Skip to comments.
Tomorrow you will watch the destruction of an American Aircraft Carrier
Northeast Intelligence Network ^
| 03/29/04
| Source
Posted on 03/29/2004 7:56:56 PM PST by Rightone
Edited on 07/27/2004 2:55:55 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
Arabic posting:
(Excerpt) Read more at homelandsecurityus.com ...
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: alqueda; antiamericanism; antiwesternism; blowemup; bombthreat; hangon; idiots; islam; islamofascism; islamofascists; jihad; marines; military; muslims; nationalsecurity; navy; nedebkanetwork; notachance; osama; religionofpeace; religionofpeacetm; sheesh; shieldsup; terror; terrorism; terroristbombing; terrorists; threats; usskittyhawk; waronterror; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 361-366 next last
To: AntiGuv
I know that, but how does an aircraft get close enough for a collision with an aircraft carrier and not get shot down?
21
posted on
03/29/2004 8:05:04 PM PST
by
HitmanLV
(I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
To: arasina
[blush]
22
posted on
03/29/2004 8:05:13 PM PST
by
Petronski
(I'm not always cranky.)
To: HitmanNY
Granted, a carrier could easily shoot one down - obviously. I wonder if they'd do that? Probably.
23
posted on
03/29/2004 8:05:26 PM PST
by
AntiGuv
(When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
To: monkey
On a highly technical note: it's pretty hard to destroy an aircraft carrier.Yeah, to do it with one shot practically takes a nuke. And I don't think anybody would get more than one shot, if that many.
24
posted on
03/29/2004 8:05:40 PM PST
by
squidly
(I have always felt that a politician is to be judged by the animosity he excites among his opponents)
To: AntiGuv
an aircraft couldn't get close to it without being picked up and shot down. i'm going with the suicide mini-sub.
To: AntiGuv
You beat me to that answer
26
posted on
03/29/2004 8:05:52 PM PST
by
GeronL
(www.armorforcongress.com..... put a FReeper in Congress)
To: AntiGuv
Maybe a mine that pops up from the bottom of the ocean at the right time.
To: Howlin; Ed_NYC; MonroeDNA; widgysoft; Springman; Timesink; dubyaismypresident; Grani; coug97; ...
Fascinating....
Just damn.
If you want on the list, FReepmail me. This IS a high-volume PING list...
28
posted on
03/29/2004 8:06:13 PM PST
by
mhking
(Burma Shave.)
To: oceanview
I dunno - 'destroying' an aircraft carrier is a tall order. Just how much explosives in that mini sub? Good call, though.
29
posted on
03/29/2004 8:06:30 PM PST
by
HitmanLV
(I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
To: Fitzcarraldo
The most inspired guess - kudos!
30
posted on
03/29/2004 8:06:52 PM PST
by
HitmanLV
(I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
To: Rightone
Could we say that such an attack would represent a significant escalation in the War on Terror? The only credible threat to destroy an aircraft carrier is a nuclear device. God forbid, but this would result in some serious slaughter being delivered upon terrorists everywhere.
31
posted on
03/29/2004 8:07:20 PM PST
by
jayef
To: GeronL
32
posted on
03/29/2004 8:07:30 PM PST
by
GeronL
(www.armorforcongress.com..... put a FReeper in Congress)
To: HitmanNY
Well, if I were trying to get a jetliner close enough to an aircraft carrier to crash it then I would charter a plane, submit a flight plan that would take it over the carrier, follow the flight plan until I'm overhead or close to it, and then just dive into the carrier at maximum velocity.
33
posted on
03/29/2004 8:07:37 PM PST
by
AntiGuv
(When the countdown hits zero, something's gonna happen..)
To: GeronL
4 airliners would be four fat targets for the aircraft carrier. I'm not worried about that.
34
posted on
03/29/2004 8:07:46 PM PST
by
HitmanLV
(I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
To: HarryCaul
The USS Kitty Hawk is usually in deep waters near Japan.
35
posted on
03/29/2004 8:08:12 PM PST
by
Southack
(Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
To: AntiGuv
Yea. My guess would be 'yes' they would shoot it down. Scary!
36
posted on
03/29/2004 8:08:30 PM PST
by
HitmanLV
(I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
To: Fitzcarraldo
Maybe the carrier's own crew? A muslim infiltrator setting off a nuclear weapon??
37
posted on
03/29/2004 8:09:59 PM PST
by
TopDog2
(Happy that I still have my job...)
To: HitmanNY
You know...just being totally theoretical here, but...
A suitcase nuke could do it, and a strike on an American carrier at sea is about the only way you could use a nuke and not get overwhelmingly negative world reaction while establishing your credibility as a major threat. You'd get condemnation, of course, but nowhere near what you'd get if you nuked Boston, for example. If al-qaeda is more world opinion savvy than they seem, it would be a way to go.
All random speculation, of course.
To: AntiGuv
Sounds good to me. I still think that's a pretty tall order for Air Al Queda.
39
posted on
03/29/2004 8:10:18 PM PST
by
HitmanLV
(I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own.)
To: Rightone
One day prediction? Hardly worth weighing in on. We'll see, we shall see.
40
posted on
03/29/2004 8:10:54 PM PST
by
JoeSchem
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 361-366 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson