Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Ryan: "I just don't understand" bayonet remark

page: 8
38
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by ManBehindTheMask

Originally posted by Xeven
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


Yes absolutely I do.


Well at least you admit it, and I commend you for that my friend!


Well we are talking politics here. Politics = hypocrisy


Can't beat them...join them!




posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus

Originally posted by Jordan River
Is ryan a mental or just retarded... Come on now, it was a great zinger, a great shot.... Ryan is worse VP choice once Chaney


Look the President's comment was idiotic and insulting to everyone's intelligence. That's all there is to it. He has been dismantling our nuclear capability and giving Russia the advantage in the Start talks. Get a clue, remember the remark he made the Russians when he thought no one was listening? Ya know, the "I'll be more flexible after the election" comment, assuming he will be reelected and can do whatever he wants? What Patriotic American would have ever said that to our former Cold War enemies?


I just don't understand Conservatives...
Since when has russia been an issue? 1980s? 90s? and since when did we bring up russia in 2012? Why in that debate? Russia economy is horrible.. Former cold war enemy? That was done when you were still putting plastic tapes in cars and listening to your jam mix
Its 2012 baby were going to mars
edit on 23-10-2012 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   
Hey old guys, Russia is not going to invade anymore. The cold war is over. Get out of your trench!



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:52 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


If you don't read the entire thread, then you should think twice about posting snarky replies.

No, I will not repost it.

Just go to the marine website and look up bayonet training.

How nice you are the only one with a life.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
Hey old guys, Russia is not going to invade anymore. The cold war is over. Get out of your trench!


Seriously, people must be reading Watchmen graphic novel or something



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by MystikMushroom





If I photoshopped the President in that I would be called a racist and more...

The bottom line is our Navy was antiquated and in bad shape in 1916, and some of those super advance ships that Obama used in his snippy remark are 60 years old....The Navy needs newer ships and more of them to do the mission it is called to do today.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Jordan River
 


Since forever, since Ex-KGB Putin is still in charge, since we don't generally trust KGB, since Russia is still arming countries like Syria and Iran, since Russia is not reducing their nukes but we are, and since Kruschev said they would concquer us from within.
Don't be a naive Utopian.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Don't confuse everyone with quotes.



That is why I had to reword it for those who get all glassy eyed when they look at numbers, kind of like our President....



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:58 PM
link   
Been skimming through this thread and noticed some things:

Mention of the US Navy still using Battleships:
There have been a few posts, so I say it again, being ex-Navy myself: the US Navy does not currently have any active BB's on duty. They have all been mothballed since the 1990's.

While I do understand that many of YOU understand that the US Navy now is even more powerful than when I was in , there are some facts about naval vessels that no mater how advanced they are, there are some things you still can not get away from, let me lay it out for you:

Maintenance and repair. Try to imagine if you will, having a car, and instead of getting the oil changed every 3,000 miles, replacing the tires, getting those tires aligned, etc, etc, instead, how about you say "Screw it." and just drive the car until it collapses in a heap on the road.....

Sound like a good idea? Ah....I thought not.

The US Navy doesn't think it's a good idea to do that to their ships and the equipment. That's why after a certain amount of time, and especially after returning from being deployed for 6, 8 or 9 months, the ship normally ends up in the ship yards getting some very badly needed repairs and maintenance done to them.
Yes, we perform prevenative maintenance on all the equipment, and effect repairs on things as best as we can, but in the end, at some point, your ship is going to need the services of a ship yard.
The ocean, salt water, salt in the air, is highly corrosive. Even in today's modern navy, ask us sailors out there how much painting we do to try and protect the metal on the ship.
Heavy seas is a......well I can't say that word on here.....let's just say it is friggin ROUGH. Ever suddenly go from walking along on the floor to having the bulkhead become your walking surface?
Those heavy pitches and rolls put a heavy strain on the hull and super structure.

How long does a ship spend in the ship yards? Depends on what all needs to be done to it. On the average, you're looking at 4 to 6 months. Longer if the ship is having it's weapon systems over hauled (new equipment, more advanced equipment, etc).
Once you are done in the yard, you're going to spend a few months doing sea trails to make sure all those repairs were done right. Don't want to find out that they weren't when you're in the middle of the Atlantic, Pacific or a actual battle, do you now?

Okay, so sea trials went okay. Now what? Now for more training. Over half the crew will have been rotated to other duty stations, other ships, getting out of the Navy, etc. New people are now on board and they have to learn how to do their jobs well, so off to GTMO or other places to do refresher training, and learning how to fight the ship.
That takes a few more months. There there are all the weapons and engineering quals that have to be done and the ship has to pass.

Then, and only then (about a year and half, to 2 years since it's last deployment) is the ship ready to be deployed with a carrier group again.

What? You all thought that they just built the damn thing, slid it in the water, put some men on it and waved goodbye?



This isn't happening to just one ship at a time either people. It's happening to many ships at one time. They have to go through this, else you stand a good chance of loosing that very expensive ship, with the very expensive weapons systems, and all those men onboard.

Do do we have enough ships to do all this?

That has been posted on here too. Right now the US Navy is under strain trying to keep up with the demands that our country makes of it. Sailors are having to spend much less time at home....and also in training, which is just adding gasoline to the fire IMHO.....because they are having to spend more time at sea.
Deployments for me were 6 months long, and I can tell you that not only was I glad to be home, so was my ship, with a lot of repairs needed.
Now they are having to spend sometimes 4 months more out there.....

So it would seem that if you want to shrink the Navy, you need to shrink our presence too. That's what the US Navy has been used for a hundred years now when Teddy Roosevelt since the Great White Fleet out on a world tour: to give the USA a presence around the world.

If we need to be in places less, than yes, a smaller Navy can work just fine. But if not, you need to have enough ships that can be rotated out, so that the ones that need to can come home and get the repairs, and the personnel the training they need.

And that has NOT changed, since yes, even Horses and Bayonets. Doesn't mater how advanced a ship's weapon system is......ships still break and wear out, crews still need to rotate out and be trained.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


Looking at the list of navy ships, there appears to be some new destroyers under constuction.

The PCU Michael Monsoor and PCU Zumwalt look interesting if you do a search. Would they qualify for what we'd call a 'battleship' during WWII?



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Jordan River
 

would concquer us from within.
.


Are they gonna arm wrestle the Chinese once both Russia and China defeat us from "within"

No I seriously consider your comment as genuine, but i think china has a better opportunity than russia.

The only time i'll be concern is if that whole missle shield, euro missile shield or whatever it was called will be put in place



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
Hey old guys, Russia is not going to invade anymore. The cold war is over. Get out of your trench!



Hey young newbies, Kruschev said the Russians would take us over from within. Manchurian candidate anyone? Someone who would seduce young paduans to put down their light sabers in an unguarded moment....
edit on 23-10-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jordan River

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by Jordan River
 

would concquer us from within.
.


Are they gonna arm wrestle the Chinese once both Russia and China defeat us from "within"

No I seriously consider your comment as genuine, but i think china has a better opportunity than russia.

The only time i'll be concern is if that whole missle shield, euro missile shield or whatever it was called will be put in place


Well, I haven't discounted China either. Is this an either/or quiz?



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:02 PM
link   
One of the main reasons we haven't had any Major worldwide conflicts since WWII is precisely because of the role the USN plays. No other country can move troops and material around on the seas without our approval. Like it or not, the USN is the Policeman of the Oceans, they are the ones responsible for protecting sea lanes, our allies and interests around the world and are often the ones called upon to force project around the world. Nothing in the world can get more attention from a country than a CSG parked off its' coast.

The Navy itself has requested over 300 ships Source if it is to effectively perform it's duties. Remember a certain percentage of ships are always in drydock or getting maintenance. I'm guessing they have a better idea of what they need then politicians do.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
That has been posted on here too. Right now the US Navy is under strain trying to keep up with the demands that our country makes of it. Sailors are having to spend much less time at home....and also in training, which is just adding gasoline to the fire IMHO.....because they are having to spend more time at sea.
Deployments for me were 6 months long, and I can tell you that not only was I glad to be home, so was my ship, with a lot of repairs needed.
Now they are having to spend sometimes 4 months more out there.....


Or more...My one friend saw port in sight twice now and got turned around on this deployment.



If we need to be in places less, than yes, a smaller Navy can work just fine. But if not, you need to have enough ships that can be rotated out, so that the ones that need to can come home and get the repairs, and the personnel the training they need.

And that has NOT changed, since yes, even Horses and Bayonets. Doesn't mater how advanced a ship's weapon system is......ships still break and wear out, crews still need to rotate out and be trained.



Not to mention we still are somewhat limited by the horizon...we are needed EVERYWHERE and ships no matter how new are just not that fast to get around.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by buster2010
 




Captain obvious says, "A few good ships is better than many bad ships."

Aircraft are also extremely important in patroling any area. I would rather have a few carriers with many helis and jets than 25 frigets with few aircraft.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


I know, but honestly, no one can invade america, unless Russia and China joined forces... Does russia have the capacity to shuttle a billion soilders to u.s. soil? doubtful



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by pavil
 

We fly our troops in commercial style aircraft. We ship our materials UPS. Scrap the entire Navy and our safety won't be compromised at all. In fact, hatred against us would be reduced if our big bad ships are not all over looking menacing to the world population.



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jordan River
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
 


I know, but honestly, no one can invade america, unless Russia and China joined forces... Does russia have the capacity to shuttle a billion soilders to u.s. soil? doubtful


A billion soldiers? lol are you over doing it a little here?They would have to take our guns away first of course. They aren't ready yet
There are already UN troops stationed here. Our leaders have been making people mad and our enemies have more control. Soros and friends are determined to knock us down and level us with everyone else. He does not wish us to be the main Superpower.

.
edit on 23-10-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-10-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 

GITMO,REFTRA, ugh.
You bring back bad memories.






top topics



 
38
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join