More US Deployments

page: 2
52
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by khimbar
 


Because they have to talk to air traffic control along the way. There was a lot of behind the scenes talk going on as well I'm sure, but all ATC traffic is in the clear.


Even the weather request? I always tend to think if they let you hear something, they wanted you to hear it.




posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 10:43 AM
link   
The E-6B's are curious though. I can't see the need for them as command and control centers in the area, seems there would be plenty enough of that with the bases and carrier groups. A bit puzzling. I'm assuming there is some other role for them to play.

Makes me wonder where the subs are...
Although maybe they are just for the airborne threat systems....



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by Hopechest
 


It is up to the citizens of North Korea to decide that, not the U.S and not China.

We really need to get out of the business of "liberating" other nations.


Sometimes people don't have the means and need some help.

NK has severly locked down the people similar to what Stalin did. Anyone who could potentially organize a revolt is already locked up or dead. All communication is strictly monitored and the people are starving.

Part of having great power is knowing when to assume great responsibility. On top of that, NK is a major security threat and they need to be dealt with now as opposed to later which could be far more costly.

Like it or not we are still operating under the Bush Doctrine and Obama hasn't changed our policy yet. This means pre-emptive and preventitive options are always on the table.

In my opinion its time we exercise them.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 10:45 AM
link   
What's going with carriers right now? Got anything heading that way or already there?



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Oh what a waste of time/money/equipment it would be if it all turned out to be nothing more than rhetorics and empty hollow threats.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Yes, but in the past, there have never been cancellations or bomber movements like this when dealing with North Korea. Even though they haven't started to evacuate civilians yet, this is much bigger than the "usual" for dealing with the DPRK.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by khimbar
 


They can get weather from multiple sources, including civilian ATC, but routine requests usually aren't sent over encrypted radio.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


The range and some of the comms systems in the E-6B give them a slight advantage over the carriers and land based assets. They also have all the datalinks in place that allow them to talk to everyone out there that would be in play, where ships and land bases don't necessarily have them.

On a lighter note, we asked once why they put the HF antennas on the bottom of the wingtips, instead of on top of them like the Air Force does. Talk about your facepalm moments.
The answer we got was along the lines of, "We talk to ships and subs, our radio signal goes down, not up."



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Curio
 


The Washington is forward deployed to Japan, so she's always in the area. The rest of the fleet is in really bad shape, so there might not be much to send over there right now. The carriers have pushed off maintenance and routine things for so long, they're scraping the bottom of the barrel.


As of February 6, 2013, four carriers are in home port, one is undergoing a three-year refueling complex overhaul, one is undergoing emergency repairs, one is on a planned 6-month incremental availability pier side, and another is undergoing maintenance. That leaves the Stennis in the Arabian Sea and the Bush underway in the Atlantic, only two carriers at sea. That said, the USS Washington is forward deployed to Japan and is in home port there. The Navy says if budget cuts get much worse, she’ll be the only carrier able to respond to contingencies. (020713)

www.talkingproud.us...
edit on 4/5/2013 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Of course the US is preparing for a worst case scenerio, to not do so would be crimminal. While nobody thinks NK wants a full scale war the US, Japan and South Korea will not be caught with their pants down. I would expect ground, naval and airforces have been given warning orders to prepare for possible deployments. However the lack of movement by the north on the DMZ and the lack of mobilization by the North and South still strongly suggests nobody is expecting a invasion.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by MrSpad
 


Of course it makes sense to, but the thing is that in all the years that I was in a better position to hear things like this happening, and North Korea "mouthing off", I never once heard of this level of mobilization. I heard of cancelled leave, and recalls, but they never forward deployed to this level before now. I can only think of one other time that they even kept a command and control aircraft on alert, and this was when we had them based at Hickam. This level of reaction is unheard of.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Theres always deep pockets for war.
The Rothchilds will be happy to lend us the money.....

That aside, the situations tense index has been upscaled signifigantly .
Carriers may not be at much advantage if the chinese try out their new anti ship balistic missiles on them...
The fuelling of missiles in NK would probably be the signal to launch the B1s, i think,....they could always recall them if the NKs stand down....
Somebody will issue an ulimatum and the decision then will start the ball....
NK just has to make a few more aggressive moves ad it will be too late to shut the war down before it starts.
Thanks for the heads up Z



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by stirling
 



Carriers may not be at much advantage if the chinese try out their new anti ship balistic missiles on them...


If the Chinese get pulled into it...carrier threats are the LEAST of our worries...



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


We need to get rid of the middle east 2 carrier requirement. We have enough bases in the region where this is no longer needed. That would allow us to have another forward-deployed carrier.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


I've always thought that system was over rated as well as being the least of our problems if China comes in (which I don't think they will). You have to be able to find said carrier to be able to hit it, and under EMCON, in the middle of a huge ocean, they're not exactly going to stand out to be seen.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


I think right now there is only one in the region, as damn near everything else is down for maintenance, but I agree. They don't need two and three carriers in the area, unless they're doing their swap outs.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hopechest
I hope they are planning on taking out the NK regime along with China. The people over there are in dire need of help and if there ever were a case for intervention to save lives I'd say there's no better example than NK.

Maybe we take out their air defenses and their leadership and China has their military leaders ready to begin a coup followed by a stable government and a ton of UN aid following closely behind.



Right....

That strategy sure worked well in Iraq and Afghanistan, didn't it?

I'm always astonished at how ready some people are anxious to sacrifice the lives and treasure of OTHERS.

Waking a sleeping dragon is one of the most stupid things that can happen!!!
edit on 5-4-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 12:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


Ever since Carter, it's been our mandate (due to Iran), something continued under each President since. Former Admirals have all called for it to be rescinded, but it never has been, at least as recently as Jan of this year. This situation may have changed it though, and for all we know, one of them is either there or on the way...but yeah, most are in port being worked on, as they went WAY too long between scheduled maintenance due to missions. Will be nice once those Gerald Ford class ones are built though...but a ways off. I think the first will be ready in 2015.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by olaru12
 



That strategy sure worked well in Iraq and Afghanistan, didn't it


I think most forget that the WAR part of the strategies worked very well. The regimes were toppled quickly. It's the POLICE actions after, that are time and resource consuming (and costs lives). If regime toppling is the mission, this again can be accomplished quickly, but trying to police people who don't want you there, is (obviously) a losing proposition from the start...and foolhardy.



posted on Apr, 5 2013 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Gazrok
 


Ford hits the water this year, but she won't even be close to ready for ops until 2015 or later depending on how her Trials go.

Between pushed off maintenance, and sheer stupidity, the Navy is hurting for money for repairs to ships right now after the budget cuts. My other half and I both were thinking that Korea blowing up is a great way to get around Sequestration cuts though.



new topics
 
52
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join