Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SECOND CARRIER SENT TO THE GULF
NY Post ^ | 01/04/06

Posted on 01/04/2007 6:34:02 AM PST by presidio9

Edited on 01/04/2007 6:37:47 AM PST by Sidebar Moderator. [history]

The Pentagon will send a second aircraft carrier and its escort ships to the Persian Gulf, defense officials said yesterday, as a warning to Syria and Iran and to give commanders more flexibility in the region.

Officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Bremerton, Wash.-based USS John C. Stennis strike group would deploy this month. It will put 5,000 more U.S. sailors in the region, bringing the total to 16,000.


(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; War on Terror
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 next last
To: randog
While steel has been cut for the USS Gerald Ford (CVN-78), the carrier will not enter service until 2013, when it will replace the aging USS Enterprise.
21 posted on 01/04/2007 9:01:37 AM PST by Stonewall Jackson (I see storms on the horizon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

BTW, as the youngest combat pilot in the history of naval aviation, GHW Bush narrowly merits a carrier, but that's it. Ford, Nixon, GW Bush, Carter, and obviously Bill "I loathe the military" Clinton do not. This is not even a criticism of any of their presidencies. It is merely a reflection of the symbolic importance of our carriers.


22 posted on 01/04/2007 9:03:33 AM PST by presidio9 (Proudly posting every day from Ground Zero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Carriers should have names like Gordy Howe, Maurice Richard,
or Terry Sawchuk. Wait, I think those are Canadians..

Never mind.


23 posted on 01/04/2007 9:12:34 AM PST by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
BTW, as the youngest combat pilot in the history of naval aviation, GHW Bush narrowly merits a carrier, but that's it. Ford, Nixon, GW Bush, Carter, and obviously Bill "I loathe the military" Clinton do not.

Ford is credited with leading fire-fighting parties that saved the light carrier USS Monterrey. He served honorably, even heroically, and was thence served as president.

I see no reason to complain about naming a carrier after him.

24 posted on 01/04/2007 9:14:08 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet; BIGLOOK

Thanks for the ping.

Don't you love all of the FR armchair Generals and Admirals who say they love our military and out the other side of their mouth bad mouth anything our warriors do.


25 posted on 01/04/2007 9:16:58 AM PST by Grampa Dave (Republican voters = a large viable group of responsible citizens. CINO Non voters aren't!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: rahbert

LOL. We could always go with the Nick Fotiu.


26 posted on 01/04/2007 9:17:24 AM PST by MattinNJ (Duncan Hunter for President in '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

While not a pilot, Ford was a WWII carrier sailor so I have no problem with a ship bearing his name.


27 posted on 01/04/2007 9:19:11 AM PST by 91B (God made man, Sam Colt made men equal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: r9etb; 91B

Since Reagan was not a veteran, I don't think that is the criterion. Other than serving a couple of replacement years as a lame-duck unelected president, there is little to distinguish Ford from hundreds to thousands of other sailors. Admittedly, he was a very nice man. Name a hospital ship after him.


28 posted on 01/04/2007 9:23:39 AM PST by presidio9 (Proudly posting every day from Ground Zero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: presidio9
Reagan was a veteran, but not a combat veteran-he was near sighted and so declared ineligible for an overseas posting, but he held a commission as a captain in the Army as a Cavalry officer.

Ford was not an outstanding president, but neither was Bush Sr. I think we should go back to naming carriers for battles, but as long as they are going to be named for presidents Ford is as deserving as any other IMHO.

29 posted on 01/04/2007 9:28:02 AM PST by 91B (God made man, Sam Colt made men equal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 91B

Bush Sr clearly had a more impressive military career, and a more eventful presidency. The Berlin Wall came down thanks to Reagan, but it happened under Bush's watch. Better yet, we could sell the naming rights the way stadiums do.

"Fighters from the USS Google knocked out surface to air missle installations around Tehran today, President Santorum ordered a second Carrier, USS Halliburton, into the Gulf area."


30 posted on 01/04/2007 9:36:52 AM PST by presidio9 (Proudly posting every day from Ground Zero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: 91B

Whether we like it or not, President's like Clinton and Carter were still Presidents, elected by the people of this country to serve as CIC.

They should have boats named after them, as disgusting as that seems.


31 posted on 01/04/2007 9:38:34 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz ("Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted." Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: EQAndyBuzz
They should have boats named after them, as disgusting as that seems.

Only because that stupid tradition got started after Reagan. We didn't always reflexively name our carriers after presidents. The first was FDR, shortly after he died in office. Next was Kennedy. Same thing. Then Ike, who didn't die, but did command our forces in the field. Then we had TR, Lincoln, and Washington. More recently we had Truman, then Reagan, and the next is Bush. If we could get away from naming them after presidents entirely, we could avoid the embarassment of a William Jefferson Clinton. Sure the man was commander in chief, but he was also impeached. Name an oiler after the slickster.

32 posted on 01/04/2007 9:47:59 AM PST by presidio9 (Proudly posting every day from Ground Zero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: evad

>Pucker up mullahs...
here it comes!<

I suspect you are right. The rhetoric from our side, culminating in the "Iran supporting both sides in Iraq" thing certainly affects ones perspective on this.


33 posted on 01/04/2007 9:52:23 AM PST by RobRoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

"Name an oiler after the slickster."

I wouldn't name a garbage scow after that POS. ;)


34 posted on 01/04/2007 10:46:47 AM PST by Levante
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: r9etb

Rockover always came by during the day shift so I always missed him, but there were obvious changes such as certain personnel not being there afterwards. He was tough.


35 posted on 01/04/2007 10:50:31 AM PST by RightWhale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: rahbert
Typhoid Mary. Now there's a name for a carrier.
36 posted on 01/04/2007 10:52:46 AM PST by SlowBoat407 (A living insult to islam since 1959)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: USS Alaska
We don't need a carrier, just a single Ohio class sub and see my tag line.

Couldn't agree more..but a carrier looks more impressive.

That sub could take care of Iran,
N Korea
and the insurgents in congress
and still have a few to spare.

37 posted on 01/04/2007 4:13:45 PM PST by evad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: rightinthemiddle
...the Willy Clinton

That'd be a submarine wouldnt it??

38 posted on 01/04/2007 4:20:27 PM PST by SwankyC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: presidio9

Mr. President, please feel free to use the Air Force extensively.


39 posted on 01/04/2007 4:23:40 PM PST by airborne (Duncan Hunter For President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rahbert

U.S.S. Dave "The Hammer" Shultz!


40 posted on 01/04/2007 4:25:25 PM PST by airborne (Duncan Hunter For President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-48 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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