‘Supercarrier’ and Warship Armada heading to Iran’s Backyard

[gortex]

On the face of it more sabre rattling or perhaps gunboat diplomacy from the US but should it go further it seems to me Putin is losing allies quite quickly these days.

Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA – As he was returning to the US from the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, US President Donald Trump told the press aboard Air Force One that an American “armada” is heading toward Iran. That armada is a US carrier strike group led by the USS Abraham Lincoln, which was reported on January 20 as having departed its previously assigned patrol area and was steaming towards the Middle East.

Deploying the carrier has come as a reaction to the rising death toll from the Iranian clerical regime’s crackdown on a nationwide wave of demonstrations. The death toll from that revolt has, according to official government admissions by the government in Tehran, risen to at least 5,000 unarmed protestors having been killed by the security forces, activists said.

However, the actual number of those killed is now suspected of being as high as 20,000 or more. Internal sources in Iran have cited previous estimates in that range. Still, they have usually been aggregate totals extrapolated from information provided by hospitals and medical workers in major cities, then passed on by activists leading the demonstrations.

On Friday, Tehran dismissed as “completely false” Trump’s assertion that his threats of using military force had halted the mullahs’ planned executions of more than 800 protesters that had previously been arrested. Trump had stated that any such killings would be a red line that would force him to launch military action.
“I said, ‘If you hang those people, you’re going to be hit harder than you’ve ever been hit,'” the US president told reporters in the Air Force One press contingent as he returned from the Davos forum. “And an hour before this horrible event, they canceled the hangings, he said. “That was a good sign.”
“I stopped 837 hangings on Thursday, would have been dead, every one of them, mostly young men,” he said on Air Force One.
Referring to the carrier strike group scheduled to be on station today, Trump added, “Maybe we won’t have to use it.” The United States has “a big force going to Iran. I’d rather not see anything happen,” he added, but “we have a lot of ships going that direction just in case.”
In addition to the carrier and its flotilla of support vessels, the US has also dispatched additional aircraft and land-based air defense systems, per statements from Pentagon officials. For its part, the UK said it would send RAF Eurofighter Typhoon jets from 12 Squadron to Qatar, at Doha’s request.

https://www.19fortyfive.com/2026/01/the-...-backyard/

If he attacks Iran it could get messy , Iran and China share a comprehensive strategic partnership with China Iran's largest oil consumer.

[727Sky]

[Ninurta]

I couldn't help but notice the similarity between that AI avatar's voice and the voice of the "WOPR" computer in the old "War Games" movie.

I personally think his assessment was faulty - he seems to be presuming that any action against Iran would necessarily be predicated on an extended, protracted and drawn out war scenario. I don't think that's the case. I think that a series of surgical strikes would be far more productive, and of a far shorter duration to accomplish the mission.
 Trump has demonstrated a preference for quick hit-n-git victories over protracted war.

The military is repositioning about 25,000 troops into a threatening posture. I think - or at least hope - that is just a "feint"... an intentional ruse to distract attention away from the main assault without intent to carry that particular threat to completion. This is not a case where we need "boots on the ground" - we already have them in place in the form of the Iranian civilians protesting and rioting. All they need is weapons to counter the regime's weapons. they don't need any extra bodies there to get in their way.

We don't need any more "boots on the ground" there, but making the regime THINK that such an invasion action is imminent would cause them to prepare more for an attack that never comes, shifting preparation away from an attack that DOES come.

About a week and a half ago or so, a KC-135 flying gas station was, briefly, actually IN the airspace of Iran. No idea what that was about.

A few days after that, drones were flying patrols all up and down the Iranian coast along the axis of the Persian Gulf. If I had to guess, I'd say they were mapping out coastal anti-air sites, marking them for future destruction. The intent of that would be to give our air power a freer hand in executing surgical strikes rather than protracted war.

While those strikes were going on, it would be prudent to air-drop weapons for the protesters to put to use against the regime.

And, all of that could be accomplished without a single boot on the ground that isn't already there now, other than the possibility of a snatch operation to capture and secure the ayatollah and perhaps a few more ranking honchos in the regime. The Iranian people themselves could mop up the rest and topple the regime on their own, assuming the possession of airdropped weaponry in the form of small arms and perhaps mortars, with perhaps a few strafing runs from western sources as air support.

We don't need extra troops there - we're not trying to gain and hold ground, we're trying to help the Iranians to regain and hold ground that is already theirs, not ours. All they want is help, and that doesn't mean they want US troopers on the ground there. It means there is infrastructure they need us to disassemble from the air to make their own victory easier.

.

[babushka]

We don't know all the players, other forces could be looking to move in. I imagine Iran has dirt on every corrupt government that is supporting them across the globe and will call in favors. When the rest of the world shuns you go to Iran apparently. There is also local groups.

Just dropping guns for the locals won't do. I think if the US does nothing at this point those people will have hatred towards the west forever. I rate the US is forced to make a move now, it's unavoidable.

[Ninurta]

Correct. Just dropping guns will not do. They also need air support, and possibly a raid or a few to capture honchos. What they absolutely DON'T need are troops in the fray. The Iranians are entirely capable of fighting for themselves, if properly armed. They don't need outsiders coming in to "cheapen" their victory, outsiders who will try to take more credit than is due for their interference.

I also believe that if the US doesn't do what it has promised - deliver some help - that it will solidify a hatred from the Iranian people towards the west. Trying to snatch credit for their victory away from them would do the same.

I seriously doubt that either China or Russia would do a damned thing, not any more than they did for Venezuela. Russia is too broke and occupied in the Ukraine, and China is not willing to risk losing face to the US again in a war they could not win in Iran. They already took enough of a beating in Venezuela to do them. They wouldn't risk that humiliation again for the likes of the Mad Mullahs.

.

[babushka]

frontlines would be Venezuela, Ukraine and Iran. I don't think either the US or Russia is worried at this stage about larger conflict breaking out. More proxy wars, idk. lots of terror actions in europe and aus/nz to come and riots elsewhere i think

Guess we need to watch Taiwan, or is China going to sit behind russia forever. Taking Taiwan now would also give them a frontline away. I think they need it anyways because they are boxed in or something