Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Site Notices
6/21/2017 8:25:40 PM
Posted: 12/10/2001 3:24:05 PM EDT
Already a US warship has been stationed off the Somali coast and this weekend there were reports that surveillance flights had been carried out over the country.
View Quote
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/africa/newsid_1702000/1702338.stm[/url] Payback time for 1993 Mogadishu!
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 3:30:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/10/2001 3:25:21 PM EDT by ArmdLbrl]
Would be nice. Can we do this AND the Philippines at the same time. Hate to keep carping about this, but some of Bin Ladens pals are actually holding LIVE Americans hostage there. And I dont like the low priority the Bush Admin keeps giving that situation. Beyond that I dont mind revenge. [b]"Gordon and Shugart Avenged!"[/b]... Slight modification on the British battlecry they used when conquering the Sudan- and putting down another Islamic madman- 102 years ago. Funny how things go in cycles like this.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 3:39:52 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 3:47:00 PM EDT
Originally Posted By osprey21: I just now heard on the radio that we have "a" submarine in the immediate area. [X] "Revenge is best served cold"
View Quote
We have more than that I would assume. I cant imagine a Predator taking off or landing from a sub. Amphibious assault ship yes, but not the round back of a sub.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 3:48:11 PM EDT
Oh my! Won't they be suprised when we show up pissed off this time!!
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 3:53:57 PM EDT
Bush will right Clinton's Fuck-Up.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 3:56:41 PM EDT
We're Back.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 3:57:31 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/10/2001 4:00:12 PM EDT by DaMan]
You guys are pretty funny! Which aspirin plants will they hit THIS time? [:P] This is "sword rattling" to show the Somalis that the US would be plenty displeased if bin Laden or his chronies attempted to show up in Somalia unreported! DaMan
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:11:41 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:16:34 PM EDT
yeah lets work are way up, start at about fifth world countries and work our way up to china and korea... only a hundred or so to go :)
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:21:36 PM EDT
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: Would be nice. Can we do this AND the Philippines at the same time.
View Quote
I sure hope so! I can't imagine that even klinton managed to nerf our armed forces THAT badly. So much for the old philosophy of being able to handle "two large scale regional wars" simultaneously. Now we have to worry about two 3rd world countries!? I sure am glad gore wasn't elected.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:26:47 PM EDT
...............and here I was trying to enjoy military leave....[beer]... Hold off on ground troops until I get back....now.."Air Force...BOMB THEM!"......we'll clean up the mess later...Thanks [smoke] [marines]
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:28:31 PM EDT
A Defense Department Admiral and an Under Secretary seemed to dodge the Somali question today. Regarding our being able to fight two major conflicts in different parts of the world simultaneously that doctrine has been eliminated. Primarily Spec Forces will fight in the Philippines.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:35:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 5subslr5: Regarding our being able to fight two major conflicts in different parts of the world simultaneously that doctrine has been eliminated.
View Quote
Seems odd to me. I'm no historian, but in the last BIG one, wasn't there a European theatre and a Pacific theatre? Those both seem pretty major to me.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:38:11 PM EDT
In the "post-Cold War" environment the US feels it does not need to be able to fight a war on two different fronts.......probably not the right answer.....but current Pentagon doctrine where we are all warm, fuzzy peacekeepers.....
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:40:10 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:41:55 PM EDT
Santyth, I'm speaking of the military at its' present levels. Last week a guy posted just how many troops, planes, ships, etc., had been eliminated in the last eight years. Truly scary. The long training time needed for today's military personnel make a quick ramp-up virtually impossible. As an example all the MEU Marines at Camp Rhino have about one and one-half years training.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:52:34 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 5subslr5: Santyth, I'm speaking of the military at its' present levels. Last week a guy posted just how many troops, planes, ships, etc., had been eliminated in the last eight years. Truly scary. The long training time needed for today's military personnel make a quick ramp-up virtually impossible. As an example all the MEU Marines at Camp Rhino have about one and one-half years training.
View Quote
Why do you think either Somalia or Philippines would be a "major comitment"? We still have 4 other MEU's and the rest of 3 Marine divisions sitting idle. The Philippines do not require a assault landing, we can just fly in on charter aircraft. We are using 1 Brigade out of 10 Army Divisions. Course the AF could be running short of transport aircraft. But Somalia is on the seacoast and the Philippines are islands, the Navy can deal with moving stuff.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 4:53:05 PM EDT
i wonder if the CNN reporters will be on the beach to greet the marines? camera lights are hard on nite vision. what a shame it would have been if a marine tripped and went full auto on the "lights" during there landing.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:06:25 PM EDT
hmmm.. i say we send in walker... the Somali 'civilians' can kill him for us and then drag him through the streets live on CNN (sound familiar anyone) except this time we drop a load of napalm on them live on CNN... wait better yet we drop it on the cameraman too...
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:13:08 PM EDT
Orionfly, Sounds like that would solve SEVERAL problems......very tactical...
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:32:53 PM EDT
Man, how bad do we suck? We used to pick on countries that could at least fight back. No we only go after countries with no central government at all! How fucking pathetic.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:39:13 PM EDT
always get rid of the little fish first before they grow up and bite you in the ass, take care of the few big ones later....
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:41:36 PM EDT
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:43:55 PM EDT
Armed, I don't believe either the Philippines or Somalia will be a major commitment. I was addressing our current inability to fight two major conflicts simultaneously. We can't.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:52:33 PM EDT
That submarine sitting off the coast is there for three possible reasons: 1) ELINT (Intelligence) gathering 2) Insert some SEALs or other Spec Forces 3) Launch some cruise missiles with a very short flight time and lots of fuel remaining. Of course could be all of the above. I would not rule out a Predator type surveillance aircraft being submarine launched. All that's needed is a small ramp and a JATO - (Jet Assisted Take Off) The trip would be one-way as they would probably bring it back out to sea after the mission and crash it.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 5:59:34 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Paul: Exactly which countries could even do battle with one carrier battle group let alone a half a dozen or more? (that answer would be none)
View Quote
I think the US could. Hmm. Isn't it about time for the South to rise again? [;)]
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 6:14:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/10/2001 6:09:50 PM EDT by DaMan]
Originally Posted By osprey21:
Originally Posted By DaMan: You guys are pretty funny! Which aspirin plants will they hit THIS time? [:P] This is "sword rattling" to show the Somalis that the US would be plenty displeased if bin Laden or his chronies attempted to show up in Somalia unreported! DaMan
View Quote
The asprin factory that your BOY bill bombed was in Sudan..and your point is ?
View Quote
My point is that the US is not going to bomb empty camps and civilian facilities in Somalia like they did previously in the Sudan and Afghanistan under Klinton! They are not going to bomb to get revenge for Mogadishu. They are making sure that none of the various waring clans in Somalia harbor bin Laden or his chronies. That's why they're watching the area right now. It is rumored that bin Laden might try to flee to Somalia. DaMan
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 6:48:27 PM EDT
Originally Posted By trickshot: Man, how bad do we suck? We used to pick on countries that could at least fight back. No we only go after countries with no central government at all! How fucking pathetic.
View Quote
Yes, your pitiful attempts to talk down your own country are very pathetic.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 7:06:39 PM EDT
DaMan we can start with guys that killed our Rangers and Delta Operators.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 7:15:42 PM EDT
Hate to keep carping about this, but some of Bin Ladens pals are actually holding LIVE Americans hostage there. And I dont like the low priority the Bush Admin keeps giving that situation.
View Quote
Making hostages a high priority (at least publicly) plays right into the hands of the hostage takers. Don't you remember what happened to Jimmy Carter? [img]http://www.arlingtoncemetery.com/iran-mission02.jpg[/img]
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 8:07:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/10/2001 9:40:22 PM EDT by DaMan]
Originally Posted By JIMBEAM: DaMan we can start with guys that killed our Rangers and Delta Operators.
View Quote
JIMBEAM, I wholeheartedly agree with you BUT here's the situation! As you will recall, the Mogadishu raid was targeted against a meeting attended by some of warlord, Mohamed Farrah Aidid's lieutenants. It went terribly wrong. Eighteen US troops and a Malasian were killed. We left, Aidid won, gained power and prestige. Mohamed Farrah Aidid, got whacked a couple years later (not by US). So we can't get revenge on him. BUT, maybe we could still whack the warlord's son Hussein Muhamed Aidid (Aidid Jr.), some of the current warlord's lieutenants, and his remaining gang! [:P] But wait! There's a problem! Hussein Muhamed Aidid (Aidid Jr.), the present warlord and head of the Habr Gidr, is on OUR SIDE! Well, at least he has promised to help fight against the almost non-existant Al Itihad (who have possible financial links to bin Laden). Aidid Jr., is in turn supported by the Ethiopeans, who are supported (sort of) by the US who want to get bin Laden. So the son (current warlord) and the group that killed out men in Mogadishu, would be our ALLIES!!! DaMan PS- OBTW, Aidid Jr. received his military training in the US courtesy of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 8:08:06 PM EDT
Don't we have a little spelunking to finish up first?
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 9:20:37 PM EDT
Thus far the United States has been able to dictate the Pace of the War, If this stops and other countries get involved then we may find ourselves with a collapsed middle east very quickly. Our military forces should have never been drawn down after the 80's but they were. That is par for the course for a politician. They did it before WWI and WWII and only Reagen in recent times had the foresight to strengthen our country. The beauracrats proclaimed the cold war over and they decide overnight that we no longer need a military. Democrats have shit for brains. I remember watching the then Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Powell before the Senate Defense committee talking about future American needs in early 90's I was totally bewildered by the way the democrats asked questions which only lead to certain answers. Never once did they ask Powell what he needed to keep the US safe. They only asked him if they needed to power to fight a two front war on the scale of the Gulf War or a Single Front war on the scale of the Gulf War with two small conflicts. I was screaming at the TV, "Don't put up with that bullshit Powell. Tell them what we need and what we face." But alas it was just the TV. Powell should have said that the world had just gotten a hell of a lot more dangerous and they would need to be capable of fighting the whole of the middle east. Benjamin
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 9:22:41 PM EDT
Originally Posted By 5subslr5: Regarding our being able to fight two major conflicts in different parts of the world simultaneously that doctrine has been eliminated.
View Quote
I'm aware of that, that's why I called it the "old philosophy." But I still hope we can manage 2 3rd world countries simultaneously.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 9:32:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/10/2001 9:34:22 PM EDT by DaMan]
Here's what's going on! No invasion! No massive bombing! Man, some of you guys need to start drinking decaf! [url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,1284,616852,00.html[/url] DaMan PS- Eric the Hun might find this article interesting! Especially the comments about Iraq!
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 10:01:11 PM EDT
Here's what's going on! No invasion! No massive bombing! Man, some of you guys need to start drinking decaf!
View Quote
Darn maybe later... Renamed, Just rescuing the hostages isn't the mission in the Philippines. Its only a reason to act now before they get killed. The mission would be to take down the Abu Sayyef for killing a American AND kidnapping the two hostages. Even if they were to be returned to us tomorrow, that wouldnt undo the ordeal they put them through much less the torture and beheading of Guillermo Sobrero.
Link Posted: 12/10/2001 10:53:18 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Orionfly: always get rid of the little fish first before they grow up and bite you in the ass, take care of the few big ones later....
View Quote
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believe we missed our chance of inhabiting 3/4 of the planet after ww2. Seems Patton wanted to pick a fight with Russia and China and kick their asses while we were on a roll.Make it look like they started it and all. The pres. pooped on his parade! Had we done it we,d pretty much own um today. We missed our chance.
Link Posted: 12/11/2001 4:31:17 AM EDT
Just rescuing the hostages isn't the mission in the Philippines. Its only a reason to act now before they get killed. The mission would be to take down the Abu Sayyef for killing a American AND kidnapping the two hostages. Even if they were to be returned to us tomorrow, that wouldnt undo the ordeal they put them through much less the torture and beheading of Guillermo Sobrero.
View Quote
I agree. I just don't want Dubya to start obsessing over the hostage issue.
Link Posted: 12/11/2001 4:41:08 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 5subslr5: Santyth, I'm speaking of the military at its' present levels. Last week a guy posted just how many troops, planes, ships, etc., had been eliminated in the last eight years. Truly scary. The long training time needed for today's military personnel make a quick ramp-up virtually impossible. As an example all the MEU Marines at Camp Rhino have about one and one-half years training.
View Quote
Oh I'm not disagreeing with you, just saying it seems odd. It's being treated as if being able to fight on two major fronts is some sort of mythical capability that isn't really feasable.
Link Posted: 12/11/2001 5:34:10 AM EDT
ZONAN, I don't want to beat this to death but under current doctrine - a few Special Forces/CIA types and massive air-power - I believe we may be limited in the number of small conflicts we can fight due to the limited number of Special Operators. Certainly we can fight two small conflicts simultaneously.
Top Top