The Official "Stop WWIII" hype train

[Gameface]

Look, folks, Trump has made a big show since his campaign over not telling foes what he's gonna do or not do. If he had a plan, he would misdirect attention somehow.

yah, "steaming" big armadas around the Pacific and Indian oceans means look at the Mediterranean..... or maybe even the Caribbean....

gotta get some food delivered to the starving masses in Venezuela somehow.....

Yeah, was trump at the helm of the "armada?"

My guess is that Trump blabbed about the strike group heading to Korea and the Navy, following Navy protocol, decided to take the long way 'round because they don't like to give a point A to B route to the world regarding ship's movement. That's the Navy being the Navy, I'm sure they didn't ask Trump to navigate their route for them.

And Trump sounds like he's stuck in the 1920s talking about an Armada. There is the Carrier, two AEGIS destroyers and a guided missile cruiser, as well as an unnamed and unmentioned submarine. Not really what I would call an armada, mostly because it isn't one and it's called a "carrier strike group."

 

[Stoked]

contrary to popular beleive america does not have the patent on war!

there have been 100ths of war taht did not include the USA.

dont be such a narcissist, thinking your country has only waged war. or has been involved one way or another in every single war in my lifetime

Never indicated otherwise. Failed attack

Not all ME wars were American wars. Iran/Iraq? That were you lived in a war zone? Or maybe the 7 day war in Israel?

Did you live in an African war zone? Sudan maybe? Syria? Maybe Rawanda in the earl 90s or even the Somali civil war

What a crock

You might have some unique experiences but you also are full of it.

 

[Stoked]

Yeah, was trump at the helm of the "armada?"

My guess is that Trump blabbed about the strike group heading to Korea and the Navy, following Navy protocol, decided to take the long way 'round because they don't like to give a point A to B route to the world regarding ship's movement. That's the Navy being the Navy, I'm sure they didn't ask Trump to navigate their route for them.

And Trump sounds like he's stuck in the 1920s talking about an Armada. There is the Carrier, two AEGIS destroyers and a guided missile cruiser, as well as an unnamed and unmentioned submarine. Not really what I would call an armada, mostly because it isn't one and it's called a "carrier strike group."

Well new reports list two other carriers and I'd assume (not mentioned that I have found) support ships.

 

[JazzForLifee]

scary ****. North Korea always did stupid ****s before, but south koreans never really worried about it.

Trump is in the office right now, so it makes me worry little bit.

Most of my relatives live in Seoul area too.

 

[Gameface]

Well new reports list two other carriers and I'd assume (not mentioned that I have found) support ships.

Carriers don't travel alone. They are part of a strike group.

Three carriers deployed at the same time to the same place is exceptionally odd. There were not three carrier strike groups deployed in the Persian Gulf at the same time during the beginning of the Iraq war (Operation Iraqi Freedom).

If it is true that will put significant strain on the Navy to maintain their normal operations.

 

[Rubashov]

Carriers don't travel alone. They are part of a strike group.


If it is true that will put significant strain on the Navy to maintain their normal operations.

Why's that? How many carrier groups do the USN have?

 

[Stoked]

Carriers don't travel alone. They are part of a strike group.Three carriers deployed at the same time to the same place is exceptionally odd. There were not three carrier strike groups deployed in the Persian Gulf at the same time during the beginning of the Iraq war (Operation Iraqi Freedom).

If it is true that will put significant strain on the Navy to maintain their normal operations.

That's what I though. I posted an article about it earlier in the thread.

As for the bolded, this is what I assumed even though it is not specifically mentioned.

Edit: Not sure how true all that is but the carriers mentioned are the Reagan, Vinson and Nimitz

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

So I know I voted for Trump because he wasn't Hillary, and all. But Hillary was down with the George Soros operation to destabilize Ukraine, and after signing off on selling 20% of our uranium reserves to the Russians, after she got her millions in "donations" for her Clinton Trust campaign slush fund, and she certainly did all the wrong things as Secretary of State for securing peace in the Mideast. So how could Trump be any worse?

By listening to the British, that's how.

So here's a live phone conference tonight that might be of interest.....

https://listmail.larouchepac.com/t/ViewEmail/t/1743B6473CBBC80C/ADE8795522C38637765E7602346EC846

A big hearty LOL to all those who think Soros is calling the shots for the Left in American politics. This BS no doubt plays well at place like Breitbart, where critical thinking skills are neither required nor welcome, but among those of us who possess them and care to use them, please spare us.

Just wonder, if/when Drumpf bungles the US into a war, will that, finally, be sufficient to convince some of his followers that they made a mistake trusting him with such things?

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

While they aren't exactly the same thing (German reunification was not due to foreign military action as far as I know), I like the examples. I haven't felt like our military actions since World War II and its aftermath have been all that useful.

But, hey, we did kick some real *** in Grenada.

 

[addictionary]

neve rsaid(or meant to say) i grew up in venezuela. i just meant to say it compares to Venezuela now! but i think venezuela might have it a bit worse! if i conveyed that i grew up in venezuela, i am sorry about that. it is not true


and holland is not my origin. i just lived there a couple of years. i chose the nicnmae DUTCHjazzer long before i went to holland. because i speak dutch i am not dutch

and i am not an american conservative. i have a severe distrust for government so i am somewhere between libertarian and conservative. also it helps that practicing judaism makes you a conservative/libertarian.

while being a "cultural jew" makes you a libtard

Glad to hear that you have your own inner integrity.

 

[babe]

A big hearty LOL to all those who think Soros is calling the shots for the Left in American politics. This BS no doubt plays well at place like Breitbart, where critical thinking skills are neither required nor welcome, but among those of us who possess them and care to use them, please spare us.

Just wonder, if/when Drumpf bungles the US into a war, will that, finally, be sufficient to convince some of his followers that they made a mistake trusting him with such things?

Here we go again. I thought schoolteachers should understand the rudimentaries of civil discussion. A big LOL, a guffaw, and an arrogant opinion that offers no factual material in evidence, supposedly respectable enough to diss a socialist "Left" organization article that does present evidence for the assertions.

you need to review your supposed "critical thinking skills" as well as your supposed righteous correctness about everything you've believed. You're more of the Kool-Aid sort of committed believer than any religious person of any cult.

 

[♪alt13]

Why's that? How many carrier groups do the USN have?

IIRC 10 or 11. The rest of the world effectively have 0 combined. Non US carriers are few in number and no match for US carriers. US Naval superiority is ridiculously superior.

 

[♪alt13]

Carriers don't travel alone. They are part of a strike group.

Three carriers deployed at the same time to the same place is exceptionally odd. There were not three carrier strike groups deployed in the Persian Gulf at the same time during the beginning of the Iraq war (Operation Iraqi Freedom).

If it is true that will put significant strain on the Navy to maintain their normal operations.

Give us a sense of scale. How many people are we talking about? Isn't it nearly 5k on the carrier alone?

 

[Rubashov]

IIRC 10 or 11. The rest of the world effectively have 0 combined. Non US carriers are few in number and no match for US carriers. US Naval superiority is ridiculously superior.

I thought it was 12. I think that's what was agreed with the Soviets from memory. The POMS will eventually have two, think the French and Italians have carriers, we've just bought two which are to be used as helicopter platforms officially but I would not be shocked if that changes once the f-35s are delivered. A decision was taken by the Australian government not to replace the Melbourne with the Ark Royal (I think) which was being offered by the RN, with its air wing of harriers because such an increase in capability would destabilise the region. Australian governments no longer act so responsibly.

 

[Gameface]

Give us a sense of scale. How many people are we talking about? Isn't it nearly 5k on the carrier alone?

5-6k on the carrier, about 3k is ship's crew, the rest are part of the air wing attached to the ship. Air wings are not monogamous, they can be assigned to different carriers.

The destroyers (DDGs) have about 200 sailors on board.

The cruisers (CGs) have about 350.

A submarine has around 150 sailors. I actually have no idea what type of sub, or even really how many, are attached to a strike group. But as far as I know they are there. It's not open info.

 

[Gameface]

A DDG has over 90 missiles and when combined with the AEGIS system which can track, with fire control accuracy, over 200 targets at the same time. All missiles can essentially be fired at once, each at a separate and distinct target.

A CG also has the AEGIS weapon system and can carry over 120 missiles.

A carrier air wing typically has over 80 aircraft. It's funny but that puts a single carrier above all but a few nations in terms of air power. The U.S. Navy is the second most powerful air force in the world, just behind the U.S. Air Force.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Combat_System

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticonderoga-class_cruiser

 

[♪alt13]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g9j_ZkuJig

 

[babe]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1g9j_ZkuJig

Thanks for giving us this analysis.

While I might not be considered by anyone an expert on the subject, when it comes to crazy people I think I'm world-class. It's elementary. Anytime you analyze the crazy out of the equation, citing purely reasonable considerations, you're gonna be wrong. So this analysis is simply wrong, of course.

Here's the crazy stuff that makes it wrong.....

NK still enjoys virtually unconditional love from both China and Russia, and always will, regardless of official rhetoric and posturing, and will not lose that love even if they launch nuclear attacks on the West.

Neither will the US ever launch a nuclear strike against NK. Yes, we will shoot down the missile if they launch one against us, but our news will never know that fact. Yes, we probably shoot down their missiles now, for practice. Expect to hear about a lot of failed missile tests....

NK leaders will always have these facts clearly in mind, and will always be building more missiles.... and parading them on TV.

What drives this "crazy" is psychology. NK/SK are devoted racists absolutely committed to their myth about being the mainspring of civilization that simply will always have a whole world of ignoramuses who don't have sense enough to appreciate them. And when it comes to such fanatical racism, there is no way either SK or NK will ever take second seat.

I say why should we care, get our troops out of SK, and wash our hands of the place entirely. Let them fight their own war and settle their issues. This would end the "unconditional love" both Russia and China have for their little spoiled brat neighbor, because if we truly just don't care about Korea, it will truly no longer be purposeful "love". Instead, they will need to worry.

China and Russia will then have the problem of defending themselves from their pestilential neighbor, and it will cost them trillions either in armaments or payola.

SDI, the strategic defense initiative, is the solution for us. And back to the original US foreign policy.... alliance with none, commerce with all.

 

[Gameface]

Thanks for giving us this analysis.

While I might not be considered by anyone an expert on the subject, when it comes to crazy people I think I'm world-class. It's elementary. Anytime you analyze the crazy out of the equation, citing purely reasonable considerations, you're gonna be wrong. So this analysis is simply wrong, of course.

Here's the crazy stuff that makes it wrong.....

NK still enjoys virtually unconditional love from both China and Russia, and always will, regardless of official rhetoric and posturing, and will not lose that love even if they launch nuclear attacks on the West.

Neither will the US ever launch a nuclear strike against NK. Yes, we will shoot down the missile if they launch one against us, but our news will never know that fact. Yes, we probably shoot down their missiles now, for practice. Expect to hear about a lot of failed missile tests....

NK leaders will always have these facts clearly in mind, and will always be building more missiles.... and parading them on TV.

What drives this "crazy" is psychology. NK/SK are devoted racists absolutely committed to their myth about being the mainspring of civilization that simply will always have a whole world of ignoramuses who don't have sense enough to appreciate them. And when it comes to such fanatical racism, there is no way either SK or NK will ever take second seat.

I say why should we care, get our troops out of SK, and wash our hands of the place entirely. Let them fight their own war and settle their issues. This would end the "unconditional love" both Russia and China have for their little spoiled brat neighbor, because if we truly just don't care about Korea, it will truly no longer be purposeful "love". Instead, they will need to worry.

China and Russia will then have the problem of defending themselves from their pestilential neighbor, and it will cost them trillions either in armaments or payola.

SDI, the strategic defense initiative, is the solution for us. And back to the original US foreign policy.... alliance with none, commerce with all.

Holy ****!?!?

Fight their own war? You mean, let NK annihilate several million SKers in the first couple days of conflict then march into the scorched earth and claim victory?

We own that mess. That's our ****ing mess.

 

[babe]

Holy ****!?!?

Fight their own war? You mean, let NK annihilate several million SKers in the first couple days of conflict then march into the scorched earth and claim victory?

We own that mess. That's our ****ing mess.

Probably you'd get closer to my meaning if you just noted the subtler implications of our walking away, none too soon. Without worldwide significance and superpower alignments, it's probably more likely that NK/SK wouldn't do the whole scorched earth war the bigger world would envision.

Reminds me of a legendary conversation between Roosevelt and Churchill over the future of India... I think the gist of the remarks will suffice here.... R: Why don't you just give India their Independence? C: What!!!!! Have you no idea at all what would happen if we left India? R: Well, the American colonials did OK.

Walking away would destroy the NK/SK psychological construct. Nothing can beat the loss of significance for ending a puppet show.

If NK/SK were relegated to commonplace rhetoric and a struggle for making a place for themselves on the world stage, it's more likely that the border would be demilitarized and some deal made for building wildly beneficial auto plants, and other industries, in the North.....

Historically, it is rumored that in making the decision to start the Korean War, the Chinese made a calculated judgment of American character/politics. Our own politics was muddled enough through our inconsistent support of Chiang Kai-shek that the communists who won out believed we were just as likely to bungle things in Korea, which we did. McArthur we couldn't stand. I consider this all proof of my thesis, that things would really get better if we just went away.