Israel insists the deployment of battleships in the Red Sea is “standard operating procedure”, rejecting any attempt to connect the announced move with rising tensions in southern Israel or the ongoing Egyptian military anti-jihad cell operations in Sinai.
Iran’s Navy Commander Habibollah Sayyari announced to the media that his country is sending a submarine and battleship as well, towards patrolling the seas and demonstrating the nation’s naval capabilities. Sayyari stated the navy will maintain “an active presence in the high seas in line with the guidelines of Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei with the purpose of serving the country’s interests.
“The presence of Iran’s army in the high seas will convey the message of peace and friendship to all countries,” he added.
While all involved are maintaining everything is ‘routine’, the eyes of military commanders in Israel are focused on events surrounding the increasing tensions in southern Israel, both on land and at sea.
(YWN – Israel Desk, Jerusalem)
7 Responses
You meant to say “warships”. A “battleship” is a type of warship that was commonly used in the late 19th through the first half of the 20th century, and is now considered obsolete. Israel came onto the scene after they were obsolete and has never owned a battleship. They were large, slow, and powerful vessels that were virtually unsinkable until the invention of military aircraft.
“The presence of Iran’s army in the high seas will convey the message of peace and friendship to all countries,”
And the presence of Israeli,souped up F-16’s blowing their nuclear plants to bits,will convey the message of thanksgiving…
akuperma,
You are correct except for the “slow” part: The last four United States battleships were as fast as any other combat ship in the Navy. But their only real use was for artillery bombardment of targets within about 20 miles from shore.
As a former naval peson, I wince at your misuse of “battleship” – and akuperma, “warship” is also out of place for a fast patrol boat, which is what we are talking about…the term “warship” is genrerally used for larger ocean going vessels.
Also, akupermaa, the last classes of battleships, in the US, British and Japanese navies were not “slow” – The North Carolina, Washington and Missouri classes (of which the New Jersey is one…and is on view to all in Camden) are capable of well over 30 knots; they sailed with carrier task forces in WWII, where their substantial secondary armament were major anti-aircraft assets. Go Navy, Beat Army!
I “wince” at my overstatement…I should have said “close to 30 knots” in #4.
Charliehall…the battleships used “primarily for shore bombardments” were the older, slower ships of the Texas, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Colorado classes…those that survived Pearl Harbor and were modernized with “modern” anti-aircraft weapons and radar suites. Designed before and during WWI, these ships generally had top speeds of 21 knots.
“close to 30 knots”
I did know the actual number about 25 years ago, but it was classified so I can’t tell you.
“the older, slower ships of the Texas, Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Colorado classes”
The Iowa was used to bombard shore targets during the Korean War; the New Jersey at Iwo Jima, Okinawa, during the Korean and Vietnam Wars, and in Lebanon; the Missouri at Okinawa and the main Japanese islands, during the Korean War, and in Operation Desert Storm; and the Wisconsin at Iwo Jima, Okinawa, the main Japanese islands, in the Korean War, and in Operation Desert Storm. Only the Iowa and the New Jersey were at Leyte Gulf, the last naval battle in history where battleships played a role.
All true…but during WWII the “fast battleships” were rarely assigned to the amphibious task forces..they were part of TF 58 and TF 38, the main carrier task force, the 38 and 58 designations changing when Admirals Spruance and Halsey alternated command.
And none of the older BBs were in commission after the 40s…so in Korea and afterwards, they aren’t relevant.
Nebuch…I am old enough to have sailed with senior Chiefs, in the 60s, who were in the Navy back then…I remember one sailor who keep us spell bound..he had the old Lexington sunk out from under him at Coral Sea in April of ’42…and was in the Princeton when it was sunk in October ’44. Another spent a week in a lifeboat in the Atlantic. And we thought we had it “tough.”