Obama assassination bid fears aircraft carriers on standby off Irish coast during G8 summit

I have no idea how 2 carrier groups are supposed to"protect the president against assassination".How so?They gonna launch an air strike against the assassin?This makes no sense to me.

reply to post by dragonridr

So the right wing what bribed the irish press to run the story do you hear yourself wow,

I never said anything about them bribing anyone, the BS story out of India that FOX News ran with was sourced from some anonymous blogger in India. This has the same smell to it.

The India trip did not cost 200 million a day, we didn't dispatch 1/3 of our navy, but FOX News and the hard line right believed it completely.

Soloprotocol:

Yes....England would be the perfect choice...even though he's in Northern Ireland, a completely different country to England. Being a Scot (that's what we call someone from Scotland BTW, another completely different country to England). I would thoroughly recommend if anything bad ever happens to Obama...please feel free to let loose with a big fat Trident south of the Watford Gap (England) a completely different country than both Northern Ireland and Scotland..
P.s. Wales is another completely different country to all three mentioned above.

Actually, anything north of the Watford Gap is an entirely different country to what is south of it. Different species and different flora and fauna. They even have their own language...take a listen...

www.youtube.com...

...I rest my case. In fact, if Obama has a very happy and successful meeting, I think a Trident or some suitably nuclear-equipped drone should still be used.

reply to post by TDawg61


Because in theory if there's an attempt, they can helicopter him out to the carrier, stuff him in the back of an F/A-18 and fly him back to the US. In reality, that won't work very well. The Hornet has fairly short legs and would require a tanker meet them to escort them to just about anywhere outside the UK or Ireland.

We don't really have that many active (deployed) carriers at present. I can't see ANY reason for carriers being in that part of the world right now. Oddly enough, most online sources that track general carrier movement haven't been updated since April.

At least half or more though, of our carriers are in home ports, being worked on (after several too long deployments). We always keep one in the Middle East, and I'm hoping we have one near North Korea. That leaves about 3 available, but really, putting 2 of these in waters of our allies? Seems like a major tactical blunder... I'm sure the same goal could be achieved with a non-carrier battle group.

Because in theory if there's an attempt, they can helicopter him out to the carrier, stuff him in the back of an F/A-18 and fly him back to the US

Or use the secure hospital facilities of the carrier.....or the Mercy or Comfort hospital ships.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by HauntWok

 

2 carriers with 10,000 people not counting the other ships in a carrier battle group because carriers don't travel alone. with 180 aircraft is TOO MUCH.


It is a serious missallocation of resources.

edit on 17-6-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

I agree that 2 CVN groups would be serious overkill as a Presidential security detail...but I have to (somewhat regretfully) question your estimate of 180 aircraft. The Nimitz class was designed to accommodate 70-80 aircraft, but in practice, almost never carry that many. If memory serves, the usual air group is in the 50-60 range these days.

reply to post by neo96


I haven't been able to find photos of the two carriers in question, but there's a part of me that wonders...I've seen 'journalists' refer to anything with a gun on it as a 'battleship' (including a Ticonderoga-class CG and a RN Type 42 DD). Every time it happens, my wife makes a mad dash for the tranquilizer rifle. Could one or more of these 'carriers' actually be LHD or LHA? Those would make more sense for the declared mission, and do resemble carriers at a fast glance....

reply to post by Gazrok


Actually at least one of them has been updated as of the 13th of June. The Bush and Truman are in WESTLANT for workups and exercises. The Bush was doing basic carrier quals for the training base out of Fort Worth. As for North Korea, we don't have anything in the area right now, with Washington in SRA.

How in the Hell can an aircraft carrier protect the President? What are they gonna do, start firing from off shore? Just obliterate the town? Yeah. That'll do it.
Your Tax Dollars At Work.

reply to post by Brother Stormhammer


They would have to be LHDs. All the LHA class, except Peleliu have been decommissioned, but she's out of San Diego, and just got back home from the 5th Fleet AOR in mid-May.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

Yeah

I'd rather see carrier battle groups actually protecting people who are more worthy.

A potus with his army already on the ground in a friendly country doesn't rate that 'overkill'.

you know nothing about the security protocols or recent threats of the G-8 conference, you are one of the ones on ATS that constantly blame Obama for everything, and you attack the government for everything it does. why are you still in this country if you despise America so much, there are other countries that seem better suited for your amount of hatred toward every aspect of our government, like North Korea, China, Iran....it must be difficult to be outraged 24/7

reply to post by DAVID64


They're secure, have better hospital facilities than some small towns, have helicopters that can get in and out fast to get him out of the area, and have a Marine security force embarked (if they're LHDs they can have an entire MEU plus landing craft embarked).

reply to post by Zaphod58


Are you sure there isn't one near enough to be rapidly deployed to NK? That's more what I'm thinking...not right there enough to be a provocation, but close enough to respond if any escalation. Good news on them getting back out there though.

Originally posted by stirling
So......if somebodt whacks him what will we do?
Bomb ENGLAND?

The implications are staggering.

Watch out for Senn Fein (y'mean MI6) to throw a falsie on
the bar. it just wouldn't make sense at this point because no
known terrorist group wants to openly cause widespread
combustion where they're settling en masse[/i].

I mean, my heart broke when Arthur Treacher's closed in
the States... there's nowhere to go now except: I'm not going there.

But ..a carrier group. I have to go to the dentist now for a cleaning,
and try to divert my attention with Dr. Zell: it might work.....