Third US warship bound for Black Sea

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Third US warship bound for Black Sea


www.presstv.ir

The USS Mount Whitney, considered one of the most advanced warships in the world, is expected to arrive in the Black Sea early in September.

The warship will become the US' third in the Black Sea as the guided missile destroyer USS McFaul and the USS Taylor frigate are already in the region.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.presstv.ir
www.presstv.ir




posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Please tell me why one of the most advanced warships in the world is delivering humanitarian aid when there are countless Merchant Navy vessels that can do the job just as well. This just adds to the already heavy US and NATO presence in the Black Sea. Sure seems to me that their "humanitarian effort" has other agendas.

www.presstv.ir
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 06:43 PM
link   
It does have other agendas. Russia has recently claimed that South Ossetia will now become part of Russia. Russsia is planning to put military bases there.

Just a week ago, Russia stated it would have a presence there, but as it did before, not like Russia is professing now.

It's all about keeping the former Russian Republics from joining NATO. The US wants otherwise as to contain Russia.

The more harware is in the Black Sea, the greater the probability of a huge clash between the vessels.

[edit on 29-8-2008 by jetxnet]



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by jetxnet
 


Although if there is an altercation NATO's so called armada doesnt stand a chance. Look at the other link on this post to see what i mean.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
I think that there may be a possibility that Russia will force the issue on Crimea and the Black sea port of Sevastopol in the near future and NATO is bracing for this and a possible clash over Russia's plans to annexe Crimea for itself or something along those lines.

The Black sea may soon turn into a Red Sea....we all hope not



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
According to Wikipedia the USS Mount Whitney is hardly one of the most advanced warships in the world. It was commisioned in 1970, and is specially designed as a command ship. It also has Mil Sealift Command crew and is able to carry supplies for the evacuation of 3, 000 people.
It also has no offensive weapons.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by watch_the_rocks
 


Ah the media and its little white lies. Thanks for the info.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 07:09 PM
link   
Uh....yeah. Its meant to say "dont fu$k with Ukraine or Poland or whoever else-you've had your fun in Georgia but thats where it ends". That is what it its there for.



Originally posted by MarkAkaSilent


Please tell me why one of the most advanced warships in the world is delivering humanitarian aid when there are countless Merchant Navy vessels that can do the job just as well. This just adds to the already heavy US and NATO presence in the Black Sea. Sure seems to me that their "humanitarian effort" has other agendas.

www.presstv.ir
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
They spoke about this ship several weeks agio as to why it would be sent for humanitarian aid:

She carries enough food to feed the crew for 90 days and can transport supplies to support an emergency evacuation of 3,000 people.
Her distilling units make over 100,000 US gallons (400 m³) of fresh water a day.


As for being advanced:

Considered by some to be the most sophisticated Command, Control, Communications, Computer, and Intelligence (C4I) ship ever commissioned, Mount Whitney incorporates various elements of the most advanced C4I equipment and gives the embarked Joint Task Force Commander the capability to effectively command all units under the command of the Commander, Joint Task Force.


I think some folks mistake "advanced" for meaning lots of firepower. Or mistakenly think that a ship built in '69 hasnt been upgraded and retrofitted with the most adavanced systems available.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by princeofpeace
They spoke about this ship several weeks agio as to why it would be sent for humanitarian aid:



Yes we know as watch_the_rocks has already pointed out in the Wikipedia link he supplied. Does princeofpeace what a scooby snack for his observational skills?

Mod Edit: Please Review the Following Link: Courtesy Is Mandatory
Mod Note: Trim Those Quotes - Please Review this link


[edit on 29-8-2008 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 07:51 PM
link   
Because if they read this "According to Wikipedia the USS Mount Whitney is hardly one of the most advanced warships in the world." in his reply and chose not to read the article then folks wouldnt know.


Thats why i posted it. Thanks.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:01 PM
link   
Well, since the Mt. Whitney's going to be there, I suspect that once Obama takes office he will utilize the proper method of doing war the American way.
Wait for them to swing. When they do, swing so hard they don't get up. Just in case nobody has caugh on in Iraq we have the technology and power to wage a war without landing a single infantryman. I bet the Mt. Whitney could park a tomahawk cruise missile in Mahmoud Amahdinejad's badei(sp), if it really came down to it.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   


There was a conference in France where a number of international engineers were taking part, including French and American. During a break, one of the French engineers came back into the room saying 'Have you heard the latest dumb stunt Bush has done? He has sent an aircraft carrier to Indonesia to help the tsunami victims. What does he intended to do, bomb them?' A Boeing engineer stood up and replied quietly: 'Our carriers have three hospitals on board that can treat several hundred people; they are nuclear powered and can supply emergency electrical power to shore facilities; they have three cafeterias with the capacity to feed 3,000 people three meals a day, they can produce several thousand gallons of fresh water from sea water each day, and they carry half a dozen helicopters for use in transporting victims and injured to and from their flight deck. We have eleven such ships; how many does France have?'


Stop fear mongering



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:16 PM
link   
It certainly does appear as this conflict is turning into a fearmongering fest.

It is understandable that U.S. wants some military presence in the area - and it is likely that this military presence will grow in the coming year, with Georgia's inevitable path to NATO.

As for the Russian Black Sea fleet - it is a relic. Sure it has some major firepower and historical importance, but it is becoming irrelevant in today's world. Russia wants any excuse to take the ships out for a stroll - but even in the recent conflict it was more of an exercise for the crew than actual combat operations.

There is virtually no risk of any engagament between Russian and U.S. ships, and no need to fear.



And for those suggesting that Russia wants to separate Crimea from Ukraine because of Sevastopol - Go take a look at the map. Russia has plenty of Black Sea coast line. The Black Sea fleet is already scheduled to start moving to Novorosiysk in the next 4 years, and would likely leave Crimea altogether by 2012.

Right now there is no threat of any military separatist struggle in Crimea. Ukraine knows that many Russians live there and that it is historically Russian territory - and will not dare to take away Crimea's automy status. NATO forces will not be welcome on the peninsula though (as well as the Eastern half of Ukraine) if Yuschenko joins NATO. The local population and politicians will block NATO's efforts there.



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   
There is, I have learned, a real reason for these vessels being used.

Apparently there is a treaty regarding the Black Sea, to which the US is a signatory, that prevents the entry of combat ships from nations not bordering the Black Sea over 15,000 tons.

The LHA & LHD amphibious ships that would be best for this mission are all well over 15,000 tons. Mt. Whitney is too, but she's not a combat ship - no offensive weaponry or combat aircraft, it's a command & communications ship.

[edit on 8/29/08 by xmotex]



posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by xmotex
 


Hey.


This is it, I think.

Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Turkish Straits


The Dardanelles (bottom left), Sea of Marmara (centre)
and Bosporus Straits (top right)



The Montreux Convention Regarding the Regime of the Turkish Straits was a 1936 agreement that gives Turkey control over the Bosporus Straits and the Dardanelles and regulates military activity in the region. Signed on 20 July 1936, it permitted Turkey to remilitarise the Straits and imposed new restrictions on the passage of combatant vessels. It is still in force today, with some amendments.

The Convention gives Turkey full control over the Straits and guarantees the free passage of civilian vessels in peacetime. It severely restricts the passage of non-Turkish military vessels and prohibits some types of warships, such as aircraft carriers, from passing through the Straits. The terms of the convention have been the source of controversy over the years, most notably concerning the Soviet Union's military access to the Mediterranean Sea.

(Wikipedia: The Montreux Convention)


And here's some of the trouble its been causing:

Russia-Georgia Conflict Puts Turkey in Vulnerable Position


The Russia-Georgia conflict has put Turkey in a tight spot. Will Turkey side with the United States, its NATO ally, and let more U.S. military ships into the Black Sea to assist Georgia? Or will it choose Russia which also shares a Black Sea coast with Turkey? As Dorian Jones reports from Istanbul, ever since Turkey joined NATO in 1952, it has hoped to never have to make a choice between the alliance and its Russian neighbor to the north.

(voanews.com)


Will Turkey Abandon NATO?


Will Turkey side with the United States, its NATO ally, and let more U.S. military ships into the Black Sea to assist Georgia? Or will it choose Russia?

A Turkish refusal would seriously impair American efforts to support the beleaguered Caucasus republic. Ever since Turkey joined NATO in 1952, it has hoped to never have to make a choice between the alliance and its Russian neighbor to the North. Yet that is precisely the decision before Ankara. If Turkey does not allow the ships through, it will essentially be taking Russia's side.

(The Wall Street Journal)




posted on Aug, 29 2008 @ 08:55 PM
link   
Excellent, thanks for the information


Yeah I couldn't remember the name of the treaty



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by princeofpeace
 


Sorry for the scooby snack dig dude. Im new to this so criticism of my posts is also new to me.



posted on Aug, 30 2008 @ 06:51 AM
link   
The Russians bring alot of money to Ukraine - as do any sailors when there in there home port,

when they leave that money will go with them and the area will decline - thats what the crimeans fear





new topics
top topics
 
1

log in

join