Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: reed13k

Interesting - I hadn’t realized how close Canadian land was there. Could the missile have originated on their side? From their waters?

Has that stolen sub ever been found?


64 posted on 06/13/2018 6:25:05 AM PDT by meyer (The Constitution says what it says, and it doesn't say what it doesn't say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]


To: meyer

As I recall, one of the postulated sources of the possible missile launch at Hawaii was from a Canadian sub...

Will look.


74 posted on 06/13/2018 6:40:45 AM PDT by smileyface (Things looking up in RED PA! I love President Trump!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

To: meyer

far as I know the Argentinian sub wasn’t located - but it also didn’t have launch capabilities - a diesel without VLS tubes of any type. Torpedoes would have been the only armament as I understood.


101 posted on 06/13/2018 7:23:36 AM PDT by reed13k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

To: meyer

“Could the missile have originated on their side? From their waters?

No, not from the location of the missile and camera, which was some 30 miles (at least) south of the launch, across the Sound from Everett. This can’t be a rogue sub, NAS Whidbey is an anti-submarine warfare base! This couldn’t have happened literally right under their nose, you could have chucked a rock from Whidbey and hit the sub that launched this missile!

This HAD to be a “friendly” launch, or that sub wouldn’t exist any longer.


174 posted on 06/13/2018 9:18:46 AM PDT by Scott from the Left Coast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson