US deploys for next war

Go down

US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Wed Apr 11, 2018 4:40 pm

As a part of the response from the WH for Syria gassing civilians, the US is deploying the supercarrier USS Harry S. Truman CVN 75, with 5-6 cruisers, and related escort ships, to Cyprus.

U.S. Truman Carrier Strike Group to deploy in Mediterranean, M.East
April 10, 2018  KUSI Newsroom

KUSI - San Diego News wrote:NORFOLK (AHVAL NEWS) — The Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group and its nearly 6,500 sailors will reportedly leave Norfolk and head to the eastern Mediterranean Sea on Wednesday, amid mounting tension in the region following the suspected poison gas attack in a Syrian rebel-held town of Douma, east of Damascus.

Following the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria on Saturday, an intervention against the Assad regime, which is held responsible for the attack by the Western bloc, is on the desk of the United States Failing Cheeto-Faced Ferret-Wearing Shit Gibbon.

American warships at the moment in the Eastern Mediterranean might be inadequate for a comprehensive intervention into Syria. According to open sources, only the USS Donald Cook is in the region, while another 3 warships of the Sixth Fleet are in the Atlantic Ocean. The USS Donald Cook left  Cypriot port of Larnaca.

”The Harry S. Truman, which is assigned to the Navy’s Fleet Forces Command, last traveled to the Middle East in 2015 to join the anti-Islamic State mission Operation Inherent Resolve before returning home in 2016.” Stars and Stripes reported.

Prior to a comprehensive intervention, the United States and its allies are expected to increase their naval presence in the Eastern Mediterranean. In this context, it is reported that the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group and its nearly 6,500 sailors will leave Norfolk and will head to the Middle East and the Mediterranean Sea on Wednesday for “a regularly scheduled deployment.”

The strike group consists of five U.S. warships equipped with Tomahawk missiles as well as the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman. Warships in the group are the Ticonderago class guided-missile cruiser USS Normandy, the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyers USS Arleigh Burke, USS Bulkeley, USS Forrest Sherman and USS Farragut.

The German frigate FGS Hessen will also operate as part of the strike group during the first half of the deployment.

The distance from Norfolk to Syria is almost 6,000 miles. This means that it will take two to three weeks for these warships to reach the Eastern Mediterranean.

When the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group reaches the area of responsibility of Sixth Fleet, the number of warships equipped with Tomahawk missiles available to the fleet will rise to nine. A total of 59 Tomahawk missiles were fired at a Syrian airbase from two U.S. destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean a year ago after Trump ordered a strike to retaliate for another chemical weapons attack in Khan Shaykhoun.

Of course, the first mission of any attack plan is to take out the air defenses.  But Russia has deployed the S-400 air defense system over Syria, and the air group of the USS Truman is not stealthy.  Israel has already lost one plane a few days ago.

Russia has said that any loss of Russian life will invite severe retaliation, according to MSNBC.

Perhaps a neat little war with Russia will ensue?

The Washington Post wrote:Russian air defense raises stakes of U.S. confrontation in Syria

By Karen DeYoung October 17, 2016

Russia’s completion this month of an integrated air defense system in Syria has made an Obama administration decision to strike Syrian government installations from the air even less likely than it has been for years, and has created a substantial obstacle to the Syrian safe zones both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have advocated.

Deployment of mobile and interchangeable S-400 and S-300 missile batteries, along with other short-range systems, now gives Russia the ability to shoot down planes and cruise missiles over at least 250 miles in all directions from western Syria, covering virtually all of that country as well as significant portions of Turkey, Israel, Jordan and the eastern Mediterranean.

By placing the missiles as a threat “against military action” by other countries in Syria, Russia has raised “the stakes of confrontation,” Secretary of State John F. Kerry said Sunday.

While there is some disagreement among military experts as to the capability of the Russian systems, particularly the newly deployed S-300, “the reality is, we’re very concerned anytime those are emplaced,” a U.S. Defense official said. Neither its touted ability to counter U.S. stealth technology, or to target low-flying aircraft, has ever been tested by the United States.

“It’s not like we’ve had any shoot at an F-35,” the official said of the next-generation U.S. fighter jet. “We’re not sure if any of our aircraft can defeat the S-300.”



For more than two years, Syria has tacitly accepted U.S. and coalition airstrikes against the Islamic State, in areas relatively far afield from where the civil war is being fought. An agreement signed by Moscow and Washington last fall, after Russia sent its own air force to join that of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, is designed to ensure that U.S. and Russian planes stay well away from each other.

But the ongoing Russian-Syrian siege of Aleppo, and the failure of diplomatic negotiations to stop it, has forced the administration to reconsider its options, including the use of American air power to ground Assad’s air force.

The possibility of using U.S. air power in the civil war, even to patrol a safe zone for civilians, has never been favored by the Pentagon, which has argued that it would involve preemptory strikes on Syria’s fixed air defenses. Now, with the installation of a comprehensive, potent Russian air defense system, many military officials see it as risking a great power game of chicken, and possible war, according to senior administration officials.

Several officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss Russian capabilities and recent high-level White House meetings on Syria, Iraq and the Islamic State, including a Friday gathering of the National Security Council chaired by President Obama. The NSC session largely focused on the Mosul offensive begun against the Islamic State this week, and an upcoming operation against the militants in the city of Raqqa, their Syrian headquarters.

Consideration of other alternatives, including the shipment of arms to U.S.-allied Kurdish forces in Syria, and an increase in the quantity and quality of weapons supplied to opposition fighters in Aleppo and elsewhere, were deferred until later, officials said. U.S. military action to stop Syrian and Russian bombing of civilians was even further down the list of possibilities.

Another senior official dismissed what he called Moscow’s “yard sale approach” of displaying all available systems to attract potential purchasers, and said last month’s S-300 deployment did not much change Russian capabilities from where they have been over the past year. Russian arms sellers have repeatedly hailed the performance of their weaponry in Syria and claimed heightened sales abroad.

U.S. strikes in heavily populated western Syria, despite the presence there of al-Qaeda-affiliated forces of the Front for the Conquest of Syria, formerly known as Jabhat al-Nusra, have been few and far between, precisely to avoid the risk of civil war involvement and, more recently, confrontation with Russia.

An attack early this month that eliminated a senior Front official in Idlib province, in northwestern Syria, was carried out by an unmanned U.S. drone, with notice provided to Russia.

Moscow has denied that Russian and Syrian attacks have intentionally struck civilians, saying they are directed toward the Front, some of whose forces are mixed with the rebels in Aleppo and elsewhere. In early September, Kerry said the United States would join with Russia in attacking the al-Qaeda forces, in exchange for a Russian and Syrian cease-fire and the delivery of humanitarian aid to besieged civilians.

It was when that agreement fell apart — and the United States suspended contacts with Russia over Syria as hundreds of civilians have been killed in the brutal bombing of Aleppo — that the Russians moved to install S-300 missiles. They formed the final component of an integrated air defense system, along with S-400 and other surface-to-air systems previously deployed in and around Russia’s Hmeimen air base in Latakia province along the Syrian coast.

Amid widespread talk of U.S. “kinetic” action to stop the Aleppo slaughter, the Russian Defense Ministry warned of the “possible consequences,” noting that “the range [of the defense systems] may come as a surprise to any unidentified flying objects.”

Russian soldiers and officers, it said, were working on the ground throughout territory controlled by the Syrian government and “any missile or airstrikes . . . will create a clear threat to Russian servicemen.”

In addition, the ministry said, following the Sept. 17 U.S. airstrike that inadvertently killed dozens of Syrian soldiers in eastern Syria, “we have taken all necessary measures to avoid any such ‘mistakes’ against Russian troops and military installations in Syria.”

Neither the administration, nor either of the presidential nominees, has ever favored using U.S. combat forces in Syria’s civil war. But the use of air power to create a zone inside the country where civilians could be safe from relentless airstrikes by Syria and Russia has long been advocated by regional allies and domestic critics of what is seen as a weak administration policy.

Both Clinton and Trump have favored such a strategy — in Clinton’s case, since she was secretary of state. Trump has advocated establishing a safe zone inside Syria as a way to stem the flow of Syrian refugees to Europe and this country.

But while such zones — protected by U.S. air power — were established during years past in Iraq, Libya and Bosnia, all were against relatively weak opponents and conducted under United Nations authorization. Neither presidential nominee has addressed the question of comprehensive Russian air defenses.

Although Kerry has continued to try to revive the cease-fire, U.S. leverage against Russia appears minimal. Following talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and U.S. European and regional allies last weekend, Kerry said that increased sanctions against both Russia and Syria were under consideration.

Meanwhile, Russia on Monday offered an eight-hour pause to the Aleppo bombing this week to allow Front militants and civilians to leave the city.

Nice time to have the idiot pussy-grabber in charge, eh?  Of course, his bungling started this mess.  If he'd acted responsibly like his predecessor, President Obama, we wouldn't be in this shithole of a situation.

We have no State Department to lend intelligence to the situation. Remember, Trump said diplomacy was for pussies, and he would handle everything personally. Fat chance! Lock him up with 25 naked Playboy bunnies and let the generals handle things.  Leave the non-disclosure agreements to Michael Cohen.

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:25 pm

More like he has more balls than Obama, who if he had of stepped in and countered Russia with Putin. When this civil war first started and when Assad first used chemical weapons. This could have been finished ages ago

Israel has evaded Russia's radar now twice, with the f-35 Lightning. The latest attack rendered that radar redundent.

If that is what the USS Harry Truman has in its compliment of planes. Then it will be the Russians very much defenseless.

They were only able to bring down an old F-16.

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:49 pm

Didge wrote:More like he has more balls than Obama, who if he had of stepped in and countered Russia with Putin. When this civil war first started and when Assad first used chemical weapons. This could have been finished ages ago

Obama sent a Syrian/ISIS war bill up to the Republican Congress in 2013.  The Republicans refused to act, and shelved it.

The president can't start a war without Congress. Art. I, section 8, clause 11, US Constitution.  The Republicans are cowards...and look, they still don't know how to react.  Run, Ryan, Run!

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by WhoseYourWolfie on Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:03 pm

Didge wrote:More like he has more balls than Obama, who if he had of stepped in and countered Russia with Putin. When this civil war first started and when Assad first used chemical weapons. This could have been finished ages ago

Israel has evaded Russia's radar now twice, with the f-35 Lightning. The latest attack rendered that radar redundent.

If that is what the USS Harry Truman has in its compliment of planes. Then it will be the Russians very much defenseless.

They were only able to bring down an old F-16.



More clueless bullshit from know-nothing Dodge...

It wasn't Obama who failed to act against Assad..


The F35 is not yet a genuinely "battle ready" aircraft --  despite some promising test flights --   yet more evidence of Didge's Zionist-fed ignorance.

The F35 is still in development in real world terms --  with the USAF the lead buyer of F35s, with Australia, Israel and Canada as the lead partners, the Dodger is truly delusional if he wants to believe his propaganda that Israel is so far superior to its development partners.


The naval planes that America and Britain would use are likely to be Tomcats for old planes and F-22 Raptors if they deploy newer ones ..

http://m.aviationweek.com/CloserLookAtStealth#slide-0-field_images-1474411

_________________
It's not what you look at that matters, it's what you see.
Our life is frittered away by details. Simplify, simplify.
The mass of men lead lives of quite desperation.
Henry David Thoreau
avatar
WhoseYourWolfie

Posts : 5766
Join date : 2016-02-24
Age : 60
Location : Lake Macquarie, NSW, Australia

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:22 pm

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:
Didge wrote:More like he has more balls than Obama, who if he had of stepped in and countered Russia with Putin. When this civil war first started and when Assad first used chemical weapons. This could have been finished ages ago

Israel has evaded Russia's radar now twice, with the f-35 Lightning. The latest attack rendered that radar redundent.

If that is what the USS Harry Truman has in its compliment of planes. Then it will be the Russians very much defenseless.

They were only able to bring down an old F-16.



More clueless bullshit from know-nothing Dodge...
c

It wasn't Obama who failed to act against Assad..
Didge wrote:He had the power to act and what did he dod?
Only act, with airstrikes two years down the road of the conflict


The F35 is not yet a genuinely "battle ready" aircraft --  despite some promising test flights --   yet more evidence of Didge's Zionist-fed ignorance.
Didge wrote:
Really?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israels-f-35-stealth-fighters-declared-operational-a-year-after-their-arrival/

Do you need a tissue to wipe that egg of your face you stalinist arselicker?

The F35 is still in development in real world terms --  with the USAF the lead buyer of F35s, with Australia, Israel and Canada as the lead partners, the Dodger is truly delusional if he wants to believe his propaganda that Israel is so far superior to its development partners.
Didge wrote:Or as seen its you that is delusional
http://uk.businessinsider.com/us-navy-aircraft-carrier-full-of-f-35s-north-korea-uss-wasp2017-9



The naval planes that America and Britain would use are likely to be Tomcats for old planes and F-22 Raptors if they deploy newer ones ..

http://m.aviationweek.com/CloserLookAtStealth#slide-0-field_images-1474411

http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/f35b-lightning-ii-sets-sail-aboard-uss-wasp-on-first-every-operational-deployment/news-story/ad93faacc4f5f3b99df50e6aa1e54567

Opps

Maybe you can explain what planes these were that went undetected by the Russians?

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-the-target-of-the-strike-on-syria-was-the-iranian-air-force-compound-1.5990918

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:27 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:More like he has more balls than Obama, who if he had of stepped in and countered Russia with Putin. When this civil war first started and when Assad first used chemical weapons. This could have been finished ages ago

Obama sent a Syrian/ISIS war bill up to the Republican Congress in 2013.  The Republicans refused to act, and shelved it.

The president can't start a war without Congress.  Art. I, section 8, clause 11, US Constitution.  The Republicans are cowards...and look, they still don't know how to react.  Run, Ryan, Run!

The Terrible Cost of Obama's Failure in Syria:

Four years ago, it almost looked as if chemical attacks on Syrian civilians would stop. “We struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out,” declared then-Secretary of State John Kerry on Meet the Press in 2014. Kerry was referring to Bashar al-Assad’s declared stockpiles of chemical weapons which, under a 2013 deal struck by the Obama administration following a sarin nerve gas attack that brought the U.S. to the brink of striking Syrian government forces, were dismantled and shipped out of the country.

But there were two important and deadly loopholes. The first was that Assad did not declare everything—a reality that Kerry acknowledged publicly, including in a farewell memo to staff, in which he wrote that “unfortunately other undeclared chemical weapons continue to be used ruthlessly against the Syrian people.” The second was that chlorine gas, which has legitimate civilian uses, was not part of the deal. The Syrian American Medical Society and the White Helmets civil-defense group have documented 200 chemical attacks in Syria since 2012, many involving chlorine. On Saturday, the group alleged a particularly gruesome attack in the besieged city of Douma, which has reportedly killed dozens and injured hundreds. It remains unclear exactly what chemical weapon was involved in the alleged attack.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/04/syria-obama-trump-assad-chemical-douma/557486/

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 3:37 pm

Within hours of learning that Bashar al-Assad launched another horrific chemical-weapons attack on his own people, Trump tweeted there’d be a “big price to pay.” He should follow his instincts by holding Assad accountable, increasing his leverage over Vladimir Putin and breaking Iran’s strategic foothold in Syria.

The tragedy of Syria is largely rooted in two decisions made by Trump’s predecessor, Barack Obama. The first was a refusal to act on his own declared red line for military action in response to the use of chemical weapons, which invited Russia and Iran to dominate the region.
The second was Obama’s decision to waive US sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran, which gave the Islamic Republic hundreds of billions of dollars to bolster the Assad regime both financially and militarily.

Trump now has an opportunity to reverse both mistakes. First and foremost, he should respond militarily to Assad’s crimes.

Obama’s failure to establish a US military deterrent emboldened Iran, North Korea, Russia and China to challenge America at every turn. Trump can ill afford to make the same mistake, particularly at a time when many question his resolve.

https://nypost.com/2018/04/09/what-to-do-about-syria-and-its-chief-accomplice-iran/

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:10 pm

Didge wrote:http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/f35b-lightning-ii-sets-sail-aboard-uss-wasp-on-first-every-operational-deployment/news-story/ad93faacc4f5f3b99df50e6aa1e54567

Opps

Maybe you can explain what planes these were that went undetected by the Russians?

The F-35 is not yet operational.  Your article, F-35B Lightning II sets sail aboard USS Wasp on first every operational deployment, published in March, 2018, in support of your thesis, says as much.  The F-35 is being put through it's paces on the USS Wasp, presently deployed in the Pacific Ocean:

news.com.au wrote:As the USS Wasp makes its way through the Pacific during the next few months, the Pentagon will get to find out if they’ve got their money’s worth.

The S-400 air defense system is a system, not a single rocket or aircraft.  It anticipates all manner of weaponry, not just one component.  For example, the F-35 still has to fly off a carrier...the S-400 has anti-ship missiles.

The major benefits of the F-35 are (1) it's stealthiness and (2) it's VTOL (vertical take-off & landing) capability.  But it still needs to be integrated into a well defended naval task force, or land-born defense such as Jordan for the French, or Cyprus for the UK.

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:16 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:http://www.news.com.au/technology/innovation/f35b-lightning-ii-sets-sail-aboard-uss-wasp-on-first-every-operational-deployment/news-story/ad93faacc4f5f3b99df50e6aa1e54567

Opps

Maybe you can explain what planes these were that went undetected by the Russians?

The F-35 is not yet operational.  Your article in support of your thesis, says as much.  The F-35 is being put through it's paces on the USS Wasp, presently deployed in the Pacific Ocean:

news.com.au wrote:As the USS Wasp makes its way through the Pacific during the next few months, the Pentagon will get to find out if they’ve got their money’s worth.

The S-400 air defense system is a system, not a single rocket or aircraft.  It anticipates all manner of weaponry, not just one component.  For example, the F-35 still has to fly off a carrier...the S-400 has anti-ship missiles.

The major benefits of the F-35 are (1) it's stealthiness and (2) it's VTOL (vertical take-off & landing) capability.  But it still needs to be integrated into a well defended naval task force, or land-born defense such as Jordan for the French, or Cyprus for the UK.


Yes it is operational both with the US and Israel air forces.
Even more so its going to be operational and this is just one of ther stealth fighters that the US can deploy.
You forget the US is able to hit any target in the world, with its air refueling system. You have F-22 raptor fighter, as well as they other stealth bombers.

I know its a system, so how was the Israeli's able to evade that system and has done so on many occasions, when it has hit targets in Syria?

Only one old F16 was taken down in all these sorties and attacks against Hezbollah and Syrian forces.

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:22 pm

You really are out of date Quill mate

https://www.f35.com/news/detail/first-operational-f-35a-squadron-receives-final-aircraft

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:40 pm

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Obama sent a Syrian/ISIS war bill up to the Republican Congress in 2013.  The Republicans refused to act, and shelved it.

The president can't start a war without Congress.  Art. I, section 8, clause 11, US Constitution.  The Republicans are cowards...and look, they still don't know how to react.  Run, Ryan, Run!

The Terrible Cost of Obama's Failure in Syria:

Four years ago, it almost looked as if chemical attacks on Syrian civilians would stop. “We struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out,” declared then-Secretary of State John Kerry on Meet the Press in 2014. Kerry was referring to Bashar al-Assad’s declared stockpiles of chemical weapons which, under a 2013 deal struck by the Obama administration following a sarin nerve gas attack that brought the U.S. to the brink of striking Syrian government forces, were dismantled and shipped out of the country.

But there were two important and deadly loopholes. The first was that Assad did not declare everything—a reality that Kerry acknowledged publicly, including in a farewell memo to staff, in which he wrote that “unfortunately other undeclared chemical weapons continue to be used ruthlessly against the Syrian people.” The second was that chlorine gas, which has legitimate civilian uses, was not part of the deal. The Syrian American Medical Society and the White Helmets civil-defense group have documented 200 chemical attacks in Syria since 2012, many involving chlorine. On Saturday, the group alleged a particularly gruesome attack in the besieged city of Douma, which has reportedly killed dozens and injured hundreds. It remains unclear exactly what chemical weapon was involved in the alleged attack.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/04/syria-obama-trump-assad-chemical-douma/557486/

What was Secretary Kerry and President Obama to do, attack Syria with harsh language?  Didge, you still are smitten with arguing over learning.  Without the ability to play diplomacy off military strength, the US was a paper tiger.

The Republican Congress failed America and the world by elevating local politics over geopolitical strength.  Congress calls the shots on all war-making under Article I, of the US Constitution.  The Constitution provides that Congress shall have exclusive power to:

US Constitution, Art. I,, sec. 8, clause 11 wrote:To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;

Had the Republicans not been enamored with preventing Obama from doing what should have been done, there might have been an effective deterrence set up in Syria today.  But the Republican theme of Party over Nation still persists, even today.  Look at Trump, arguing that Democrats are responsible for failures even when Republicans now control both Houses, the Executive and the Court.

You've got to be realistic: the Republican Congress failed to act in 2013, not Obama.  Dr. Obama had no part in the 'do-nothing' congressional fiasco.

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:48 pm

Didge wrote:You really are out of date Quill mate

https://www.f35.com/news/detail/first-operational-f-35a-squadron-receives-final-aircraft

You still didn't learn, did you?  The F-35 may be operational, but it's overall systems are not:

F-35 News wrote:“Gaining the 24th F-35A here is another outstanding milestone for the 388th and 419th wings,” said Col Jason Rueschhoff, 388th Operations Group commander. “This allows both operations and maintenance to fine-tune our tactics, techniques, and procedures with a focus on maximizing our combat lethality.”

Perhaps you should spend less time on finding C&P's, and more time on reading between the lines.

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:23 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:You really are out of date Quill mate

https://www.f35.com/news/detail/first-operational-f-35a-squadron-receives-final-aircraft

You still didn't learn, did you?  The F-35 may be operational, but it's overall systems are not:

F-35 News wrote:“Gaining the 24th F-35A here is another outstanding milestone for the 388th and 419th wings,” said Col Jason Rueschhoff, 388th Operations Group commander. “This allows both operations and maintenance to fine-tune our tactics, techniques, and procedures with a focus on maximizing our combat lethality.”

Perhaps you should spend less time on finding C&P's, and more time on reading between the lines.

You did not learn either, as they are operational as seen by the meaning operational sqaudron, as that link was well over a year ago.,

Doh

Plus the fact Israel has them operational

Maybe you should not be such a lemon

You really think that they are not or could not be used operationally?

PMSL,

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:27 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:

The Terrible Cost of Obama's Failure in Syria:

Four years ago, it almost looked as if chemical attacks on Syrian civilians would stop. “We struck a deal where we got 100 percent of the chemical weapons out,” declared then-Secretary of State John Kerry on Meet the Press in 2014. Kerry was referring to Bashar al-Assad’s declared stockpiles of chemical weapons which, under a 2013 deal struck by the Obama administration following a sarin nerve gas attack that brought the U.S. to the brink of striking Syrian government forces, were dismantled and shipped out of the country.

But there were two important and deadly loopholes. The first was that Assad did not declare everything—a reality that Kerry acknowledged publicly, including in a farewell memo to staff, in which he wrote that “unfortunately other undeclared chemical weapons continue to be used ruthlessly against the Syrian people.” The second was that chlorine gas, which has legitimate civilian uses, was not part of the deal. The Syrian American Medical Society and the White Helmets civil-defense group have documented 200 chemical attacks in Syria since 2012, many involving chlorine. On Saturday, the group alleged a particularly gruesome attack in the besieged city of Douma, which has reportedly killed dozens and injured hundreds. It remains unclear exactly what chemical weapon was involved in the alleged attack.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/04/syria-obama-trump-assad-chemical-douma/557486/


You've got to be realistic: the Republican Congress failed to act in 2013, not Obama.  Dr. Obama had no part in the 'do-nothing' congressional fiasco.






Did you even read the link?

Seriously, with that load of babble?

What did it actually say?

Take your time

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:30 pm

You are also talking bullshit on Obama

It's a step Obama was unwilling to take, at least without congressional approval, as Obama elected not to strike Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime in 2013 after a chemical attack crossed his "red line."


But Obama did launch airstrikes in Syria a year later, as the US began a military campaign against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. The nearly three-year war against ISIS has led to a steady stream of US bombings from manned aircraft, drones and missiles fired from warships.

https://edition.cnn.com/2017/04/07/politics/obama-syria-airstrikes-trump/index.html

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:45 pm

Didge wrote:You are also talking bullshit on Obama

It's a step Obama was unwilling to take, at least without congressional approval, as Obama elected not to strike Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime in 2013 after a chemical attack crossed his "red line."

No, it's illegal.  The Republicans are war-hawks, and they have invented a lot of theories on how the executive can take unilateral action.  Republicans also invented theories for torture, as well.  It's in their blood.  You have to understand that Republicans (and Conservatives) are inhumane, and are disposed to harm their fellows.

The most fundamental principle of the Constitution is separation of powers.  If the founders wanted the executive to have direct authority to engage in wars, they would not have given the power to Congress, the people's branch.

Didge wrote:But Obama did launch airstrikes in Syria a year later, as the US began a military campaign against ISIS in Iraq and Syria. The nearly three-year war against ISIS has led to a steady stream of US bombings from manned aircraft, drones and missiles fired from warships.

And notice there is no army in Syria.  What Obama did was use the limited executive war power to chase-the-enemy, in order to send aircraft into Syria.  Thereafter, he sent in a few hundred soldiers in as trainers and non-combat personnel.  If Obama had sent in troops for actual fighting, Republicans (who rejected his war bill) would have started impeachment proceedings.  Republicans openly announced they were dedicated to making America fail as long as Obama was in the WH.[/quote]

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Didge on Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:59 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:You are also talking bullshit on Obama

It's a step Obama was unwilling to take, at least without congressional approval, as Obama elected not to strike Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime in 2013 after a chemical attack crossed his "red line."

No, it's illegal.  The Republicans are war-hawks, and they have invented a lot of theories on how the executive can take unilateral action.  Republicans also invented theories for torture, as well.  It's in their blood.  You have to understand that Republicans (and Conservatives) are inhumane, and are disposed to harm their fellows.
Didge wrote:Really? They are war hawks?
Just how many wars have the Democrats got the US involved in, just from the 20th century (how to go back even further if you like)?

WW1
Banana Wars (Occupation of Haiti and the Dominican Republic)
Russian Civil War
WW2
Korea
Bay of Pigs (Cuban Crisis)
Vietnam
Communist insurgency in Thailand
Dominican Civil War
Insurgency in Bolivia
Cambodian Civil War
War in South Zaire
Operation Eagle Claw (Iranian Hostage crisis)
Intervention in Haiti (1994–1995)
Kosovo War
Operation Infinite Reach

In their blood you say?
What does that make the Democrats then?




The most fundamental principle of the Constitution is separation of powers.  If the founders wanted the executive to have direct authority to engage in wars, they would not have given the power to Congress, the people's branch.

Didge wrote:And yet Obama carried out airstrikes against ISIS, without approval. All he obtaiedn was to arm 5000 rebels, in 2014, with congress approval

And notice there is no army in Syria.  What Obama did was use the limited executive war power to chase-the-enemy, in order to send aircraft into Syria.  Thereafter, he sent in a few hundred soldiers in as trainers and non-combat personnel.  If Obama had sent in troops for actual fighting, Republicans (who rejected his war bill) would have started impeachment proceedings.  Republicans openly announced they were dedicated to making America fail as long as Obama was in the WH.

So he did exactly what Trump is doing. Actually he sent in many troops to Iraq to fight ISIS, as they invited the US to come.

I am no fan of the republicans, but as seen your view on war mongering is clearly misplaced with the Democrats. Being as they got involved in countless conflicts.

Again Obama was a great Domestic President, but the worst foreign policy wise and why we have seen nations like North Korea, Syria and Russia, continue to take the piss.

_________________
Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free.

-- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
avatar
Didge

Posts : 10280
Join date : 2016-06-18

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Fri Apr 13, 2018 4:06 am

Didge wrote:So he did exactly what Trump is doing. Actually he sent in many troops to Iraq to fight ISIS, as they invited the US to come.

Trump seems to realize that Obama was right to accept, without strong resistance, Congress' desire to avoid another overseas military adventure. He (Trump) is following that course...and it seems that his followers intuit that he is right.

But all that this means is that some reconstructed Republicans have realized all along that the Democrats were right about the Bush administration. The Neo-Con bent toward preemptive war appears to have created the mood that all of America has no-will for any more foreign military adventures.

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Fri Apr 13, 2018 4:14 am

Didge wrote:I am no fan of the republicans, but as seen your view on war mongering is clearly misplaced with the Democrats. Being as they got involved in countless conflicts.

I think the Democrats realized, before the war-starved Republicans, the ultimate futility of asymmetrical war. Vietnam was the model and it ended the Democrat, Lyndon Johnson's, presidency.

Recall, Johnson quit because he realized his own party was not behind him. It was the beginning of America's disenchantment with war, and the beginning of the no-will for war sentiment.

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Original Quill on Fri Apr 13, 2018 4:31 am

Didge wrote:Again Obama was a great Domestic President, but the worst foreign policy wise and why we have seen nations like North Korea, Syria and Russia, continue to take the piss.

It bears repeating, Obama had no decision in the Syria matter. I'll admit, when Republicans rejected Obama's war bill in 2013, his attitude appears to have been to let it be. But we will never know if that was futility at Republican steadfast dedication to opposing him, or his lack of enthusiasm for another protracted war.

What we have seen with North Korea, Russia, and Iran, is clever nations, skilled in statecraft, running circles around the child president, Donald Trump. Russia has ensnared Trump in Kompromat, Iran will tease and torment him to provoke a situation to re-start their nuclear program, and North Korea will trick him into releasing sanctions one more time...which they will violate. Why not? He's easy prey.

America deserves this. They put an idiot in the White House.

_________________
“Little thieves are hanged, but great thieves are praised.” — Old Russian proverb, offered by Vladimir Putin to Donald J. Trump.

"I don't stand by anything."  ― Donald Trump, interview with John Dickerson, 5.1.17...

“That's libertarians for you — anarchists who want police protection from their slaves.” ― Kim Stanley Robinson, Green Mars
avatar
Original Quill

Posts : 23615
Join date : 2013-12-19
Age : 53
Location : Northern California

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: US deploys for next war

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum