Click the Flames
Your Conservative Source of News and Information
Abolish FReepathons
Donate Monthly
Sponsors will contribute $10 for each New Monthly Donor
Posted on 01/03/2012 4:15:20 AM PST by edpc
Yassur, sho’ don’t wan’ ta cause no trouble round here Mr. Chineeman, eye’s be goin’ now. “feets do yo’ stuff.’’
Yeah, OK.
Jeez.
I remember a state-run, lame-stream media report broadcast many years ago in which Momar Khaddaffy was shown riding in what looked like a PT Boat out to sea. The state-run media reported that Khaddaffy was “chasing away the U.S. Fleet”.
AMEN! I too worked with some of those guys, and even to this day they still tell me there is a huge liking for the U.S. that never gets past their leaders. Anyone who thinks Iranians en masse are like their leaders is off base.
The "carriers" remark by their leaders reminds me of some dogs in our area. We walk by them on a daily basis and they never bark - until we are past them. Then they sound like the Hound of the Baskervilles.
They lost about a million people in their war with Iraq. I think most Iranians have absolutely no taste for war with anyone, least of all, the U.S. They saw how the U.S. military buzz-sawed through the Iraqi Army they had fought to a standstill after ten years. My bet is that most Persian mothers want to see their children grow up in freedom and peace, things that do not appear to be on offer in their corner of the world.
I seriously fear that Obama could actually lose a military confrontation with Iraq. In 1940, France had a larger and better equipped army than Germany, and unlike Germany, had a world class navy, was defending a single front, had powerful allies on the ground, including the British Army and RAF, the tacit support of her neighbors and other neutrals. The Maginot Line *successfully* narrowed the front that needed to be defended, forcing the invaders to go through well armed neutrals, Belgium and Holland.
How could they lose?
They had appallingly bad leadership.
If Ronald Reagan was President, or even George Bush, either of them, that carrier would be transiting the straits inbound to the Persian Gulf as we type.
With F/A-18s armed for ground and surface attack, as well as air defense, spotted on deck. And a big sign on the Island saying “Up Yours”.
That's nothing. My mother-in-law's 12th birthday was 7 Dec 1941.
She still hasn't forgiven the Japanese.
Pretty sure there is at least one more already there. The region is sucking up the majority of the available CV's. We only have 11. Right now 3 are deployed, 4 counting the Washington, which is home-ported in Japan, 1, the Reagan is "surge ready". The Enterprise is "post-deployed", and 5 are in various "down" states for maintenance. One of those, "Ike", might be good to go on fairly short notice. Might.
In FY13, (which starts in October) the Enterprise will be retired and it will be two years before the Ford is commissioned, but she won't be ready for a few years after that, so we'll be down to 10 for a number of years.
Enterprise is the second oldest ship in the fleet, only the USS Constitution is older, much much older.
It's also possible that the Lincoln won't be refueled in FY14 as planned. (presumably to account for some of that Trillion dollar cumulative cut to defense spending.) We could end up with only 9 carriers for several years.
He'll probably apologize, but I doubt he'll use MOABS. But we have few MOABS to send, they were never put into regular production. We have around 15. Course that's 15 targets that we could, but won't, blow all to hell and back. I wonder if they could put on in that well near OOM, to see what the 12 Imam thinks of that. although perhaps a MOP(Massive Ordnance Penetrator) would be a better choice for that target.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.