U.S. May Keep Aircraft Carrier In Mediterranean To Couner Russian, Iranian Influence In Region

Donate

U.S. May Keep Aircraft Carrier In Mediterranean To Couner Russian, Iranian Influence In Region

(U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Anthony Flynn/Released)

The US military is weighing whether to withhold the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group (CSG) from deploying to the Middle East, opting instead to keep the carrier in the Mediterranean Sea, Defense News reported on April 21.

According to three defense officials quoted by Defense News, the decision “under discussion” move is aimed at countering the Russian influence in the region and readying foew a new possible strike on Syria. The officials noted that keeping the Harry S. Truman CSG in Europe would be a major departure from the normal rotational presence missions. However, it would correspond with the new US security policy.

On April 11, the Harry S. Truman CSG left Norfolk for a scheduled deployment to the 6th Fleet and 7th Fleet areas of operation. On April 19, Harry S. Truman entered the Mediterranean Sea, according to the US Naval Institute (USNI) news. The destroyers Jason Dunham and The Sullivans had been also expected to join Harry S. Truman CSG, according to the US newspaper Stars & Stripes.

Some Syrian experts alredy described a possible decision to keep the the Harry S. Truman CSG in the Mediterranean as a sign of further military escalation expected in the region. The April 14 missile strike conducted by the US, the UK and France against the Syrian government changed little on the ground. Forces loyal to President Assad and their allies are still winning in the war. So, Washington has started searching for additional options to acomplish its goas in the region.

On the other hand, keeping the CSG in the Mediterranean is also a clear political move because it has little military reasons if no further strikes on Syria conducted. The NATO has enough military means and measures in the Mediterranean without the US CSG.  However, the CSG presence is a show of power and a signal highlighting the US stance towards the Assad government and its closed allies, Russia and Iran.

Defense News writes:

Keeping a carrier close to Russian strategic interests also tracks closely with the Defense Department’s recently released National Defense Strategy that declared that “inter-state strategic competition, not terrorism, is now the primary concern in U.S. national security.”

Currently, the US Navy has three carrier strike groups in the sea. If it to keep the Harry S. Truman CSG deployed in the European theater for a long period of time, one more CSG will be needed to project power in the Middle East. Such a move will take additional costs and will impact the operational-strategic balance of US forces around the world.

Another problem is that in case of a direct military conflict with Russia, the CSG deployed in the Mediterranean will be vulnerable for attacks.

Some experts also suggest that the CSG deployment in the European theater is a signal to US allies. The move would allow Washignton to prevent a possible crisis within NATO if some of the member states, for example Turkey, rejects to fulfill its responsibilities in the framework of the military alliance.

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Russie Unie

    Nuke the Pentagon !!!

    • 1691

      and Hell Aviv.

    • Pave Way IV

      Useless. Cockroaches are able to survive a nuclear blast, so Pentagon officials wouldn’t be harmed in the least. They would be scurrying around the rubble creating new PowerPoint slide decks before the dust even settled. Besides, the US already Tomahawked the Pentagram (claimed it was a passenger aircraft). I just can’t afford the additional taxes to cover the government pork and Haliburton contracts it would take to rebuild that five-sided Israeli-firster neocon shithole if it was destroyed. Best to leave the DoD Roach Motel undisturbed.

      • PZIVJ

        Damage on Pentagon from a tomahawk?
        You are way dilusional and talking conspiracy trash again Pave Way!

        • frankly

          Well aimed took out the exact department they wanted. With it’s own missile defense system, which wasn’t used, it was supposedly invulnerable. A lot of things didn’t add up on that day. Like how they suspended the rules of physics. Or how that BBC reporter announcing building 7 had fallen before it actually did! Just read the script lady, oops, not that one.

  • PZIVJ

    Why not send the group to the Persian Gulf, where it will be easier to sink. :)

    • Stephan Williams

      It doesn’t matter where the Americans send their carriers. They can be sunk anywhere in the world and the American military brass won’t even know they’ve been hit until they’re destroyed.

      The newest Russian missiles can apparently circumnavigate the world on their way to their selected targets at speeds that cannot be defended against.

      The American carriers and their outrigger defenses are now effectively coffins built for 5000+ people.

      • velociraptor

        They can be sunk anywhere in the world

        sure. with your pocket knife.

      • PZIVJ

        “The newest Russian missiles can apparently circumnavigate the world”
        Can these new miracle missiles also reach the moon?

        • as

          It probably can probably can’t. Well technically it’s very easy if it’s to have it crashes into the moon.

        • testera

          Well, the old ones had no problem doing it ;)
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luna_programme

        • Stephan Williams

          In Putin’s speech before the Russian Parliament he mentioned a nuclear powered missile that was capable of encircling the globe on its path to target.

    • velociraptor

      they want challenge the tigers! :P

  • Joe

    Just how a naval force can make any difference to the war in Syria other than risking being sunk very fast if Russia is to act.

    Russia is on land and unsinkable plus with unlimited supply of ground forces from Iran , syria .. how the heck US has any option if Turkey is not into confronting Russia and Iran which they would not be suicidal to do so.

    US has practically nothing in ME and how the author says US has enough assets without the CSG?

    To win a fight today you need powerful ground forces not war planes …

    • alejoeisabel

      Send Israeli army that would increase the recruitment of Hezbollah.

    • FlorianGeyer

      I agree Joe. Infantry units have been given a new lease of life with the highly accurate and long range man portable ATGM’s and Manpads etc.

  • MADE MAKER

    US CARRIER could be useful for TARGET PRACTICE

    • Tiresia Branding

      neocons HOPE (or are sure) the oldest carrier will be hitted! And if Russia refuse to do the job, it can be commissioned to the devilish realm of yawe servants. Remember the USS Liberty…

    • zman

      …or comic relief.

  • Smaug

    It would be wise to shift US naval presence the the Med, given Syria and Libya. Just don’t get to close, I would advise a position halfway between Greece and Libya.

    • Joe

      Then what is the point? Cruise missiles are expensive and limited in effectiveness as proven.
      What a waste of money.

      • testera

        Wasting money is the point.

  • Rob

    Turkey should do a favour to Russia to close the passage of Bosphorus and Dardanelles to US and NATO Navies. If it was US, NATO, ISIS. SDF or Israel so that would be closed long time ago.

  • lancelotlink

    I would guess that there are 3-4,000 navy personnel on a carrier. If hostilities ensued, it would go the bottom of the Mediterranean in the first few minutes. The carrier is only good for countries like Nicaragua, Granada, and Panama, countries that cannot defend themselves against the mighty warriors from N. America.

    • Nexusfast123

      The US idiots forget that Russian can deploy nuclear armed torpedoes and missiles. One of which will eliminate a carrier.

  • Jamie9260

    Counter what? all of the action in on the ground… I think this may be a waste of resources they cannot operate without giving the Russians advanced warning period! coupled with that if they even think about launching aircraft off of that carrier it will show up on radar given what’s happened lately the Russians have beefed up their anti-aircraft systems along with their EW. systems among many others I my view that parking a carrier off of a coast that you are looking to attack only works if you can control the air space and have a weak opponent that cannot fight back so unless they are looking for a direct conflict with Russia which seems likely now that Mr. Bolton stepped in in more of a possibility there is really nothing they can do?

  • Jesus

    US navy still has not comprehended YET, that their carrier task forces are ineffective against hypersonic technology that Russia is implementing on multiple weapon platforms.

    Maybe the Russians instead of sinking the carrier, they might play with it, using EW and laser technology to incapacitate it, letting it float adrift until some tugboats get on the scene to tow the disabled carrier away.
    A cat playing with a mouse, from a technological standpoint.

    • jerry hamilton

      That is what they just did to a British submarine. They just played with it.
      Just as well Maggie Thatcher was not Russia’s leader.

      • Jesus

        Russia inherited significant technological know how from the Soviet era, it is a foundation that they are building on.
        The west on the other hand went to sleep, atrophying capabilities they had in the 80’s and not being serious about meaningful R&D for future weapon developments.

        • zman

          Padding the bill to tax payers is their main goal…weapons and reliably of same said, not so much. Their real stock in trade is corruption.

    • Jesus

      Kommersant: Russia set to launch supplies of S-300 air defense systems to Syria
      The issue of delivering the S-300 Favorit air defense systems from Russia to Syria, which “used to be primarily a political angle,” has almost been resolved as Russia is about to start its supplies, Kommersant writes with reference to military and diplomatic sources. Damascus struck contracts on those supplies back in 2010, though the agreement was later halted under Israel’s request. This time around, Favorit’s delivery is planned on a non-repayable basis as part of military and technical assistance to Syria. They will be used as a basis for the creation of a layered air defense system in the country as quickly as possible to counteract potential strikes by the US-led coalition and Israel, the newspaper says.
      READ ALSO

      Kremlin mum on Russia’s possible deliveries of S-300 air defense systems to Syria
      No official response on Russia’s plans to supply the S-300s to Syria has come from Israel yet, though some expect a knee-jerk reaction from Tel Aviv, the publication says. According to Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies Director Ruslan Pukhov, Moscow “most likely chose the option of providing demonstrative support to Bashar Assad after the April strike, which required a certain response from Russia due to the US and its allies.”
      Meanwhile, Russia assumes that deployment of the S-300s in Syria will help stabilize the environment in the country and prevent Israel and the US-led collation from freely eliminating civil and military infrastructure. Chairman of the Federation Council’s Committee for Defense and Security Viktor Bondarev believes that “the presence of efficient defense equipment in any sovereign country will sober up some loose cannons not just among NATO military and high-ranking officers.” Initially, plans are to keep Russian military advisors on the ground to coordinate actions of their Syrian counterparts, sources told Kommersant, adding that if, for example, Israel decided to attack the S-300s’ locations, the consequences “will be catastrophic for all sides.”

      More:
      http://tass.com/pressreview/1001207

    • frankly

      Disagree, they know full well or there would be one there full time. They’ve known for at least 40 years and built new ones anyway. like I’ve said before Russians build weapons, the US builds profit.

      • Jesus

        They though Aegis would provide AA coverage against Soviet missiles in the 80’s, whether that was presumptuous or not, today Russia has developed hypersonic weapons the Aegis system was not configured for.

        • frankly

          Did a Med run in the 70’s. I stand by my assertion and the lack of a full time Med deployed carrier is all the evidence I need to know that they are even more at risk now than they were then. I am very impressed that the Russians do not build carriers but small ships and submarines, particularly diesel ones.

          The threats large targets face are hardly limited to missiles. A small old diesel boat with a nice new torpedo is every carrier groups worst nightmare. Don’t think the Admirals aren’t fully aware, their masters in the capitol may not be up to speed, but the military know exactly what they face.

          To me a carrier is the most clear symbol that the US’s war planners are MIC agents looting the treasury. Spending their booty on obsolete, dangerously over crewed Imperial symbols, instead of cutting edge weapons. If the carriers can complete a launch, the results would be devastating, the aircraft however, will have to find somewhere else to land.

          • Jesus

            Mediterranean Sea is not on open ocean, from my perspective the 6th fleet carrier task force left the Meditaranean sea after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Since then US used that carrier as a tool of projecting power against third world countries.
            The emergence of the Russian power in the 21st century and deployment of hypersonic weapons made the carrier strategic concept obsolete.
            True, diesel subs can pose grave dangers to carrier task forces, however, their endurance is limited and they are highly effective in green water scenarios.
            Carrier task forces prefer to operate in blue water scenarios, the emergence of hypersonic missiles with +1000 Kms, and MRB anti ship missiles would keep the carriers far away from an enemy coast line, whereby the range of these missiles exceed the range of the carrier borne aircraft.

            I agree that the MIC is short sighted and interested in building weapons that produce fat profits, regardless of their effectiveness against a peer enemy.

          • frankly

            Agree with most. Quibbling topics. My reaction came from your idea that the leadership does not comprehend the futility of the carrier paradigm, they knew this before the USSR failed. Further to that their failure to adjust amounts to a treasonous exposure of personnel to clearly shown danger. For what? A pretty show, the biggest toy. Profit.

            I thought the hyper stuff was to avoid ABM systems stopping big nukes. Hell I’m talking strictly conventional. With a nuke torpedo you could take out the whole task force. Them cheap old subs carry those too. Have not read deeply on it but apparently there is some new tech that has extended the diesel boats range considerably. That’s where this idea of drone subs is really over the top. No need for air or air conditioning or crews space, fresh water.

            More and more it seems the human element in warfare is the factor that limits a weapon instead of being essential to its success. If we spent 5% of the budget on figuring out how to stop war, it would not be long and we would been done with this useless waste of humanity and resource.

          • Jesus

            Naval procurements seem to focus on helicopter and aircraft carriers, the helicopter carriers being able to deploy F35 and a variety of drones. The fleet is built around these capital ships, cruisers, destroyers and lighter ships being designated to escort and protect the capital ships.

            US Navy leadership is involved in their procurement process, lawmakers cannot shove obsolete armaments down their throat, the problem with the US Navy is lack of foresight and strategic thought and consideration, not taking into account the emergence of Russia and China and their naval capabilities.
            For a couple of decades In a unipolar world, US thought presumptuously that it had unmistakable military advantage, and chose to stay with the same strategic concept that enabled them to win the WW2.

          • frankly

            Once again agreed mostly except “lawmakers cannot shove obsolete armaments down their throat”. That seems naïve in the extreme. It’s a strange combo you got going. Factual dissertation that lulls one to sleep, combined with offhand editorializing that is divorced from reality.
            To me it is very simple. Psychopaths have taken charge.

          • Jesus

            Sorry if you fall asleep, reality is simple and nothing complicated, the psychopaths do not dictate weapon procurements, the psychopaths have no military experience, they placed a multitude of military nodding donkeys to agree to their whims.
            The psychopaths do not understand strategy, are mere airheads driven by hubris, and are highly delusional. Maybe a few Kh 101 directed at their gathering places would make the world a better place to live.

          • frankly

            Read a few books on psychopaths before lecturing us professor. I would editorialize that manifesting psychopathic tendencies is a prerequisite for membership these days and those without go. That is the core problem. Obama’s purge of military leaders comes to mind as an example. Whereas psychopaths are not usually brilliant, they are far from stupid.

            If Robert Hare lost his access to prison populations he said he would go to Wall St to study psychopaths. They are over represented in upper management positions in every hierarchical organization in the world. Although it seems likely the Russians are on to them and sorting them out as we speak, perhaps not.

            The reality from my perspective, the west has had a tyrannical grip on the purse strings of the world for a very long time. Large segments
            of the rest of the world are revolting as the master’s benevolence has
            plummeted while at the same time demanding more. Psychopaths are insatiable for power and resources, in that order.

            All the classical signs of a collapse of empire are upon us. To portray the US as merely stupid is an extremely dangerous way to approach an enemy. Putin mocks them to an extent when they go way over the top, but he does not threaten them, he makes carefully worded promises. I think for the most part he has kept his word.
            The west on the other hand lies. This is the most typical psychopathic tendency. Psychopaths are consummate liars.

            So if you need someone to go to the armed services committee and sell another useless piece of crap you don’t send the people who did the simulation and know it won’t work. You send a psychopath with false documents and here we are. Big debts, huge numbers of personnel and equipment, bullying our way around the world, which is quietly preparing to kick the shit out of us.

          • Jesus

            The characteristics of a psychopath are far more prevalent today than 30-40 years ago, primarily caused by moral decay and total rejection of what constitutes truth and lie.
            With God removed from schools and society, these psychopathic skills are used to get to the top of the food chain.

            There is a very good case to be made that Jews in the US, undermined the social fabric by pushing a leftist, promiscuous and a homosexual agenda and making it politically incorrect to talk about God and His commandments in public places.

            However, in the 50’s and early 60’s American society was far more reverent towards God and maintained a sense of civility and proper behavior.
            From a military standpoint, back then , US was still building carriers and maintained a huge navy, of course technological advances in missiles and smart weapons were on the horizon.
            US will reap what it sowed.

          • frankly

            Agreed, this is a full spectrum assault. Every organization has been infiltrated and corrupted. Long term plans are made and followed. One of the biggest casualties, in North America has been the institution of the family. Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud’s nephew who used his skills to undermine culture and the media, wrote a book titled, “Propaganda”. Seen as the father of Public Relations he helped invent a lot of the tricks that are still used today.
            The organizations that propel these agenda go back centuries and I doubt if they can be reduced to a Jewish source. I think psychopaths have often used a religious vehicle to take us for a ride, but ultimately subjugating themselves to God’s will is not on the table. Many of them may identify themselves as Jews, but an everyday believer would chafe at their personal proclivities. Read a bit, but understand very little in this area.
            I would think the average citizen in Israel has much in common with his peers in Nazi Germany. Got a bad feeling about this, but how can you fight city hall?

          • Jesus

            What have I editorialized that is divorced from reality?

  • Pietka

    There are only two kinds of ships : Submarine and targets , the mediteranian is a closed sea everybody knows where you are !

  • frankly

    It’s quite clear the US is more concerned with appearances than anything else. At this point their most powerful weapon seems to be the MSM. With, is it ten?, carrier groups losing one carrier may not affect their equipment level so much. But, I guaran-fuckin tee Every man on every ship will talk more about the sinking than any other topic.

    They’ll be dropping Sona-buoys faster than they can make em! Even more so if it is a false flag, as it certainly will not make sense, and as mostly men, they will be hell bent to figure it out. God help the oligarchs if even the common sailor knows you lied. I say go for it, you are on such a good roll. What could go wrong?, smirk.

    • velociraptor

      Back in my day there was always a carrier in the Med

      and the ussr also loést the cold war. ruskies gave up.

      • frankly

        The US got warmly chased out of Viet Nam, did you make some sort of point?
        Or more of the usual irrelevant nonsense?

        • velociraptor

          vietnam is far past. since that time won all wars, ruskies none.

          • frankly

            I see, more of the usual.

        • EmilyEnso

          US has been chased out of everywhere.
          Oops.
          Forgot Granada – they managed that.

          • frankly

            At what cost to all involved

  • Rob

    Panama Papers Data Leak : King of Saudi Arabia sponsored Netanyahu’s campaign
    By Zen Adra – 08/05/2016. Recently in March 2018 Saudis have allowed Israeli terrorists that they can use Saudi aerospace. The recognition of Israel mean the destruction of Palestine. Saudi MBS have not only recognized Israel but also allied with Israel. They have sold Palestinian blood and their whole land on Israeli terrorists.

  • georgeking

    A big fat Target, I would think.

  • Pave Way IV

    “…According to three defense officials quoted by Defense News, the decision “under discussion” move is aimed at countering the Russian influence in the region and readying for a new possible strike on Syria…”

    Countering Russian influence? Like when Russia helps Syria exterminate foreign, Saudi-supported Wahhabi head-choppers? Yeah, I can see how US defense officials would want to counter that kind of anti-jihadi craziness. Angering the Saudis or Israelis might interrupt the flow of bribes to Washington. What’s the use of even being a politician or US defense official if there’s no money in it?

    Readying for a new possible strike on Syria? Hah. ‘Defense officials’ have the next one thoroughly planned by now. The only aspect in doubt is exactly when they plan on triggering the next false flag to justify the strike. Americans will believe anything.

    And what the ‘defense officials’ will never say, of course, is that they need CSG8 in the eastern Mediterranean now to either protect Israel from Iranian or Syrian retribution, and/or to join the Israeli attack on Syria – a preemptive ‘protective’ attack. You know… to ensure the safety and security of the apartheid state of Israel.

    They hoped to continue such attacks while repeatedly chipping away at Syrian air defenses, but the Douma false flag and FUKUS response were both kind of flops. Worse yet, S-300s because FUKUS+Israel pissed off Russia once too much. Israel (or rather their US whores) must to do something NOW to assure Israel’s unimpeded ability to bomb Syria, and remove the threat of Syrian air defenses.

    Syria must not be allowed to protect itself from Israel. CSG8 will remain off of the coast of Israel as long as Nettanyahu demands such protection.

    • Brad Isherwood

      Iran has their own version of BUK M2E, …S 300.
      Hezbollah is rumored to have 1 SA 17 system from Syrian military.
      With Iran’s help/IRGC…Hezbollah could build a copy of BUK M2E on road or track chassis.
      Hezbollah has been building their own Rocket and missile copies of Iranian /Chinese.
      I do believe Putin has checked Iran from using airdefence in Syria …even Iranian Helicopters.
      That may change in the future.
      If Russia does send Syria S 300 PMU 2…..Iran could introduce it’s S 300 system ,work with
      SAA airdefence. ..
      Hezbollah could gear up to plan on taking IAF down in the future.

      It’s got to be Humiliating for Russia and Iran to bow to Israhell and Nikki Haley level screaming Harpie extortions.

    • PZIVJ

      Or CSG can stay near Naples and Sigonella bases where it is a bit safer.
      The group can cruise near Naples, to irritate the Italian “no nukes” mayor there. :)

  • Baek

    US carriers are good for gunboat diplomacy for hapless and defenseless countries. It is a question of how many missiles would it take to sink or disable them.

    • Brad Isherwood

      Syria’s Bastion coastal defence has limited range.
      Syrian Airforce Su 24mk and Mig 29….possibly 36 -40 ▪Airframes with Wing pylon/rails to carry Anti ship missiles.
      With extended range fuel tanks…they could get out into the Med and say 35% chance tear up several ships…if not sink a few.
      Maybe not sink a Carrier. …yet probable tear it up good…knocking it back to Norfolk for a year + repairs.
      Putin will not fire on Israel or US…
      Both know to stay away from Russian assets …beat up on SAA,IRGC, Shia Militias.
      Putin disappoints. ..as He gestures Iran nor Syria proactively take on US or Israhell.

      Both fight Empire with hands tied behind their back. .
      Great Shame on Putin…
      No more Grinning photos with Netanyahu. ..
      At least that Vlad. ……for God’s sakes

      • Baek

        Iran has the ability to sink US carriers with advanced missiles and subs, but is unable to help Syria for some political reasons. North Korea is a very good friend of Syria and can help Syria since North Korea is one of the most advanced countries in missile technologies.

    • velociraptor

      more then russia has

  • SnowCatzor

    Dear US Navy, Russia isn’t scared of your white elephant carriers. In fact no nation with any good submarines (and in Russia’s case: hyper-sonic missiles) need be afraid of them – as even the Swedes could sink them. It’s pathetic to watch these neo-cons beat their chest and think they’re invincible.

  • Drogba

    This is the mad man in Hell Aviv plan b of getting war started with Iran.Their terrorists of Isis failed,so the real terrorists will try to use parts of Syria as a bridgehead to accomplish their goals.But they will fail as usual.

  • Kentus

    Let’s have just a little fun with USS Harry S. Truman.

    “Just passing by” http://telemarksporten.no/SakerPhotos/USS_Harry_S._Truman_MIG_31.jpg

    “Serious” http://telemarksporten.no/SakerPhotos/MIG_31_Harry_S_Truman.jpg

    Kent

  • frankly

    Carrier are extremely impressive, Titanic grade. The only thing more impressive would be the headlines if one were to go down. As historically war is Empires only solution that certainly seems where we are headed. For most of us here that seems to be the US goal. Not Russia’s!

  • EmilyEnso

    U.S. May Keep Aircraft Carrier In Mediterranean

    All the easier to sink it and faster – if needs must.

  • Sinbad2

    Well the carrier has to be deployed somewhere, and since the US got scared out of the Persian Gulf the guys don’t get much shore time, so the Med has some good ports, and it looks like the ship is doing something.

  • william serrahn

    It’s been a while since the Stark was hit by and Iraqi Exocet and the Cole was totaled by a couple of al Qaeda guys in a small boat. These multi-billion dollar carriers are America’s sacred ships but can’t be put in harm’s way as they are extremely vulnerable to being sunk by a relatively cheap hypersonic anti-ship missile. I don’t think they will keep the HST in the eastern part of that big swimming pool and conduct air operations over Lebanon and Eastern Syria from her.

  • frankly

    You know given the rulings of the Nuremburg trials a case could be made that an aircraft carrier is a strictly aggressive weapon. You could make the further case that it is no good against a well defended foe, only weak countries vulnerable to an aggressive attack. Begs the question. Why build so many?