OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-123
Posts: 9,152
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: January 07, 2008, 11:02:57 PM » |
|
I am old enough to remember the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964. The propaganda machines overbuilt that farce. Let's be careful.
OswaldTheOsprey
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|
jpn of Seattle
|
|
« Reply #16 on: January 08, 2008, 05:16:35 PM » |
|
I am old enough to remember the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964. The propaganda machines overbuilt that farce. Let's be careful.
OswaldTheOsprey
Can't argue with that. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
|
jpn of Seattle
|
|
« Reply #17 on: January 08, 2008, 05:18:15 PM » |
|
I imagine the Chinese sub was under orders to display its technological prowess, and demonstrate that the Chinese Navy has made great strides in its warfighting capability.
This would enhance China's international prestige and add to any hesitation we would have interposing ourselves between them and Taiwan.
It's easy to say that the ability of the sub was a SNAFU on the U.S. Navy's part, but it's a great deal more complicated than that. Sweeping the seas for submarines in front and around a task force is extremely labor-intensive and not something that the Navy does constantly, and certainly not when it's just transitting from point to point. Even with full-out anti-submarine operations under way, it's a chancy thing to pick up an advanced submarine. In fact, the best anti-submarine asset a task force has, is another submarine. With the demise of the Cold War, it's possible that we don't routinely have one of our submarines assigned to every task force, 24/7.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 08, 2008, 05:20:16 PM by jpn of Seattle »
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +212/-207
Posts: 4,064
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #18 on: January 08, 2008, 11:49:56 PM » |
|
It's easy to say that the ability of the sub was a SNAFU on the U.S. Navy's part, but it's a great deal more complicated than that. Sweeping the seas for submarines in front and around a task force is extremely labor-intensive and not something that the Navy does constantly, and certainly not when it's just transitting from point to point. Even with full-out anti-submarine operations under way, it's a chancy thing to pick up an advanced submarine. In fact, the best anti-submarine asset a task force has, is another submarine. With the demise of the Cold War, it's possible that we don't routinely have one of our submarines assigned to every task force, 24/7.
So I shouldn't worry about the fact that a Chinese submarine surfaced in the middle of a NAVY excercise? It's not like it popped up far away or anything... but in the middle of the formation. C'mon, I know you're ex-NAVY and I have a special appreciation for the NAVY myself (I am training to be a mearchent marine) but you have to criticize them for this. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
jpn of Seattle
|
|
« Reply #19 on: January 09, 2008, 10:04:41 AM » |
|
If you insist. It would have been worse if the Navy had been conducting ASW excercises. It's not clear where the submarine surfaced. "Within torpedo range" can be miles away, considering the range of modern torpedos.
It's interesting that the class of submarine is conventional power, not nuclear. A modern, conventionally powered sub running on batteries can actually be quieter and more difficult to detect than nuclear submarines (how noisy is a flashlight?)
It's possible that the sub was sitting there, waiting for the task force to sail into the area, then surfaced. In time of war aggressive ASW operations would first clear the path of the task force, but not in peace time. It's really hard knowing what really happened by reading media reports. I'd love to hear the inside scoop.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 09, 2008, 10:09:06 AM by jpn of Seattle »
|
Logged
|
What you got is everything-and I mean everything—run by the political arm. It’s the reign of the Mayberry Machiavellis. --John DiIulio, former White House official
|
|
|
|
Baldar
|
|
« Reply #20 on: January 09, 2008, 11:44:34 AM » |
|
I have to tell you, he is definately not ex navy. He fell apart a months back on the most innocuou military questions put to him. He may claim it, but he certainly hasn't shown he has had the experience, certainly not in this forum.
It is standard for ASW execises to be carried out during maneuvers. And it is something that should be criticized.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #21 on: January 09, 2008, 01:13:30 PM » |
|
We need to make it abundantly clear to our Iranian friends that should we be approached again out in open waters, we will send these mariners on to allah to become fish food and investigate later. We played games just like this with the Cole and we see where that got us.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Toaster
Hero Member
Karma: +53/-129
Posts: 741
Burnin' for you
|
|
« Reply #22 on: January 10, 2008, 03:27:37 AM » |
|
After watchign the video, the idea that this is way hyped up surely comes to mind. Why are the boats described as gunboats?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
DISCUSSION, n.
A method of confirming others in their errors.
The Devil\\'s Dictionary
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #23 on: January 10, 2008, 05:11:43 AM » |
|
After watchign the video, the idea that this is way hyped up surely comes to mind. Why are the boats described as gunboats? The Cole comes to mind. Like I said, next time, they are target practice. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Toaster
Hero Member
Karma: +53/-129
Posts: 741
Burnin' for you
|
|
« Reply #24 on: January 10, 2008, 05:38:54 AM » |
|
After watchign the video, the idea that this is way hyped up surely comes to mind. Why are the boats described as gunboats? The Cole comes to mind. Like I said, next time, they are target practice. Why are they being called gunboats? The Cole does come to mind, which makes you wonder why they were not blown out of the water. They were warned, they closed BOOM!We have rules of engagement for this sort of thing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
DISCUSSION, n.
A method of confirming others in their errors.
The Devil\\'s Dictionary
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #25 on: January 10, 2008, 05:48:42 AM » |
|
Why are they being called gunboats? I've not heard the boats called that, personally, so I don't know for sure. The general I heard on the radio yesterday said that he would reprimand the captains for not firing on the little johnny boats. I expect the Iranians have been warned. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
OswaldTheOsprey
High Society
Hero Member
Karma: +100/-123
Posts: 9,152
|
|
« Reply #26 on: January 10, 2008, 08:53:29 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Urbi et Orbi
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baldar
|
|
« Reply #28 on: January 10, 2008, 09:25:06 AM » |
|
After watchign the video, the idea that this is way hyped up surely comes to mind. Why are the boats described as gunboats? The Cole comes to mind. Like I said, next time, they are target practice. Why are they being called gunboats? The Cole does come to mind, which makes you wonder why they were not blown out of the water. They were warned, they closed BOOM!We have rules of engagement for this sort of thing. That last statement "We have rules of engagement for this sort of thing." Speaks of the trite stupidity so many young people have who have never sacrificed and whose world view is limited to, well, what they can see from their bedroom window after a harsh night of Halo3 on an Xbox. There is the assumption, that soldiers and leaders act as automatic machines and simply "respond" when a certain invisible line has been crossed. As if our soldiers were walking land mines. Of course one can understand such ignorance, after all if you have never had any real exposure to the military or people in military leadership, you might assume everyone is a Rambo with target acquisition as their first and only duty. In fact it is much different from that. Consider that the military leadership in the Straits of Hormuz know for a fact that Iran will be provocative and attempt to create provocation, this is partly due to the present mini power struggle going on between mullahs and civilian government, the lack of a possible immediate invasion by the US is causing further divisions within Iranian leadership. The gunboats by the way, carry both explosives, launchers and 50 caliber cannons. These self same gunboats also dropped "boxes" in the water, whether these boxes carried small rapid torpedos, or plastic with mines attached, or wether hey carried mines that submerged in the water and were separated from the box after being sumberged are all considerations that military leaders look at when their crew and ship are threatened. People, their people, could die based on the decision.... Of course the ignorant will say "we have rules of engagement for that sort of thing". As if the rules of engagement account for all possible actions or reactions by other groups. Now these weren't Iranian military ships, they belonged to an independent revolutionary guard (arm of the mullahs) which can claim they were civilians if attacked. But of course we have "rules of engagement for that sort of thing"....  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
