It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What to do with the U.S.S. Enterprise

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 10:41 PM
link   
Iranian terrorists and the USS Samuel B. Roberts thgat never gets talked about on ATS.

Or the terrorists who attacked the USS Cole.

Sell the Enterprise on Ebay who cares but some people to get off the damn Anti Isreal kick.




posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


and of course the USS Liberty was smack right inside enemy territory - when it should'nt had been there in the first place spying on both Egypt and Israel.

But we won't mention the HMAS Hobart clearly waving the Australian flag that was attacked by the USA during the Vietnam War. Oh, hang on.....that was "friendly fire", right?
edit on 17-8-2012 by bluemirage5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 11:48 PM
link   
Ok down to the basics of this plain and simple. Its not just the fact of us giving away a nuke class carrier, Or first nuke class carrier for that matter. And the largest single MAIN reason is because of her name, Enterprise. It's a deep rooted and regarded name in the fleet going back many of years.

For anyone to even think of selling off a vessel with that name to any other country, even The U.K. Would be treason of the highest. This whole thread is about the reaction there would be, if Obama or anyone else who is chief of staff would make the decision to sell a vessel with that name to another country.

I call this Thread propaganda. Even Obama is his infantile wisdom wouldn't dare make a call like this. Its a slap in the face. Plain and simple. I would rather see her stripped of reactors and cut up for scrap. This coming from a Navy boy himself.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Pegasus2000
 


sigh, relax. It's not happening anyway. However, we "decommision" our warships which allows our reusing the name in newer versions/vessels. We have sold used ships in the past to other nations of which cease to be that "Name" upon decommisioning. The new nation then commissions it with a new name, a new identity if you will. I believe Argentina had one of our WW2 cruisers, also renamed, that the Brits sunk.

I consider Israel our only real ally in the region. Despite the USS Liberty, or is Canada and Britian not allies due to previous "disagreements/wars with them???



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by cayote
 


No, the Navy sticks to their schedules. At the end of its current mission, the Enterprise will be mothballed for a period of time until it is far too outdated to even be useful in an emergency and then the ship will either be sold for scrap, turned into a museum, or sold to another country (which because it is a nuclear-powered carrier, won't happen).

The Enterprise will be replaced by the USS Gerald R. Ford, the first of a new class of super carrier that incorporates radar stealth designs and the newest technology. The second of the class is named the John F Kennedy, and the third is unnamed but petitioned to be named the Enterprise.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I thought I said this plainly enough up above, but apparently not.

This is a done deal. The Navy has already said so.

The Enterprise is not going to be mothballed. It is not going to be made into a museum. It's not going to be sold or given to another country. It is not going to be sunk for a reef.

It is going to be scrapped. They are going to cut a large hole in the deck. The reactors will be eviscerated and buried somewhere out West. The rest of the ship will be taken apart and recycled.

That's the plan.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by nwtrucker
 


No...No.... NO!

Decommission it as planned. Why the hell would we give something with 8 Nuclear reactors [1 fueled and 7 inactive] away?

I say that's just asking for trouble. With Great power comes Great responsibility.

It's a clich'e but accurate.



posted on Aug, 18 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


I guess your right... I just get this feeling if Israel had a carrier task force group, the whole region would be a lot quieter...



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join