assertive, disruptive and coercive behaviour of some countries," and take part in anti-submarine, anti-surface, anti-mine, air and missile defence and air strike operations.
Earlier this month, commercial satellite imagery showed Iran was building a tunnel facility inside a mountain near a key nuclear complex -- a move nuclear analysts said could be an attempt to protect nuclear activity from aerial attack.
Tension over Tehran's nuclear ambitions has raised regional fears of a military confrontation. Iran has dismissed previous U.S. drills off its coast as morale-boosting exercises, and has said it had missiles that could sink big war ships in the Gulf.

Sounds to me like they're doing what they are getting paid to do and the Iranians are not worried about it.

Answer 3

How are 3 carrier strike groups going to pull another terror attack from the gulf of Aden? Are they gonna fly the planes halfway around the world into your house? That makes no sense at all whatsoever.

Answer 4

This is to Brad M and those like him.

You say you have sworn enemies in that part of the world...and you have no problems with your army defending you over there. Gee Brad, lets think that through a bit. Ok, I give you that you do have sworn enemies in that part of the world, but could it be Brad that part of what you condone is actually part of the problem? I mean that part of the world is not our property is it Brad? So is it fair to say Brad that if we threaten them and do things that they perceive as us hating them and siding with their enemies etc...could it be Brad thats why (they are your sworn enemies)?

Do you see the vicious cycle Brad? Maybe not, you would have to think like a modern homo sapien rather than a scared neanderthal. When you evolve from chest beating and knuckle dragging let us know.

Answer 5

Believe it, it makes President Ima-dinna-Jacket very nervous to have that kind of power sitting off his coast. He knows without a doubt that they could effectively wipe out his entire Air-Force, Navy, major army bases, electrical grid, communications and government targets in one night.

But you follow the Rosie O. theory of 9-11, don't you?

Answer 6

Considering that "off the coast of Iran" just happens to the aptly-named Persian Gulf, no, that's not particularly strange - it's a strategically vital region where we're currently embroiled in a military conflict..

Answer 7

Not coincidence at all, carrier groups are always located closet to the points or areas of possible danger. Iran is saber rattling, sounds like strategic posturing to me. Glad to know someone is doing something to protect me and my freedoms.

Answer 8

The United States is fast becoming the most warmongering country ever on the face of the earth...and the global disapproval rating to prove it.
Gee, Is it a wonder why so many love to kill us?

Think about this, in a presidential debate, if a hypothetical question is asked about reacting to an attack on america by enemies, you are considered a wimp if you sound like you say something like you will first make sure you protect americans from any further effects of the ongoing attack, and 2) assess the situatiuon to determine who the attackers are and 3)make sure that you retaliate but that you retaliate agains the actual culprits and keep the pressure on the culprits and never getting distracted from punishing the culprits or bringing them to justice.

In america today, such a logical intellectual, and measured answered is considered wimpish if coming from a presidential candidate. What seems to work these days is the chest beating neanderthal that will respond by saying the first thing he will do the moment he hears of the attack is to attack somebody back...anybody..just somebody(making sure that americans are protected from any residual attacks or making sure that he or she is retaliating against the right culprits..is not as important). We want our leaders to have knuckles that drag across the floor when they walk.

Answer 9

Let me put it simple. I am an American and I have sworn enemies in that area. They want to kill me and my family and friends. The Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, and Airman of this country have taken a vow to protect me. And, that's what they are doing, protecting me. Oh ay! They are protecting you also. Because if one of those guys got a hold of you, doesn't matter if your muslem, christain, jew, or what!!! Because you are not one of them and especially if you are American, you would be repeatedly raped and tortured, then they would cut your head off and drag your body through the streets.

Answer 10

Actually, we should have already attacked Iran for holding US citizens hostage.

Bush should have issued a "US citizens free or Ahmadinejad dead" message from the very first.