curious

lot of blog buzz about Iran, its rejection of the UN nuclear enrichment curtailment, attack on Romanian oil platform (?) and arabist doom'n'gloom about August 22nd being some symbolic date...

it is new moon, which is the most opportunistic time for US air strikes, should they be so inclined
only two more new moons before the Nov elections, and the Oct new moon is embarrasingly close to the election dates; and, of course, no one puts out new policies in August, everyone is on vacation

should the US decide to something silly and pre-emptive, it'd need at least three carriers in the gulf or Indian ocean. By my count, there should have been only two carrier groups there Enterprise and Kitty Hawk (?) - although one might be further east. The Iwo Jima group is in the Red Sea, and there are two carriers in the Atlantic.

But, the USS Reagan is closed due to operational commitments - is it at sea? Or still in San Diego as it was last week?
And the USS Stennis was visiting Canada last week, but I don't know where it is now. Anyone seen it in harbour this week? US Navy web site says neither is underway.

Interesting times. For what it is worth, I don't see the US has the assets in place to do anything drastically stupid right now, but then I've been wrong before.

More like this

"...As the country drifts slowly to war" Update: Why do I keep hammering on the "paranoid Iran scenario"? Because I am worried that the decision to "take out" Iran has been made in DC, and that it is now merely a question of when, and with what rationale. There are two considerations: one is next…
Lots of news and speculation on possible steps to mobilization by US forces to position for a strike on Iran. They couldn't be that stupid, could they? Old Speculation Updated. So... in my humble and uninformed opinion, if the US were to launch a air strike on Iran, supported by Navy aircraft and…
The USS Reagan Carrier Strike Group is surging - it will forward deploy to the western pacific next week. That makes three. Caveat... ...this is to backstop the Kitty Hawk which is going in for maintenance in harbour in Japan. The Stennis was supposed to cover the Kitty Hawk, but was deployed…
the US navy is all out this week when listening to heated rhetoric from DC, it is interesting to keep half an eye on what is actually happening on the ground. US doctrine calls for an ability to strike any where on the globe within 24 hours, a time they'd like to shorten to one hour (for non-…

Wouldn't Kandahar or other Afghan air bases be close enough if using Air Force jets (117s or the like, dunno if F-35s would be an option)? Also, B-2s can fly round-trip from the mainland US for certain missions (I believe they were used in such a manner in the Kosovo campaign).

But I doubt that even Donald Rumsfeld would be dumb enough to light that powder keg at the moment. Besides, if they were to do so for domestic political reasons, they'd try to do something like get congressional authorization to use force against Iran as a means of dividing congressional democrats.