Posted on 09/15/2006 11:13:07 AM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
EASTERN PACIFIC OCEAN (NNS) -- USS Stephen W. Groves (FFG 29) recently scored her third successful take down of narcotics trafficking vessels in less than two weeks, and assisted in the take down of a fourth, interdicting an estimated 8.1 metric tons of cocaine during a counter-narco terrorism operations (CNT OPS) deployment for U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command.
While on patrol in the Eastern Pacific Ocean in early August, Stephen W. Groves took down a “go fast” loaded with an estimated 2.6 metric tons of cocaine and interdicted another “go fast” that was preparing to onload narcotics. “Go fast” vessels are small, multi-engined speedboats commonly used to transport illicit narcotics.
Less than two weeks later, the ship’s crew, along with Helicopter Anti-Submarine Squadron (Light) (46), Det. 8, and embarked Coast Guard Law Enforcement Detachment (LEDET) 105 interdicted a third “go fast” vessel. Stephen W. Groves was able to close to within a few miles of the “go fast” before being detected and having to give chase. Stephen W. Groves pursued the “go fast” at high speed for the next hour and a half before catching her and detaining her four crew members.
“It is really rare to capture a fully-fuelled 'go-fast' in a flat-out chase,” said Lt. j.g. Scott McCann, LEDET 105 officer in charge. "It is estimated this bust prevented 3 metric tons of cocaine from making it to the United States."
A 26-hour, 750-mile pursuit a few days later resulted in the interdiction of an additional 2.5 metric tons of cocaine and the detention of 10 suspects.
“Only with the precise coordination of everyone involved was the capture of these go-fasts possible,” added Stephen W. Groves’ Commanding Officer, Cmdr. Jon Kreitz. “We could not have had these successes without the terrific support of several maritime patrol aircraft and personnel ashore. We’ve had a terrific couple of weeks interdicting over eight tons of cocaine.”
Stephen W. Groves began her six-month counter-drug operations deployment to the U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command area of responsibility in early April. While deployed, Stephen W. Groves’ crew works with other assets from Joint Interagency Task Force South, the agency responsible for counter-drug operations in the Eastern Pacific and Caribbean.
Homeported in Mayport, Fla., Stephen W. Groves is a Commander, Destroyer Squadron 14 ship. During the ship’s deployment, the crew will be patrolling nearly 4 million square nautical miles of water in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific.
"This is what I joined the Navy for, for a chance to get out and do what we train for, and for a chance to really make a difference," Quartermaster 2nd Class (SW) Zachary Bullock said. "I know that’s what we’re doing."
For more information on Stephen W. Groves, go to www.groves.navy.mil.
For more information on U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command, go to www.cusns.navy.mil.
For related news, visit the Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command Navy NewsStand page at www.news.navy.mil/local/cusns/.
Moonman62 said Prohibition wasn't prohibition because personal consumption was allowed, but he did not say that made it a failure.
Not any different than saying, "folks who are in business and have to fight to stay in the game think the criminal crowd is not worth hiring."
The ones who do checks think so, the ones who don't don't ... none of which explains his implied relevance of nonuniversal drug testing to drug laws.
Non sequitur.
It's a followup question relevant to your statement. Duck away.
You asked for the relevance, I gave it to you.
You didn't give me any relevance that Moonman62 could have been implying.
Moonman62 said Prohibition wasn't prohibition because personal consumption was allowed, and I say that made it a failure and I say that's how it's different than todays drug laws.
You can't assume that.
"none of which explains his implied relevance of nonuniversal drug testing to drug laws."
Since when does relevance require universality?
Answer: All? No. but in some occupations, ya, I'd like to see it mandatory. You know like airline pilots, truck drivers etc.
Starbucks? Well I'd just leave it up to the employers.
I'm just pointing out that employers find it just not worth it to employ druggies.
"Cocaine's a hell of a drug."
So is "personal consumption was allowed" part of your definition of "failure," or did allowing personal consumption cause its failure?
and I say that's how it's different than todays drug laws.
Are today's drug laws by definition not a failure because personal consumption is not allowed? If not, then by what definition are they not a failure?
Moonman62's statement about drug testing admits of no other rational interpretation.
Answer: All? No. but in some occupations, ya, I'd like to see it mandatory. You know like airline pilots, truck drivers etc.
Me too ... including the drug alcohol.
I'm just pointing out that employers find it just not worth it to employ druggies.
SOME employers. As long as you're not trying to present that as an argument for continued illegality of drugs, we have no disagreement.
Damn...Bubba C lost his weekend supply......
Allowing personal consumption is a failure of prohibition -- a failure of the concept. And I say it was one of the reasons Prohibition failed.
"Are today's drug laws by definition not a failure because personal consumption is not allowed?
It's rather that today's drug laws are undermined by "allowing" personal consumption. That "allowing" could be medical marijuana, decriminalization, low-priority enforcement, or simply law enforcement looking the other way.
Just a few posts ago you said Prohibition's allowing personal consumption is "how it's different than todays drug laws." Now you say today's drug laws allow personal consumption. Get back to me when you've made up your mind.
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.