Is US Gulf Missile Move Defensive or Aggressive?

[Purveyor]

By Paul Reynolds
World affairs correspondent, BBC News website

An increase in anti-missile capabilities by the United States in the Gulf should probably be seen as more of a defensive manoeuvre against Iran than an aggressive one.

US officials have let it be known that it now has Patriot batteries in four Gulf states - Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. US anti-missile ships are also being stationed in the Gulf.

All this comes as the impasse over Iran's nuclear activities continues and amid efforts by the US and other Western countries to increase sanctions on Iran.

A US Navy boat seen from the deck of a US military ship docked in Manama, Bahrain, on 20 Jan 2010
The US has been beefing up its defence capabilities in the Gulf

The stationing of extra anti-missile defences in the Gulf is likely to be part of an American effort to reassure its nervous Gulf Arab allies that it is acting to contain whatever threat they see from Iran.

That threat is regarded as increasingly coming from ballistic missiles. The increased capability, of course, also gives the US better options if there is a confrontation with Iran.

And the deployment should also be viewed in the context of a review of US ballistic missile strategy being presented by the Obama administration to Congress.

MORE...

BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8490929.stm

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

1. Is this really news?

While it is new that the US is scattering terminal defense systems (the Patriot batteries) hither and yon, modern naval platforms are generally designed to kill everything from the water line to low earth orbit.

At least on the naval side of things, they capability was built-in to whatever ships they already had parked over there. A single naval missile platform can put up a *lot* of air defense missiles.

[Robb]

14. We're making a point of making it news.

This is pretty much a diplomatic mission. In the strictest sense of the word, I should add.

[tammywammy]

2. The Patriot is a defensive missile n/t

[Fumesucker]

3. How would it appear to *us* if it were Iran ringing the USA with "defensive missiles"?

Somehow I think that would be construed by the US government as aggressive..

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

4. Nonsense

The US is already "surrounded" by foreign naval missile platforms. No one gets the vapors over it.

The Patriot batteries are *terminal defense* units. They are placed around potential targets, they are not a general regional defense against missiles. Iran would have to target whatever the batteries are protecting for the defense to have any impact on Iran.

Only the most ignorant ninnies in Iran would care about these missile defenses unless they were planning an attack on these countries. So really, I could not care less what may be passing through the fevered imagination of the militantly clueless.

[Fumesucker]

5. Look at the history of US aggression..

It's been eight years since the US invaded Iraq over the most transparently flimsy of pretexts..

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior, only a fool would dismiss the idea that the US might invade Iran.

[Echo In Light]

6. The pro-war nuts will of course downplay it

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

7. And what does this have to do with purely defensive weapons?

That's right, absolutely nothing.

If you install a deadbolt on your front door, does that mean you plan on robbing your neighbor's house?

[Echo In Light]

8. What was "defensive" about invading Afghanistan & Iraq?

That's correct, fuckin zero

[Alias Dictus Tyrant]

9. Way to ignore the point! Never let inconvenient facts get in the way.

[Fumesucker]

11. But you didn't answer the question..

What was defensive about invading Iraq?

Defensive missiles were also deployed in that invasion.

[Fumesucker]

10. If you have a known history of robbing your neighbors houses

It could easily be seen as a defense against warranted reprisal.

And Iran is not ringed with defensive weapons only.

Iran has no blue water navy so there are no Iranian ships ringing the USA..

[Flaneur]

13. This suggests the US may be doing something that would result in an Iranian attack.

As in, US strikes at Iran result in Iranian counterattacks on US regional allies.

[leftstreet]

12. We gotta protect ourselves from the Taliban Navy and al Qaeda Air Force

Those are my greatest fears

[bvar22]

15. LOL...Nailed It.

We really need to find a way to rein in this Military Expansionism.
People at home don't have access to Health Care or decent jobs, while the Military squanders our resources in an all consuming fantasy of World Domination.
Democrats or Republicans....doesn't seem to matter anymore.

[whattheidonot]

16. enemy.

Iran is the enemy of choice now. seems their most always be an enemy out there to rally the troops. Iran witnessed the Iraq war up close. after that war next door is Iran expected too be soft?

[Echo In Light]

17. The "war oF terror" is a phony war in its official aims, a REAL one re dissent/anti-war types