Dr. Salla is a pioneer in exopolitics. Here is his autobiography.

His current exopolitical interests have led him to assert that the undisclosed presence of extraterrestrials is one of the primary forces behind international conflict. He further states that the claims of various "whistleblowers" (informants) suggest that as many as sixteen different extraterrestrial civilizations are currently interacting with the human race while a number of other extraterrestrial races monitor Earth affairs, while avoiding contact. Most of his claims are derived from whistleblowers (informants) or 'experiencers' (individuals who claim to have contacted extraterrestrials) who, while arousing much debate in the UFO field, are alleged by Dr. Salla to be primary sources of reliable information. In conversation with the Washington Post, Salla pointed to evidence widely available on the internet as a source for his research on extraterrestrial visitation: "There's a lot of stuff on the Internet, and I just went around and pieced it together."

The Iranian's anti-ship missiles probably present the biggest threat to the carrier's consorts than to the carrier itself (unless they're packing nuclear warheads) but the US Navy would likely not extract much else from the Gulf. The Iranians need not initiate this attack either, waiting for the US to conduct its Cheney-inspired strike and then responding as opportunities arose. In many respects, the Iranians could easily seize the initiative while retaining escalatory options denied the US, which would be an interesting turnabout from the usual conflict situations of the last sixty years. So low has the Bush administration brought the US capabilities.

In addition to the anti-ship missiles, the Iranians could also deploy mines into the Strait of Hormuz and in the Gulf. The US Navy is particularly deficient in anti-mine warfare because it's dull, methodical work and they've never invested properly in those particular missions. It's too bad too, because a mine underneath the keel of a carrier could potentially sink it pretty damned quickly. Worse, a whiff of mines in the Gulf would shut down commercial traffic immediately and force the EU and China to act in the UN to snuff the US activities in the Gulf. Cheney just might find himself impeached before his term of office expires if he "successfully" pushes war with Iran.

based on what I found on the internets and pieced together. The US attacking Iran will set off a chain of events and create a history which the whole world will regret, in particulr the US. It will reinforce the neocons, it will escalate and spread, something I suspect they will be happy with. I suspect that there are one or two of them who would love the excuse to use tactical nukes and I think they will get it if an attack happens.

I also think the US will get it´s ass handed to them, but not in a conventional way of course. I developed this pov from what what came through those internet tubes.

Caribdude

PS. It is quite often that someone´s pov is discredited because of something they wrote or have said before. Over on SXM Private Eye we get many anonymous comments, something we leave possible because the culture of fear here is quite ingrained in people and signing in discourages writing them. We always point out to users who demand to know who the writers are by pointing out that it is what is written and the pov, opinion or information that is important and for discussion, not who wrote it. It´s a small island and you can suffer consequences in many ways by voicing an opinion or speaking up.
That said, while I don´t beleive aliens are taking over or causing the problems in the world, I would like to hear JPD´s take on it all.

Dear all,

I see a lot of discussion on the "sunburn." While interesting this seems to be based on speculation that has emerged through less than credible websites regarding the sale of those missiles to Iran. I have for a while been trying to locate a source on this that is not generated by defense buffs interested in seeing an interesting fight and I have not been able to do so. Please produce such references or otherwise we should be skeptical of any reports regarding Iran's SS-N- 22s.

That said, it does not mean that the other types of weapons that we know that Iran owns are not dangerous. The C 802 that Iran has been importing is supposed to be a pretty potent weapon and Iran has those in significant numbes. It is ironic then that if there were to be a clash, you would see old Soviet style warfare against the standard US tactics. If the Iranians are smart, they would open their radars just lonf enough to acquire a target and then send the missiles. The CIWS systems of the US navy are theoretically effective against such missiles but in manageable numbers and during military exercises. How a single ship would respond to 5 or 10 missiles directed towards it is unclear.

So we will see what happens. Argentina used old technology exosets very successfully against the Brits and had Mitterand not stopped selling spares for the super etendards that were launching them, England would have lost the war at the Malvinas and Labour would have returned to power in the elections (now that would have been interesting).

The questions we need to ask are. How able are the Iranians in using this equipment? How smart are their officers and planners? If they are even marginally ingenious, and why not expect that from them, then the US could lose some ships even without the sunburn.

If they are even marginally ingenious, and why not expect that from them, then the US could lose some ships even without the sunburn.

The iranians I've met are a lot more than "marginally ingenious".

one's enemy one of the surest ways to get beaten? And what happens to empires that underestimate their enemies? From the Romans to Star Wars we see the same result, ultimately the destruction of said empire. And why do empires not learn this lesson? For the same reason some drunk drivers don't learn after the first DUI, they think they are special. And one result of forgetting to put themselves in the other guy's shoes is that they have become fatally arrogant.

What would Americans or Canadians or the citizens of any country do when they are occupied or attacked by another country's armed forces? They try to defend or take their country back. American arrogance and hunger for empire has brought us to the point of consistently underestimating our foes.

Ask any police officer or soldier, that one mistake will kill you every time.

_{"I beseech you in the bowels of christ think it possible you may be mistaken."}

I was a NROTC cadet at Texas A&M University for a single semester (yes, I flunked out-long story).

Each company in the corps of cadets had two Iranian students, sent to the United States to be educated (during the Shah's administration). These guys were the cream of the crop in their own country and while nice enough on an individual basis, it was patently obvious they disliked Americans.

I still remember the names of the two in my company. Chageni and Yahghobian. And their majors: Nuclear physics.

I did inhale.

I posted on this topic on October 2, in response to what I believe is willful blindness here. Not many followed the links, I fear. Whether Mr. Salla has unsound views on space aliens is irrelevant. His views on the possible fate of the American naval forces in the Gulf are quite sound. In fact, he understates the case, in terms of the options the Iranians have.

For those interested in going beyond tinfoil hat photos, I suggest starting with Joe Galloway’s piece on Millennium Challenge 2002:

http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,95496,00.html

An excerpt: “Though fictional names were applied, it involved a crisis moving toward war in the Persian Gulf and in actuality was a barely veiled test of an invasion of Iran.

In the computer-controlled game, a flotilla of Navy warships and Marine amphibious warfare ships steamed into the Persian Gulf for what Van Riper assumed would be a pre-emptive strike against the country he was defending.

Van Riper resolved to strike first and unconventionally using fast patrol boats and converted pleasure boats fitted with ship-to-ship missiles as well as first generation shore-launched anti-ship cruise missiles. He packed small boats and small propeller aircraft with explosives for one mass wave of suicide attacks against the Blue fleet. Last, the general shut down all radio traffic and sent commands by motorcycle messengers, beyond the reach of the code-breakers.

At the appointed hour he sent hundreds of missiles screaming into the fleet, and dozens of kamikaze boats and planes plunging into the Navy ships in a simultaneous sneak attack that overwhelmed the Navy's much-vaunted defenses based on its Aegis cruisers and their radar controlled Gatling guns.

When the figurative smoke cleared it was found that the Red Forces had sunk 16 Navy ships, including an aircraft carrier. Thousands of Marines and sailors were dead.”

Neither Mr. Galloway nor General van Ripper wear tinfoil hats, I think.

For those interested in taking this a little farther, Airpower Australia has a lot of useful material, particularly this:

http://www.ausairpower.net/Analysis-Regional-ASCM.html

See especially the section: “Defending Against Supersonic ASCMs,” and note that Iran would not need to be firing missiles from long range bombers, but would as Mr. Salla pointed out, from their very long and rugged coastline, and from ‘fast patrol boats’ and 'converted pleasure craft.'

Note also that Iran may not have Sunburns, but does not require them to do huge damage. General van Ripper sank the fleet (16 ships, including an aircraft carrier and two marine corps helicopter carriers, in 48 hours) without them. The C-802 is a very capable missile. Iran manufactures a version of this missile. They may have a very large number, more than adequate for flooding attacks.

Further, as has been pointed out, Iran has other powerful weapons. Again, for those seriously interested in informing themselves, this article is very useful. General van Ripper did nothing that the Iranians could not be expected to do. His thinking outside the box is their naval doctrine:

“Marshall Center Occasional Paper #10
Obsolete Weapons, Unconventional Tactics, and Martyrdom Zeal: How Iran Would Apply its Asymmetric Naval Warfare Doctrine in a Future Conflict
Date: April 2007
Author: Jahangir Arasli”

at: Link

There is no more important issue than this.

From Commander Jeff Huber, U.S.N., retired, http://zenhuber.blogspot.com/:

“The Air Force's ubiquitous argument against the efficacy of Navy ships operating in restricted hostile waters is that they offer relatively little striking power in return for the vulnerability they present. This is particularly true in the Persian Gulf where Iran's naval forces enjoy significant asymmetric advantages over ours. If I'm planning a surgical strike on Iran and want to maximize force protection, I get the Navy out of the Gulf. Operating from the North Arabian Sea limits the set of targets in Iran that carrier based jets can reach, but I suspect the Air Force has plenty of manned aircraft available for missions requiring air breathing pilots, and the Navy's cruise missiles, only having to go one way on each mission, have a sufficient un-refueled combat radius to hit whatever they have to hit.

If I'm the Navy, of course, I’m not wild about leaving the Gulf because it will look like I ran away from the fight (because, in essence, I will have.) What's more, once I leave the Gulf and the fight starts, it may be a long time, if ever, before I can get back in, and then how will I ever justify my share of the defense budget again?

Fortunately or unfortunately for the Navy, it will probably stay in the Gulf to serve as a casus belli. A torpedo in the side of an amphibious ship carrying Marines or a destroyer losing its bow to a mine or an anti-ship cruise missile cooking off in a carrier's hangar bay will give the Cheney gang all the justification it needs to unilaterally declare general war against Iran

You'd like to think the administration wouldn't sacrifice an armed service that way just to enable a Dick Cheney foreign policy initiative. But look at what they did with the Army and Marine Corps in Iraq.”

What if we attacked and they just went to the UN? The US is on the edge of an economic abyss. If the rest of the world decided we were the real danger, we would get the rug pulled out from under our economy. We have hollowed out our industrial base, worn down our military and inflated our currency. If the dollar collapsed, we'd have to pull out of Iraq, because we wouldn't be able to pay the contracters, leaving it to Iran. They would win by not responding.