Posted on 04/13/2018 9:34:47 AM PDT by McGruff
An armada of 12 warships — the largest US strike force since the 2003 Iraq war – is steaming toward the Middle East as President Trump mulls an attack on Syria in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack on civilians, according to a report.
The aircraft carrier USS Harry S Truman set sail from Norfolk, Va., on Wednesday with five escort warships and they were expected to join four destroyers and two nuclear-powered subs believed to already be in or near the Mediterranean, the Times of London reported.
Trump on Wednesday appeared to telegraph an attack on Syria by tweeting that missiles “will be coming” in response to the attack on the town of Douma on April 7.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Real problem in syria is they border our ally Israel. We have to land that thing in a stable fashion and without soviet troops running the thing. Just my opinion.
Listening to Bolton is like using a hair dryer in the bathtub. <
Bolton joining the Trump administration was a bad sign. Bolton loves the smell of napalm in the morning, as long as he is 1000 miles away.
I’ll supplement your observation about modern task force size with a comment about “steaming” as an anachronistic way to describe Naval propulsion in the 21st century.
I suspect we'll fire at least a couple hundred or more.
“Trump on Wednesday appeared to telegraph an attack on Syria”
The media and many other people still haven’t learned to ignore what Trump says and Tweets and watch what he does.
When you go to War.., - better be prepared to fight.
That is not the apparent conclusion of Trump, the state department, the Pentagon, UK, France, and others. Even Russia back off that, pulled their Navy out, and asked to participate in targeting. I think Israel has already said Assad did it as well.
Every time Israel seemed threatened by Syria in the past they have dealt with it. Why not continue that way. Removing Assad would destabilize the whole area.
Russia is claiming the UK was behind it.
You (like so many) are engaging in logical fallacy. The President has to engage many different problems at the same time.
(I have no position on whether America should strike Syria as there is not enough open source information available to make any such determination.)
Israeli officials: U.S. must strike in Syria
“Assad is the angel of death, and the world would be better without him.”
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Israeli-officals-US-must-strike-in-Syria-549144
Who takes over then?
Yep...and Damascus will lay, a smoking ruin.
Glazed.
... as I gaze into my looking glass.
We are spending vast sums of money to “protect” the world as our country is being colonized.
We won’t have a nation to defend.
Whelp, here is how we spend that big Omnibus bill and line up to do it again next year.
Bolton is a great sign. He is a good historian too.
Not really, if you consider that nuclear powered craft use steam-driven turbines. Nuclear power is just modern steam engines.
I do realize the difference in firepower and capability though. Just focusing on the numbers
Bear in mind, in 1945 we spent 42% of GDP on defense. In 2016 it was 3%.
Also, a Fletcher-class destroyer cost $6 million in WW2 (in 1945 dollars, of course). An Arleigh Burke-class destroyer costs $1.8 billion. Even taking inflation into account, that's 21 times more expensive!
It all starts in our heritage and culture.
Protecting Israel is the protection of the root of our identity, therefore we protect them and we protect ourselves.
Yes, were were just assaulted by a marxist and muslim coalition and it continues to this day. In the meanwhile the world keeps on turning as well, and islam is at war with Israel.
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.