Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on July 15, 2013
Pentagon denies US is about to ‘invade’ Egypt
The Pentagon and the US Embassy in Cairo have denied reports in the Egyptian media that an American task force in the Red Sea is preparing to “invade Egypt.”
Pentagon Press Secretary George Little took to Twitter on Saturday to say that such reports are “absolutely wrong,” ABC NEWS reported.
Some Egyptian press reports suggest US Navy ships are near Arabian Peninsula/Suez Canal to invade Egypt. Those reports are absolutely wrong.
— George Little (@PentagonPresSec) July 13, 2013
The US Embassy in Cairo issued a statement denying the reports.
“We deny false claims in Egyptian press that U.S. naval ships are in the vicinity of the Arabian Peninsula and the Suez Canal to militarily invade Egypt. The United States has forces regularly deployed in the vicinity of the Arabian Peninsula, and U.S. vessels regularly pass through the Suez Canal en route to the Indian Ocean or the Mediterranean Sea.”
Two US Navy vessels moved to Egypt’s Red Sea coast last week. Navy and Marine Corp officials, however, said there were no new orders to prepare for a possible conflict in Egypt.
The USS San Antonio, an amphibious transport dock, and the USS Kearsarge, an amphibious assault ship, had moved further north in the Red Sea several days before the two ships were deployed, according to Marine Corps Commandant General James Amos.
The presence of amphibious ships near the shore facilitates the movement of helicopters and other equipment.
The third ship in the group, the USS Carter Hall, has remained off the coast of Bahrain in the Gulf, Navy officials said.
5 Comments on "Pentagon denies US is about to ‘invade’ Egypt"
Arthur on Mon, 15th Jul 2013 11:09 am
Why on earth would the US even consider invading an oilfree desert like Egypt with 80 million potential snipers. It would be very difficult to plan the next ‘Green Zone’ in Egypt other than in the utmost south-western tip of the Egyptian desert, far away from any population center. I do not foresee any invasion of US ground troops anywhere any time soon. All fighting will be done by proxies, which is much cheaper and more effective. A battle hardened sniper from the muslim Caucasus will do the job for 100$ a day, much less than a lad from Kansas will do and less controversial. Another example of the US exporting jobs no American will want to do. And the US can afford this behaviour as long as the US dollar remains reserve currency. An army of 100,000 mercenaries will cost the US 3.65 billion per year, or 37 billion per 10 years, which is peanuts compared with the 3-5 trillion the 10 year Iraq safari has cost the US.
paulo1 on Mon, 15th Jul 2013 1:05 pm
The Suez zone might have to be ‘protected’ if things wing out sideways. I could see that happening.
Paulo
Arthur on Mon, 15th Jul 2013 1:20 pm
That would be one of the very few occasions where the ownership of a navy would actually make sense (and would be sufficient, making invasions superfluous). But the canal is in no way threatened as it is one of the very few sources of income Egypt has, regardless of who is ‘on top’ in Egypt.
Plantagenet on Mon, 15th Jul 2013 4:17 pm
Even Obama isn’t stupid enough to invade Egypt.
DC on Mon, 15th Jul 2013 5:53 pm
I agree, the US does not need to ‘invade’, Egypt. The Egyptian army has already done that for the US lol! The army there is a fully under the command and control of the pentagon. Who does presstv think pays the generals salaries over there haha! The US will only land if they feel its proxies will lose control of the situation, which is doubtful since the US has trained and equipped the army. Not in how to defend the country, but on how to suppress and hunt down pro-democracy groups.