A Third U.S. Aircraft Carrier is Headed to the Gulf

REUTERS

"MANAMA • The US Navy said yesterday it had ordered an aircraft carrier to the Gulf to replace one of two patrolling the region, as the United States winds down naval war games on Iran’s doorstep.

The Nimitz carrier strike group will sail from San Diego for the Gulf on Monday, a navy spokesman said, to replace the Dwight D Eisenhower, as tensions mount between Iran and the West over captured British troops and Iran’s nuclear programme.

“She (the Nimitz) will be deployed to the Gulf region. She is the relief for Eisenhower, who leaves and she replaces her,” Lieutenant Commander Jeff Davis said by telephone from Naval Headquarters in Washington.

Strike groups typically include four or five frigates and destroyers and a submarine.

“You are looking at the early part of May that you would have the transition. It would be without any overlap. There is no plan to overlap them at all,” he added.

The Eisenhower and fellow carrier John C Stennis took part in this week’s US war games, the largest in Gulf waters since 2003, when the US led an invasion of Iraq.

The drills, which included anti-submarine, anti-surface and mine warfare drills, ended yesterday. For the first time since the Iraq invasion four years ago, two US aircraft carriers were deployed in the Gulf.

Fifth Fleet spokesman Lieutenant-Commander Charlie Brown said there were currently no plans for more. “We do not expect to have three carriers in the Gulf region ... but we cannot talk about future needs or future operations,” he said.

Earlier in the day, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned the US not to aggravate tensions with Iran with its naval presence in the Gulf......"

***

Here is my take:

The Pentagon, as usual, is lying. There will be an overlap and the U.S. is continuing the buildup in preparation for the attack on Iran. After the arrival of the Nimitz, all three carrier groups will be in the gulf. It makes no sense to replace the Eisenhower carrier group right after it took part in the largest war games since the invasion of Iraq. All that training down the drain? It does not make sense.

The attack on Iran will trigger far stronger reaction from Iran than that from Iraq in 2003. The Iraqi military was already downgraded even before the invasion. Iran is different and that is why you need a third carrier group. Of course no one knows the timing of the upcoming attack, but based on this information (assuming that it is not disinformation) it seems that it has been pushed back to early May.

The other possibility is that the attack is straight ahead, as some Russian experts claim. They predict the first week of April to be the likely window for the attack. But then why not have the Nimitz in place, just in case you need it?