To: pepsionice
Get real.
This was NO ‘collision’.
This was a deliberate RAMMING. Now, take it from there........
3 posted on
06/19/2017 5:35:34 AM PDT by
Flintlock
(The ballot box STOLEN, our soapbox taken away--the BULLET BOX is left to us.)
To: Flintlock
FWIW, CharlesO did call the other ship a “naval” vessel....
4 posted on
06/19/2017 5:38:15 AM PDT by
treetopsandroofs
(Had FDR been GOP, there would have been no World Wars, just "The Great War" and "Roosevelt's Wars".)
To: Flintlock
Don’t jump to conclusions. A Navy ship had another collision w a Japanese fishing boat about 6 weeks ago.
Something wrong with radars/watch.
8 posted on
06/19/2017 5:50:11 AM PDT by
LS
("Castles Made of Sand, Fall in the Sea . . . Eventually" (Hendrix))
To: Flintlock
No one (officially) has even yet attempted to explain why a huge container ship would make 2 Crazy Ivans, then do a U-TURN just to run into the Navy ship. Normally, the owner of the container ship would fire a captain who wasted time and fuel taking that crazy path.
12 posted on
06/19/2017 6:04:18 AM PDT by
UCANSEE2
(Lost my tagline on Flight MH370. Sorry for the inconvenience.)
To: Flintlock
Get real. This was NO ‘collision’. This was a deliberate RAMMING. Now, take it from there........ If true doesn't change anything regarding what is going to happen at the board of inquiry.
21 posted on
06/19/2017 3:33:59 PM PDT by
xone
To: Flintlock
A container ship is not maneuverable enough to ram a Destroyer.
This resulted from a deliberate act by someone on the Fitz.
Or a very unlikely series of incompetent acts by them.
27 posted on
06/20/2017 3:56:29 PM PDT by
mrsmith
(Dumb sluts: Lifeblood of the Media, Backbone of the Democrat/RINO Party!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson