To: matt1234
It looks a bit rusty, but I wonder why they didn’t board, tow, and salvage it?
At the least, it’s quite a bit of scrap metal.
3 posted on
04/05/2012 6:38:21 PM PDT by
Cicero
(Marcus Tullius)
To: Cicero
>It looks a bit rusty, but I wonder why they didn’t board, tow, and salvage it?
Because salvage makes sense.
4 posted on
04/05/2012 6:40:27 PM PDT by
OneWingedShark
(Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
To: Cicero
Cost of salvage towing (manpower, fuel, etc) probably far exceeds scrap value.
5 posted on
04/05/2012 6:42:51 PM PDT by
mnehring
To: Cicero
Article says a Canadian ship attempted salvage but was unsuccessful.
7 posted on
04/05/2012 6:47:31 PM PDT by
matt1234
(Bring back the HUAC.)
To: Cicero
If explosives are AN option then explosives are THE answer.
20 posted on
04/05/2012 7:20:40 PM PDT by
Eaker
(Remember, the enemy tends to wise up at the least convenient moments.)
To: Cicero
Because expending munitions is more fun than salvaging.
To: Cicero
If you read the rest of the article, a Canadian salvage company claimed it, boarded it, and then told the Coast Guard it was in too bad a shape to tow to port.
Sinking it deep is the only option.
Towing is not an easy operation. It's a way to lose two ships instead of just one.
28 posted on
04/05/2012 7:45:33 PM PDT by
Ditto
(Nov 2, 2010 -- Partial cleaning accomplished. More trash to remove in 2012)
To: Cicero
That was my first thought too, then I thought it probably has a hold full of rotted fish.
50 posted on
04/06/2012 4:16:20 AM PDT by
exit82
(Democrats are the enemies of freedom. Be Andrew Breitbart.)
To: Cicero
“It looks a bit rusty, but I wonder why they didn’t board, tow, and salvage it?”
They actually stopped a Canadian fishing ship from salvaging it.
I’m guessing because it is radioactive.
56 posted on
04/06/2012 2:16:47 PM PDT by
MeganC
(No way in Hell am I voting for Mitt Romney. Not now, not ever. Deal with it.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson