Post by concrete on Jan 24, 2012 3:20:27 GMT 10
Right.
I've been reading a bit about the USS Enterprise. Seems it's been in the news a bit lately.
www.presstv.ir/detail/222475.html
www.wavy.com/dpp/military/panetta-addresses-enterprise-sailors
www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/22/us-huntington-ingalls-carriers-idUSTRE80L11W20120122
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_%28CVN-65%29
Now while i get my thoughts together again.
Something to ponder. Panetta can fuck off.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3362443.stm
To my knowledge these diplomatic ties were never restored. So If the US wants diplomacy.
Then start diplomacy.
Ok...
Break over.
Now, think about this.
articles.cnn.com/2012-01-19/middleeast/world_meast_arabian-sea-us-carrier_1_aircraft-carrier-uss-carl-vinson-uss-john-stennis?_s=PM:MIDDLEEAST
If it's standard practice. Why send a third carrier? A carrier that is due to be decommissioned? A carrier that the DoD has know idea what it would cost to decommision?
It's a win-win situation, sort of a check. Get rid of a ship and get public support for yet another war. The costs of decommisioning is gone straight away, and budgets for production are probably even increased!
Now. Imagine if a dolphin class sub, on batteries, managed to sink an american aircraft carrier (that was due for decommission anyway) in the persian gulf? The third ship.
Wouldn't be nice to experience a new 'cuban crisis'?
I've been reading a bit about the USS Enterprise. Seems it's been in the news a bit lately.
On board of the oldest US aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise, Panetta told the crowd of 1,700 sailors that the 50-year-old ship is heading to the Persian Gulf region in a direct message to Tehran.
“The reason we maintain a presence in the Middle East ... We want them to know that we are fully prepared to deal with any contingency and it's better for them to try to deal with us through diplomacy," Panetta said.
“The reason we maintain a presence in the Middle East ... We want them to know that we are fully prepared to deal with any contingency and it's better for them to try to deal with us through diplomacy," Panetta said.
www.presstv.ir/detail/222475.html
The Enterprise Carrier Strike Group is scheduled to head to the Middle East in March.
www.wavy.com/dpp/military/panetta-addresses-enterprise-sailors
...the Enterprise goes offline in November...
www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/22/us-huntington-ingalls-carriers-idUSTRE80L11W20120122
Enterprise will be the first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier to be decommissioned by the United States Navy.[39] In August 2009, an Internet-based petition began circulating to convert Enterprise into a museum ship after she is decommissioned.[40] The costs of doing so regarding her nuclear reactors has yet to be calculated by the United States Department of Defense. A petition has also been set up for the next carrier (CVN-80) to be named as the ninth USS Enterprise.[41]
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_%28CVN-65%29
Now while i get my thoughts together again.
Something to ponder. Panetta can fuck off.
1979 4 November - Iranian students seize 63 hostages at US embassy in Tehran, prompting drawn-out crisis leading to severing of diplomatic ties and sweeping US sanctions against Iran. Their initial demand is that the Shah return from the US to Iran to face trial. Later Iran also demands the US undertake not to interfere in its affairs.
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3362443.stm
To my knowledge these diplomatic ties were never restored. So If the US wants diplomacy.
Then start diplomacy.
Ok...
Break over.
Now, think about this.
The aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln arrived in the Arabian Sea on Thursday, Navy officials said, a likely prelude to testing Iran's recent warning against sending a U.S. carrier through the Strait of Hormuz.
The Lincoln joins the USS Carl Vinson, already in the region, returning the U.S. Navy its standard two-carrier presence there. The carrier USS John Stennis left in the past few days and is now traveling back through the western Pacific.
The Lincoln joins the USS Carl Vinson, already in the region, returning the U.S. Navy its standard two-carrier presence there. The carrier USS John Stennis left in the past few days and is now traveling back through the western Pacific.
articles.cnn.com/2012-01-19/middleeast/world_meast_arabian-sea-us-carrier_1_aircraft-carrier-uss-carl-vinson-uss-john-stennis?_s=PM:MIDDLEEAST
If it's standard practice. Why send a third carrier? A carrier that is due to be decommissioned? A carrier that the DoD has know idea what it would cost to decommision?
It's a win-win situation, sort of a check. Get rid of a ship and get public support for yet another war. The costs of decommisioning is gone straight away, and budgets for production are probably even increased!
Now. Imagine if a dolphin class sub, on batteries, managed to sink an american aircraft carrier (that was due for decommission anyway) in the persian gulf? The third ship.
Wouldn't be nice to experience a new 'cuban crisis'?