John Bolton, President Donald Trump's national security adviser, announced on Sunday that the US would use the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier to send a message to Iran. US officials told multiple publications that they found intelligence indicating Iran may soon attack US forces. Iran has long fantasized about sinking a US aircraft carrier and harassed the US Navy. Aircraft carriers are powerful tools but ill-suited for a fight in Iran's home waters, and they would operate at major disadvantages. Visit INSIDER's homepage for more stories. John Bolton, President Donald Trump's national security adviser, announced on Sunday that the US would send the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier and its associated strike group to the waters near Iran to "send a message" and respond to vague threats. But the US will be sending the powerful carrier to a job it's arguably ill-suited for, putting thousands of sailors at a major military disadvantage. And if a conflict were to arise, the sinking of a US aircraft carrier would be in Iran's sights. Though the carrier's deployment to Iran's nearby waters may have been planned long ago, Bolton has been clear that the ship's return to the region marks a response to "a number of troubling and escalatory incident and warnings" from Iran. Read more: Why the US suddenly decided to send an aircraft carrier and bombers to check Iran DoD photo While Bolton did not get into specifics, a report from Axios said Israel passed the US "information on an alleged Iranian plot to attack" US forces or interests in the region. The Wall Street Journal cited US officials as saying new intelligence "showed that Iran drew up plans to target U.S. forces in Iraq and possibly Syria, to orchestrate attacks in the Bab el-Mandeb strait near Yemen through proxies and in the Persian Gulf with its own armed drones." Read more: Iran harassed and humiliated the US Navy under Obama — here's why it stopped under Trump US aircraft carrier strike groups represent the highest order of naval power ever put to sea, but they're not the right tool for every job. Caitlin Talmadge, an associate professor of security studies, said on Twitter that US carriers are "designed for operations on the open ocean." As a floating air base with guided-missile destroyers and cruisers sailing nearby for antimissile defenses from land and sea, the carriers are best off when moving around far from the range of missiles fired from the shore. The narrow, "confined waters of the Persian Gulf make carriers tremendously more vulnerable to asymmetric air, land, and naval threats," Talmadge wrote. Iran's home-field advantage could sink a tanker Iranian military personnel participate in the Velayat-90 war game near the Strait of Hormuz. REUTERS/Fars News/Hamed Jafarnejad In the shallow brown waters of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow pass through which about one-fifth of the world's oil passes through, Iran's outdated submarines and missiles see a vastly uneven playing ground leveled out. "Ideally, a Nimitz-class carrier would operate within comfortable range of its targets (based on the range of its air wing) but at sufficient stand-off distance to minimize the risk of enemy threats," Omar Lamrani, a senior military analyst at the geopolitical consulting firm Stratfor, told Business Insider. "This varies based on operating environment but is usually between 300 to 400 nautical miles." Aircraft carriers do send a message and have been relied on for such by presidents for decades, but according to Talmadge, it's kind of empty in this situation. Read more: Iran releases video of its submarine sinking a US aircraft carrier by exploiting a key weakness In the Gulf wars and against militants such as ISIS, aircraft carriers made plenty of sense. "Iraq has tiny coast, couldn't contest US carrier presence, so unusual situation," added Talmadge, who said that Iran was a different kind of beast. But "Iran's geography & military capabilities, particularly presence of significant assets near Strait of Hormuz, make sailing carrier through Gulf a lot riskier, and w/ less benefit given US ability to deploy carriers in Arabian Sea & Indian Ocean instead," she said. In fact, the Persian Gulf, Iran's home waters, plays directly into their hands. One of Iran's favorite and best documented ways to harass the US Navy is to use fast-attack boats in a swarming attack. Swarm boat attacks would "not be much of a danger in the open sea," where the carrier had room to maneuver, but could be a problem in the choked gulf. "Iran has various systems that can be a threat within the Persian Gulf, including anti-ship cruise missiles, fast attack craft and swarm boats, mini-submarines, and even asymmetric tactics like UAV swarms that seek to harass rather than disable the carrier," Lamrani added. Read more: Iran has found a new way to mess with the US Navy Aircraft carriers lack onboard defenses against torpedo attacks, something that an old Iranian submarine could manage. In the noisy brown waters of the Persian Gulf, the US Navy may also struggle to track such small boats. Furthermore, the Iranian media has fantasized for years about sinking an aircraft carrier. In the country's state-controlled media, the massive ships are often seen as targets ripe for sinking. Iran's Ghadir submarine menaces behind a US carrier strike group in a propaganda video. Iranian TV via MEMRI With US-Iranian relations hitting a startling new low, the Trump administration's decision to send an aircraft carrier to Tehran's home waters seems like a risky choice with little apparent payoff. Accompanying the carrier deployment announced by Bolton was an increase in bombers in the region. Business Insider has previously reported that Iran is highly unlikely to attack even small exposed groups of US troops in the region because the response from nearby US air bases would all but obliterate the country.<doc-sep>Iran's national security body has dismissed the deployment of an American carrier strike group to the Middle East as psychological warfare as tensions between Washington and Tehran continue to escalate. According to Iran's semi-official Tasnim news agency, Keyvan Khosravi—a spokesperson for the Supreme National Security Council—issued a statement on the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier group and a bomber task force, announced by National Security Adviser John Bolton on Sunday. "Bolton's statement is a clumsy use of an out-of-date event for psychological warfare," said Khosravi, according to Al Jazeera. He also suggested that Iranian forces had been tracking the carrier group since it arrived in the Mediterranean Sea 21 days ago. On Sunday, Bolton said the ships and bombers were being sent to the Middle East in response to "troubling and escalatory indications and warnings" from Iran. A prominent hawk who has called for military action against Tehran, Bolton did not specify what troubling indications prompted the deployment. But for Khosravi, Bolton's motivation is simple. He said President Donald Trump's adviser "lacks military and security understanding, and his remarks are mostly meant to draw attention to himself." In his announcement, Bolton said U.S. forces were deployed "to send a clear and unmistakable message to the Iranian regime that any attack on United States interests or on those of our allies will be met with unrelenting force." "The United States is not seeking war with the Iranian regime," he added. "But, we are fully prepared to respond to any attack, whether by proxy, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, or regular Iranian forces." On Monday, Acting Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan said the forces had been repositioned based on indications of a "credible threat by Iranian regime forces," though he did not elaborate. "We call on the Iranian regime to cease all provocation. We will hold the Iranian regime accountable for any attack on U.S. forces or our interests," Shanahan said. Last week, Iran warned that a "B-team" around Trump—including Bolton and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—were pushing for conflict with Tehran. "The B Team is pushing U.S. policy toward a disaster," warned Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif. "The plot is to push Iran into taking action. And then use that," he claimed. An Iranian lawmaker responded to the deployment by threatening military action. Alaeddin Boroujerdi, a member of the Iranian parliament who previously served as the country's deputy foreign minister, said carrier strike group would "definitely be drowned by our precision-guided missiles" if it "made a mistake. "War with Iran is playing with fire, and it will burn all, and not just Iran," Boroujerdi added.<doc-sep>WASHINGTON – The Pentagon is rushing additional military muscle, including B-52 bombers, to the Middle East to counter Iranian threats to U.S. troops on the ground and at sea, the Pentagon announced Tuesday. The announcement follows two days of increasing alarm over threats from Iran. National Security Advisor John Bolton said Sunday that the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier and bombers were being sent to the region. Meanwhile, senators from both parties urged the White House to move cautiously. By Monday, Pentagon spokesman Charles Summers was pointing "to indications of heightened Iranian readiness to conduct offensive operations against U.S forces and our interests." On Tuesday, the Pentagon fleshed out the nature of its response. The Air Force is dispatching B-52 bombers, long-range warplanes capable of carrying 70,000 pounds of bombs. The Abraham Lincoln, which already was scheduled for deployment to the Persian Gulf region, is cutting short other port visits to arrive ahead of schedule. The aircraft carrier, with a wing of warplanes and 3,000 sailors aboard, is accompanied by the USS Leyte Gulf, a guided-missile cruiser, and four destroyers: the USS Bainbridge, Gonzalez, Mason and Nitze. "U.S. Central Command continues to track a number of credible threat streams emanating from the regime in Iran throughout the CENTCOM area of responsibility," Navy Capt. Bill Urban, a Central Command spokesman, said in a statement. The escalating tensions follow an announcement last month by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo of new sanctions against any country, including U.S. allies, that imports Iranian oil, the country's top source of income. The White House also designated the Revolutionary Guards Corps as a foreign terrorist organization, part of a hardening stance toward Iran. Pompeo, who canceled a long-planned visit with Germany's Angela Merkel, made an unannounced stop in Baghdad instead on Tuesday to meet with the country’s intelligence and defense chiefs, among other officials. He said he wanted to discuss the new threats from Iran with Iraqi leaders. "Iran is escalating their activity," Pompeo told reporters en route to Baghdad. "I wanted to go to Baghdad to speak with the leadership there, to assure them that we stood ready to continue to ensure that Iraq is a sovereign, independent nation." Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky, warned against any U.S. military action against Iran. “I think it’s very important that the administration know they do not have our permission to (engage in) … any kind of war or regime change operation in Iran.” Asked if he is worried about Bolton pushing for military action, Paul said: “I think that the president’s instincts are good on this and hopefully he’ll listen to his inner voice.” Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., in a statement, said the White House was being reckless in confronting Iran and lacked legal authority to start a conflict. “I’m deeply worried that the Trump administration is leading us toward an unnecessary war with Iran," Kaine said. To others, the deployment makes sense as a warning to Iran, said Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "I like the decision, to the extent I can understand the backdrop to it, because it tells Iran they won’t get away with doing something nasty by proxy," O'Hanlon said. "We are on to them. That may or may not suffice as deterrent, and we have to be careful about assuming that a carrier or bomber can stop a covert operative, but I still favor it – and I also favor reminding Iran that we aren’t really pivoting out of the Middle East too too dramatically, either." More:President Trump moves to cut off Iran oil exports; decision could roil markets There are thousands of U.S. troops in the region, many of them in Iraq, Iran's neighbor to the west. During the bloody insurgent war there, hundreds of U.S. troops were killed by weapons the Pentagon said were furnished by Iran. Read more:Download the USA TODAY app<doc-sep>
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The commander overseeing U.S. naval forces in the Middle East told Reuters on Thursday that American intelligence showing a threat from Iran will not prevent him from sending an aircraft carrier through the vital Strait of Hormuz, if needed. U.S. aircraft carrier the USS Abraham Lincoln is pictured while it travels through the Suez Canal in Egypt May 9, 2019 in this picture obtained from social media. Bud Kinsey/via REUTERS Vice Admiral Jim Malloy, commander of the U.S. Navy’s Bahrain-based Fifth Fleet, did not say whether he would send the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group into the strategic waterway off Iran, through which passes a fifth of oil consumed globally. The group, whose deployment to the Middle East was fast-tracked by President Donald Trump’s administration as a warning to Iran, transited through the Suez Canal into the Red Sea on Thursday and was now under Malloy’s command. “If I need to bring it inside the strait, I will do so,” Malloy said in an interview by phone. “I’m not restricted in any way, I’m not challenged in any way, to operate her anywhere in the Middle East.” Iran has dismissed the U.S. contention of a threat as “fake intelligence.” Tensions have risen between Tehran and Washington since the Trump administration withdrew a year ago from a 2015 international nuclear deal with Iran and began ratcheting up sanctions to throttle the Islamic Republic’s economy. The Pentagon said it expedited the Lincoln’s deployment and sent bombers to the Middle East after U.S. intelligence signaled possible preparations by Tehran to stage attacks against U.S. forces or interests. Malloy said the intelligence was linked “with actual activity that we observed.” “And that was certainly enough for me ... to say that we saw this as a threat,” he said. U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, say one of the pieces of intelligence indicated Iran had moved missiles on boats. One of the officials said the particular missile observed was perhaps capable of launching from a small ship. The officials also noted growing concerns about the threat from Iran-backed Shi’ite militia in Iraq, which have long avoided any confrontation with U.S. troops under the shared goal of defeating Islamic State, a Sunni militant organization. Slideshow ( 5 images ) Malloy, whose naval forces would support efforts to defend U.S. troops throughout the region, did not enter into details on the U.S. intelligence. But he confirmed that some of the U.S. concerns centered on Iranian missiles. “It might be a new fielding of technology by Iran,” Malloy said, adding the weaponry “falls under the category of destabilizing and offensive in nature.” ‘NOT IN A WAR-PLAN FOOTING’ The nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers required Tehran to curb its uranium enrichment capacity to head off any pathway to developing a nuclear bomb, in return for the removal of most international sanctions. Iran has always said it pursued a nuclear program for peaceful purposes only. In the past month, the U.S. designated Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) as a terrorist organization and increased sanctions pressure, with an explicit goal of slashing Iran’s oil exports to zero. Beyond the deployment of the Lincoln, the United States also dispatched B-52 bombers to the Middle East in response and is also weighing the redeployment of Patriot missiles after pulling several out of the region last year, officials said. Some of Trump’s critics fear the White House is intentionally provoking Iran. Although the military sought the deployments, the announcement itself came in a statement from White House national security adviser John Bolton - a hawk on Iran policy. Senator Tim Kaine, a Democrat, said he worried “that the Trump administration is leading us toward an unnecessary war.” Malloy, in his first interview since the IRGC designation, confirmed that U.S. forces were operating at a heightened state of readiness. Still, Malloy stressed that the U.S. military was not seeking or preparing for war with Iran. “I am not in a war-plan footing and have not been tasked to do so,” Malloy said. “However we are absolutely ready to respond to any aggression against the United States, partners in the region, or our interests.” Trump also reaffirmed that message on Thursday, saying he did not want conflict. “We have one of the most powerful ships in the world that is loaded up and we don’t want to do anything,” Trump told reporters.