OPERATION BITE: More Than We Can Chew? Posted by Jeremy Broussard

A recent article on the Israeli-based DebkaFile reports that a third carrier group, the USS Nimitz, is steaming out of San Diego for the Persian Gulf next week to join the John C. Stennis and Eisenhower carrier groups already in the Gulf.  The possibility of a third carrier deployment was first reported in Newsweek over a month ago.  If the Eisenhower does not rotate back to the States--and many have speculated that it won't--this will represent the largest U.S. naval air presence in the Gulf since the 1991 Gulf War I. 

Many have speculated that the current captive/hostage standoff between Iran and the U.K. might be the spark that ignites a conflict between the U.S./U.K. and Iran.  While a limited air campaign might ostensibly be over freeing hostages (how this accomplishes that is anyone's guess), more than likely it would be used to 1) degrade Iran's uranium enrichment production; 2) destroy its ballistic missile sites; and 3) and destroy or disrupt Iran's command and control over its Qods Force and other paramilitaries operating in Iraq.  According to several media sources quoting a Russian military intelligence source, this air campaign is code-named Operation Bite and is scheduled to begin sometime around April 6 (Good Friday . . . **sigh**, what a way to bring in Easter Season).

This might not be the first U.S.-Iranian head-to-head confrontation, as this week's Time reports on a still-classified skirmish between U.S. and Iranian forces on the border with Iraq six months ago.

But, as we used to say in the Army, the enemy gets a vote too.  So how would Iran respond?  We've already seen crude oil prices spike in the past few days over the hostage standoff.  What if Iran intentionally limited the supply of crude, either through reducing production or taking military action in the Strait of Hormuz?  What if it responded by ballistic missile attack against Israel or Baghdad?  What if it just amped up the paramilitary support in Iraq, or launched terrorism and sabotage missions in Europe, the U.S., and elsewhere? 

In other words, what is our desired goal in this proposed airstrike and does it outweigh the potential costs?

Comments

[Dan Kervick]

How about also mentioning the fact that an airstrike of the sort that is being described, in the present context, would kill thousands of people, and would clearly be a barbarous act, illegal under any civilized standard governing the just use of force?

[Don Bacon]

Some other items to chew on:

Iran has three Kilo class subs. They are currently refitted to carried the Club-S sub launched anti-shipping missiles. The missiles are a direct threat to U.S. aircraft carriers stationed in the Persian Gulf/Arabian Sea. Iran claims to fire world's fastest underwater torpedo--221 mph, but the threat is questionable.

Over the past several years, Iran has purchased Sunburn, C-801 and C-802 Silkworm antiship cruise missiles, fast attack missile boats and naval mine warfare capabilities.

The Sunburn anti-ship missile can deliver a 200-kiloton nuclear payload, or a 750-pound conventional warhead within a range of 100 miles, more than twice the range of the Exocet. The Sunburn combines a Mach 2.1 speed (two times the speed of sound) with a flight pattern that hugs the deck and includes "violent end maneuvers" to elude enemy defenses. The missile was specifically designed to defeat the US Aegis radar defense system.

The C-801 anti-ship cruise missile is a Chinese version of the popular French made EXOCET anti-ship cruise missile, the second generation of antiship missiles developed by China. The C-801 can be air-launched and is carried on missile speedboats, submarines, escort boats, and destroyers, and is used to attack destroyers or escort boats.

The C-802 “Silkworm” missile was used against the United States escort vessel U.S.S. Stark, causing the death of 37 sailors. It was recently used by Hezbollah in the Israeli-Lebanon war to cripple the Israeli missile boat Hanit in the Meditarranean Sea. The high-tech, anti-ship missile is tough to shoot down, partly because it flies only 20 feet above the water, making it hard to spot by radar.

Iran has sophisticated EM-53 bottom-tethered mines, which it purchased from China in the 1990s. The EM-53 presents a serious threat to major U.S. surface vessels, since its rocket-propelled charge is capable of hitting the hull of its target at speeds in excess of 70 miles per hour.

Iran also has a new Russian-made TOR M-1 surface-to-air defense shield which has a 12 km range (could be increased to 20 km). It is capable of rapidly tracing down 48 targets and engaging with eight, including cruise missiles, simultaneously.

Bon appetit!

[squid]

Fifth Fleet SOPs require 2 carriers on station. The Ike is due to be relieved. Ominous timing or more opportunistic material?

[kb]

"airstrike of the sort that is being described, in the present context, would kill thousands of people, and would clearly be a barbarous act, illegal under any civilized standard governing the just use of force"

Nope, cos according to this site, the US has 'ideals' that are adored by citizens of other countries.

So if the US decides to slaughter civilians in pursuit of those 'ideals' then it doesn't really matter.Ditto if the US sets up secret torture camps around the world. Or invades countries on fake intelligence. Or its military rapes people , or takes hostages or beats prisoners to death.

Cos the US has 'ideals'.........

Not like those dirty foreigners

[Don Bacon]

kb,

Cos we're special, don't you know. Ever since the Pilgrims and Puritans arrived in Massachusetts, Americans have been the chosen ones. It's in the Bible somewhere. It gave our ancestors license to eradicate those pesky native Americans, and it continues on, only now it has fancy names like "peacekeeping" and "exemplarism" and "city on the hill" and "global war on terror". And they can't understand that it's wrong.

To quote Dan Kervick: "They are always willing to accept that all manner of mistakes have been made, but they refuse to examine the violent, greedy and systematic ugliness beneath it all. Their "exceptionalist" self-image, and impossibly rosy and fanciful view of American history and motives, render them incapable of formulating a realistic critique of US society and foreign policy. And since they don't understand the world, they cannot devise a compelling strategy for changing it."

Without intending it, Dan was describing Matt and his whole mangy melange of mediocre manipulators.

[Lane Brody]

The capability of Iranian Kilo's and/or sub and air launched anti ship missiles does not reside in the listed range from Jane's or some other source. Certainly Iran has some specific military capabilities that we need to be concerned about- most especially the threat of modern naval mines. However, the context of any potential conflict will be a very strong indication of what Iran could do.

If the US were to engage in an air campaign against Iran one might well assume things little things like the Iranian Navy will be destroyed in an hour or two just like they were destroyed in the Tanker War in 1989.

The morality, legality, and political need for any strike is of course a matter of debate. To state any such strike would be a mistake on a variety of levels would not be a difficult argument- even if one were to hold an alternate position. To argue against military action based on a conventional military response by Iran is an impossible position given the military realities. That said it is the less conventional military threats that potentially are Iran's main military cards of which we should be very concerned.

Iran's Kilo's and the rest of it's naval forces, including shore based anti ship missile batteries, are much more in the category of target than threat. A small warehouse of naval mines one can emplace from what appears to be a fishing boat is however something to be more concerned about.

To raise the possibility of a US strike on Iran is perfectly valid but to speculate based on a the movement of one or more carrier groups is problematic. How many heavy bombers are on Diego Garcia and what if any gulf states have given permission to operate from them will be more indicative. If you hear a sqdn of F-22's is heading to the mideast that will tell you the US might be preparing- as would a hundred other indications as well.

Finally Iran imports gasoline. They lack refinery capacity. Were Iran to be attacked they probably would make some effort to cripple all oil exports from the Gulf seriously disrupting supply and spiking prices. However, and perhaps paradoxically, they could potentially be the most damaged by this form of economic warfare. Very little gets the blood up in third world oil exporting nations than raising the highly subsidized gasoline price. Losing all your gasoline imports and perhaps your limited refinery capacity as well is probably the greatest threat to the survival of the regime. Economic warfare need not be one sided.

[J Thomas]

If the iranians were to damage one of our carriers -- if a missile did get through -- that would be the beginning of the end for them. Every nation would beef up its anti-ship missile forces, because once there's proof that our carriers can be hit then everybody will want to be ready to hit them.

The morality, legality, and political need for any strike is of course a matter of debate.

This is kind of like saying the morality, legality, and political need for government graft is a matter for debate. Or like saying the great accomplishments of the Bush administration are a matter for debate. Sheesh.

I have a practical concern -- if we "win", what do we get from it? Will the rest of the world be so afraid of us that they agree to do what we want? Or will they be so upset about starving iranians with no gasoline etc that they decide to do something about us?

I'm concerned about that last possibility. The rest of the world couldn't enforce an embargo against us -- we control the oceans. If they tried to enforce an oil embargo against us we could just confiscate the oil tankers sent elsewhere -- nobody else has a navy that could stop us. But if they did declare an embargo it would hurt our prestige considerably. And if they, say, declared all our loans and investments and patents in other countries void and unpayable, it would be kind of disruptive.

The problem isn't iran, the problem is we don't need any *more* enemies just now.

[J Thomas]

In other words, what is our desired goal in this proposed airstrike and does it outweigh the potential costs?

The obvious goal is to give the US public something to pay attention to other than Bush administration scandals.

Cost? Why would it cost anything? There's nothing like a shooting war to rally the base. That's worth more than any possible cost in mobilising the opposition.

[bub]

Where is the outrage at Iran for torturing and pressuring the hostages. Is it nit illegal to parade them on television! You are all just abunch of appeasers and cowards like the little wimp Jimmy Carter!! Its always Americas fault. Just abunch of america hating cowards. And no I am not even American but it is easy to see what kind of people you are. So you will negotiate with the terrorists, probably give away several billion dollars in a deal in exchange for Irans good behaviour. Its no wonder countries like Iran behave the way the do!! I probably would to knowing that the other side has no balls!!

[jgt]

BLAH BLAH BLAH. (most of you) if the Iranians have nukes, life as we know it is finished.

[J Thomas]

jgt, you are way overdramatising it. You're getting all hysterical over a mostly non-event.

We thought it would be the end of the world when the russians got the bomb. It wasn't.

First we, and then the russians, thought it would be the end of the world when china got the bomb. It wasn't.

Somehow, against all reason or evidence, we talked like it was just fine for israel to get nukes, and we've lucked out -- so far they haven't used them.

We didn't get so upset about india and pakistan.

Now nonproliferation is dead. It was kind of shaky and Bush killed it. Iran is probably the last country we can make any serious attempt to stop getting nukes. Are you really more worried about iran than argentina? Indonesia? Mexico? Cuba?

Nonproliferation is dead. Life as we knew it is finished -- you just haven't noticed yet.

So what are you ready to spend so you can keep pretending another couple of years?

[J Thomas]

"Where is the outrage at Iran for torturing and pressuring the hostages. Is it nit illegal to parade them on television!"

Torture? You mean, worse than the totally-legal strenuous interrogations we do?

As far as I know it's legal to put them on TV at the moment. The Geneva Conventions say not to do that when you're at war with them. But the war between iran and britain officially hasn't started yet. So, legal.

It sounds like you want us to get into a third war before we finish either of the first two. On borrowed money. Are you perhaps israeli, Bub?

[Michael S Harris]

We are toast.
Happy Easter one and all.
"Suicide is Easy" was the theme song of MASH.
Perhaps it should replace the American National Anthem

good night

[jtg]

your lack of confidence in the US military is amazing.

Iran has a conventional military, something the US is an expert at destroying.

[Don Bacon]

Lane, appreciate your comments. As a former ground-pounder I know nothing about navies. But I was impressed with Hezbollah's crippling of the Hanit in the Med, weren't you? A bunch of partisans successfully firing a cruise missile at a ship at sea would concern me if I were a squid on a huge floating airport in the Gulf. I suspect that the Iranians are concerned with US targeting and if they're smart have taken some evasive action. We'll see. The proof is in the pudding.

Losing all your gasoline imports and perhaps your limited refinery capacity as well is probably the greatest threat to the survival of the regime. Actually it would strengthen "the regime". When a country, any country, is attacked by foreigners (in this case 'the great satan') then the citizens under attack become a cohesive force against the attackers. The dissidents in every country say this--don't attack our country, it'll just make things worse. Iran is a modern, large and populous country, and crippling their economy and transportation is really going to piss them off, with terrible consequences for us from Iran and from all the 120 smaller countries in the world that support them--the Non-aligned Movement (NAM).

In other words military actions, as we're finding out to our sorrow in Iraq and Afghanistan, always carry a social and nationalistic component which the US seems oblivious to in its endeavor to show we have balls, as bub would say.

[Lane Brody]

Hi Don,
It was surprising that Iran gave them a modern anti-ship missile, surprising that the IDF was so unaware of any missle threat that it's warning and defenses were apparently turned off, suprising that the the IDF allowed naval search radars to be operating which further underlines them not being aware of that kind of threat, and surprising the boat was not sunk.

This aside it's not applicable for a US carrier battlegroup. The USN will actively go after the missle batteries and radars- any operating radar will quickly eat a HARM so target data will be limited. A battlegroup has layers of active and passive defenses including multiple Aegis equipped ships. A missile battery is not going to take out a carrier. Soviet and current Chinese doctrine was/is to saturate a groups defenses by air, surface, and sub launched stand off weapons. Iran has little to no ability to attempt this, even if they had the ability to practice this kind of coordination. If the missile could not sink a 1,000 ton corvette it's questionable how much, if any, impact it would have on a 90,000 carrier.

I disagree Iran's regime, which most Iranians do not support, would be strengthened by a shortage of gasoline within Iran. Gasoline is already an important issue there. In any case that would be a long term result that we could impose in response to Iranian actions. If Iran attempted to close the Gulf and did not we would not have to respond.

I do not disagree that any military strike on Iran will be problematic especially in terms of strengthening the regime and turning many pro US Iranian's against us. Furthermore, I do not disagree that the vast majority of the world will be against such strikes.

The problem however is that Iran must be isolated and made to feel very serious diplomatic, economic, and political pressure in order to get any of the results we desire and that neither Russia or China support such measures. Without the ultimate threat of military action it's impossible to see Iran backing down given Russia and China's support.

What we could achieve with an air campaign of say 4-7 days is open to debate. If it pushed back the nuclear program 10 years it might be worth it and course it might not nor might it be 10 years.

For those saying any nation has a right to nuclear weapons that is not so if one signs the NNPT. One specifically gives up such a right. Neither India nor Israel ever signed, iirc. In any case the moral relativism in saying if the US has nukes then it's ok for Iran is irrational and suicidal. It's also simply not the way the UN Security Council views the matter. They might not be willing to do enough to really change Iran's path but they do pass resolutions pointing out the legal basis of objecting to Iran's policies. Iran has no such right to nuclear weapons and given the regime's policies the world would be criminally negligent in granting them such a right.

To assume the regime in Iran is a rational actor is extremely dangerous. Of course Pakistan going fundamentalist will get Iran off the front page in a hurry. If that indeed is a big danger since Pakistan has nukes today then certainly Iran with the same regime with nukes in 5 to 10 years is also a large danger.

To be clear exactly what is a bigger danger to the West than a fundamentalist regime with nuclear weapons- perhaps one that is also a leading sponsor of global terror? The they are not really as crazy as they say they are argument has gotten tens of millions of people killed in recent history. Sometimes people do mean what they say.

[Trilogy Crew]

Weird. I cant believe this. I dont think the gov't can afford to take on Iran right now. You sure this is what they want?

[Brad Arnold]

Frankly, I am surprised the overall faith in the US military's ability to stifle any adverse military retaliation by Iran. If I commanded Iranian forces, I would immediately target every oil facility in the Persian Gulf. Furthermore, I would sponsor bio/chemical attacks on the US homeland. Finally, I would attack every ship in the Persian Gulf, regardless of how it is flagged. That is what escalation means: upping the bet. The US Achilles heel is financial, and massive oil facility destruction in the Persian Gulf should do the trick-no money, no army.

[Gabriel]

What's funny is we'debating what's basically an Enquirer article.
Right up there with Aliens ate my pickup truck.

[J Thomas]

Lane, has it been confirmed where the lebanese got an anti-ship missile? Or are you assuming iran gave it to them?

If an iranian missile hits a US aircraft carrier, we lose whether it does any significant damage or not. It doesn't mean we lose in iran. It means our expensive navy depreciates a whole lot all of a sudden.

We have a whole lot of credibility tied up in this idea that our carriers are invulnerable. We have special weapons systems that are supposed to protect our carriers -- that have never been used in combat. If we fight iran and one missile gets through -- one missile that does trivial damage -- every potential US enemy will be emboldened. Essentially every nation that might someday face US carriers, every nation except britain and australia, will start putting money into antiship missiles and such. All of a sudden they will all believe that our carriers are vulnerable. That's a giant risk to take for the chance to delay iranian nukes a few years, particularly when nonproliferation is dead.

I do not disagree that any military strike on Iran will be problematic especially in terms of strengthening the regime and turning many pro US Iranian's against us. Furthermore, I do not disagree that the vast majority of the world will be against such strikes.

I tend to doubt there are all that many pro-US iranians left at this point, so that isn't much of an issue. The rest of the world, though, you want to write them off?

The problem however is that Iran must be isolated and made to feel very serious diplomatic, economic, and political pressure in order to get any of the results we desire and that neither Russia or China support such measures. Without the ultimate threat of military action it's impossible to see Iran backing down given Russia and China's support.

Umm. You feel like we can't isolate iran properly because they have russian and chinese support. So you want to use unilateral military strikes to isolate iran from their russian and chinese support? Knowing that it's heading toward isolating the USA from the world community? Do you see anything wrong with this logic?

For those saying any nation has a right to nuclear weapons that is not so if one signs the NNPT. One specifically gives up such a right.

Well, no. What you get from signing is assistance at civilian nuclear programs. And what you get by withdrawing on 3 months notice is that assistance is shut off. NATO claims that no notice at all is required, a signee can quit the treaty instantly. Also note that the USA has refused to honor our obligations under the treaty. The main thing that's worked for NNPT is that hardly any of the signees have wanted nukes. But many of them are reconsidering given our behavior.

Iran has not withdrawn from the treaty because they claim they aren't making nukes and they have no plan to do so. There's a Catch-22 here, they claim they can't show all their sites to inspectors because if we find out where all their civilian nuclear power sites are we'll bomb them. And that's a reasonable fear on their part whether they're making nukes or not.

To assume the regime in Iran is a rational actor is extremely dangerous.

That's your assumption. We thought the soviets weren't rational actors, and we thought the maoists weren't rational actors. For no reason whatsoever we thought the Masada-complex israelis were rational actors, and we lucked out -- so far they have been. We don't have a good track record about assessing our chosen enemies.

Consider how dangerous it is for us to stage a unilateral attack with essentially the whole world against us. This isn't like the USSR moving into czechoslovakia. This is big-time. And if it doesn't come off like a training exercise when it's us against iran, our ability to intimidate russia and china will be pretty badly damaged.

To be clear exactly what is a bigger danger to the West than a fundamentalist regime with nuclear weapons

A giant depreciation of the dollar.
A worldwide embargo against the USA.
An ultimatum by all nuclear powers combined except israel and USA -- disarm or else.

Oh, but you're saying danger to the West. I was thinking about dangers to the USA. None of those are particularly dangerous to the West. The biggest danger to the West is low birth rate.

[DustBGD]

Don`t you suppose how dangerous would be that attack?

[TommyG]

TADA... looks like it was a Hoax... or an attempt to detect a spy working for Russia?

Either way, Iran still exists and steams ahead in its strive for peace and prosperity.

[Randy PHK]

Can I at least ask that the world, which means basically everyone, including my U.S. government, to allow one day of global cease-fire, as just a statement to prove that all violence in all situations is completely the fault of us dumb human beings? Russia can't hold it with Georgia, Palestine can't hold it with Isreal, we never thought of it with the insurgents in Iraq, well, the militias we did, and that worked out wonderfully didn't it? So, lets try a cease-fire and see if there is a small, little possibility that it can be done. If so, why can't we do it more often?

[Entropiauniverse ped]

Since I entered into this game, I learnt skills to earn Entropia Universe Gold. My friends sometimes give me some Entropia Universe Money. Buy Entropia Universe Gold is a good way. I like to search on Internet to find where to buy cheap Entropiauniverse ped.

[Omega replica watches]

we don't think it is reasonable to spend hundreds thousands dollars to buy a decorating watch. you can use those money to invest in other industry which will return you good profit.
here you just need to spend 100-200 dollars to buy a replica rolex watches.
Omega replica watches are made by the rating 1:1 according to the original watches, and you can't distinguish the original and the fake watches when you look at the surface of the watches.

[cheap Perfect World Gold]

I am so happy to get some Perfect World Gold and the Perfect World Silver is given by my close friend who tells me that the Perfect World money is the basis to enter into the game.

[eve isk]

I hope i can get eve online isk in low price.
i buy isk for you.

[wonderland online Gold]

Once I played wonderland, I did not know how to get strong, someone told me that you must have wonderland Gold. He gave me some wonderland online Gold.

[Atlantica online money]

You can also save your Atlantica online money in the game. But Atlantica online Gold, MM were able to enjoy apart from other turn-based online games bring the fun; there are a lot of experience unprecedented MM awaits you to explore.

[shaiya online gold]

or you can not go on this game without shaiya online gold. If you buy shaiya gold, you can continue this game.

[Fake Marc Jacobs Handbags]

Since I entered into this game,

[Gucci replica Bangle]

we don't think it is reasonable to spend hundreds thousands dollars to buy a decorating watch. you can use those money to invest in other industry which will return you good profit.

[luxury watches]

I am so with you,rolex watch
luxury watch

[luxury watches]

I am so with you,rolex watch
luxury watch

[molded rubber products]

Plastic parts made by injection molding
printing in China
construction scaffolding

[cheap coach handbags]

Thank you for your sharing! I like i very much!

[mariahair]

good article, the solution of health and health and hairstyle

health and hairstyle

[johndollar]

i like this site there are money info, for get more info for
get dollar and forex signals visit here

get dollar and forex signals

[rado watches]

If you have PANERAI Watches , I still have my idea to achieve.

[bvlgari watches]

I am so with you FRANCK MULLER Watch

[some watches]

Good recommended website.

[gucci watches]

That's awesome! I can't wait to get into it.

[dofus kama]

at present I am in urgent need for dofus kama.

[achat kamas]

Is there anyone who have ever bought achat kamas before?

[9 Dragons Gold]

Do you know9 Dragons Gold?if you play the online game,you will know9Dragons Goldis the game gold. if you wantBuy 9Dragons Gold,you can come here and spend a little money to boughtCheap 9 Dragons Gold.Quickly come here.

[MapleStory mesos]

Do you know Maple Story mesos?if you play the online game,you will know MapleStory mesosis the game gold.in the game,if you had more mesos

[ghd]

GHD IV mini styler has a safety feature that gives you peace of mind, by turning itself off if it is left unattended for 30 minutes. The unique digital technology of GHD hair straightener means that the temperature is automatically controlled even quicker for even better styling.

Creating tight curls, flicks and waves as well as the perfect straight. The ideal styling tool for urban angels with short hair, men's hair and fringes.

price includes: ghd IV salon styler,ghd purple roll bag.

product features:
Auto sleep mode(A built in safety feature that gives you peace of mind by turning off if the ghd IV styler is left unallended for 30 minutes.)
Universal voltage(So that you can use your styler in any country without an adaptor.)
Advanced ceramic heaters(The ultimate heating technology for the ultimate shine and style creation.)
All our products are cheap,if you want to find cheap ghd,come here and that is right.

If you want to find GHD hair products,you can write GHD straightener,GHD hair straighteners,GHD straightners,GHD hair,straighteners GHD in google browse.

[chanel handbags]

Chanel Handbags are woman’s dream come true.

Chanel, a fashion name that has become synonymous with femininity since 100 years, is on the must-have list of every fashion-conscious woman.? And we bring these must-have Chanel Handbags at never before discounts, just for you.

It is only when you come across an Chanel New Arrivals, do you realize the power of her words.? Chanel handbags are crafted not just to be trendy, but trend-setting.? Hardly has lived a celebrity who has not been seen carrying a Chanel handbag under her arm; such has the influence of Chanel handbags as a fashion statement.

Chanel handbags have been so popular in the elite classes of the society, that their pricing is usually prohibitive for everyone else.? Discount Chanel handbags are really difficult to come across, but today should be your lucky day.? We bring you a superb unbeatable range of Chanel Flap bags, all at fantastic discounts.? With us, you have an incredible chance to buy your favorite Chanel handbags at rock bottom prices!

Chanel Handbags have always been at the forefront of luxury and style.? The Chanel classic quilted leather handbags and its reinventions have ruled fashion since forever.? Chanel handbags have remained extremely popular as they continue to merge evolving modern trends with the class and simplicity of its original avatar.

An Chanel 2008 Collection and Chanel 2009 Collection single handedly enhances the look you are carrying.? The reason you would buy a Chanel handbag is own a bag that mingles with your charm and intensifies it with its inherent simplicity.? If you have owned an authentic Chanel handbag before, you know what we are talking about.? If you are one of the unlucky people who haven’t yet gotten a chance to own an Chanel Cambon, now is your chance to shop for an authentic Chanel handbag and discover its ability to transform your look completely.

Buy Chanel handbags with us, and get fabulous discounts which you will never get at your favorite store.? We offer cheap authentic Chanel handbags and they are all up for grabs!

[Louis Vuitton]

Mysterious black bezel and case, case materials for cement and steel production hasLouis Vuitton been the industry standard TEXIN belt do? 985U black rubber information, and the price and spraying mosaics, showing a high hardnessLouis Vuitton steel lesson material, with a special texture satin. Rubber surface show the appearance of fine lines beautifully, from the electro-corrosion to form the inner mold carved.

[jordan shoes]

Fen an off-hand phrase furnishings.

[monday]

MTS to AVI Converter is the best and fast conversion tool to convert.MTS to AVI MTS files is the video format of HD DV which is widely used all over the world.AVI files is the best and the most widly used video format.So convert mts to avi is more and more important for DV lover.

[cheap lv handbags]

thanks you

[Car DVD Players]

might be the spark that ignites a conflict between the U.S./U.K. and Iran.This is a really excellent read for me. Thanks for posting this useful article.

[Laptop AC Adapter]

The problem however is that Iran must be isolated and made to feel very serious diplomatic, economic,dell pa-10 and political pressure in order to get any of the results we desire and that neither Russia or China support such measures.02k6543 Without the ultimate threat of military action it's impossible to see Iran backing down given Russia and China's support.

[monday]

This super video converter for mac is developed by Emicsoft Studio, it is currently the best video converter running under Mac os x, comparied by isqunite, Visualhub and other Free video converter for Mac, This video converter for Mac is more stable in converting video files and support more video formats.
thank you for sharing the post!it is good !
Convert VOB to AVI MAC
Convert FLV to AVI MAC
Convert MOV to AVI MAC
Convert WMV to AVI MAC
Convert MP4 to AVI MAC
Convert 3GP to AVI MAC
Convert MPEG to AVI MAC
Convert M4V to AVI MAC

[gucci sneakers]

Produced pioneering spirit is very difficult.

[gucci handbags]

You are the few people who wrote something about that, I like it.

[gucci bag]

Your post is great, I have some common ideas with you.

[gucci purses]

Oh man, thank you for writing this.

[fendi bags]

I hope you don't mind me linking you so that this information spreads more.

[fendi handbags]

it's good to know someone has an idea about what's going on.

[coach outlets]

Well done!

[coach wallet]

Is it real or not?

[baidu]

to be welcome baidu342

[save fuel]

Lane, appreciate your comments. As a former ground-pounder I know nothing about navies. But I was impressed with Hezbollah's crippling of the Hanit in the Med, weren't you? A bunch of partisans successfully firing a cruise missile at a ship at sea would concern me if I were a squid on a huge floating airport in the Gulf. I suspect that the Iranians are concerned with US targeting and if they're smart have taken some evasive action. We'll see. The proof is in the pudding. reverse phone detective jump higher Electronic Cigarette earth4energy grow taller