posted on Feb, 2 2007 @ 11:27 AM
It must be rookie hour, back in November I posted regarding the scheduled deployment of the Nimitz CSG in late Feb or March.
Might as well get paranoid, because the Truman is preparing to deploy this summer, and yes, when you finally here about it, the addition of the Royal
Navy destroyer to the Truman group this summer is intentional, but not for war. Same with the US DDG deploying with the Royal Navy carrier late this
The fact is, the only group of ships that have 'surged' in the past several weeks is 2 FFGs (that don't even have a missile launcher) for MSO
operations, boarding of merchant ships, and the Reagan CSG to the Pacific. Everything else that has deployed in the last 2 months or so has been
scheduled. The Stennis was planned to deploy since June 2006, the only difference was it went to the Gulf instead. The Nimitz deployment was announced
in October of last year, too bad "thwashingtonnote" website didn't take note of it then.
Expect another ESG (BR group) to deploy from the Pacific soon to replace the Boxer group, and the Nimitz after that to replace the Eisenhower.
If something happens that is odd with Naval deployments, don't worry, I'll let you know.
While everyone is watching the Navy in the Gulf and the Army surge in Iraq, it is a real shame nobody has mentioned those F-117s and F-22As in
northeast asia (google news it, its happening and being reported and no one is saying beep about it). With all those extra refueling planes in Guam,
and the rotation of B-1s and B-2s to Guam, a rather large chunk of the US offensive capability has quietly rotated into the Pacific while everyone
states at Iran.
If observers are supposed to gauge the possibility of war based on military movements, the potential of the US to strike is much higher in North Korea
than Iran right now.