1 posted on
11/09/2007 4:55:11 PM PST by
fanfan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-55 next last
To: magslinger
2 posted on
11/09/2007 4:55:49 PM PST by
neodad
(USS Vincennes (CG-49) Freedom's Fortress)
To: Cindy
3 posted on
11/09/2007 4:56:20 PM PST by
fanfan
("We don't start fights my friends, but we finish them, and never leave until our work is done."PMSH)
To: fanfan
Frack.
4 posted on
11/09/2007 4:56:35 PM PST by
mad_as_he$$
(Illegal Immigration, a Clear and Present Danger.)
To: fanfan
5 posted on
11/09/2007 4:57:42 PM PST by
null and void
(No more Bushes/No more Clintons)
To: fanfan
Diesels are very difficult to detect in restricted waters. That said, doesn’t look good for the admiral.
6 posted on
11/09/2007 4:57:51 PM PST by
neodad
(USS Vincennes (CG-49) Freedom's Fortress)
To: fanfan
Didn’t this already happen once already or something about a ChiCom sub following the Fleet?
7 posted on
11/09/2007 4:58:18 PM PST by
BGHater
(Lead. The MSG for the 21st Century.)
To: fanfan
While this may very well be a big goof or failure on our part, I’d also have to think that it might be to our advantage to let them think we can’t detect their subs.
8 posted on
11/09/2007 5:00:00 PM PST by
NMR Guy
To: Vroomfondel; SC Swamp Fox; Fred Hayek; NY Attitude; P3_Acoustic; Bean Counter; investigateworld; ...
SONOBUOY PING!
I hate that! I hate it when that happens!
![](http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y38/lazuruslong/sonobuoy.jpg)
Click on pic for past Navair pings.
Post or FReepmail me if you wish to be enlisted in or discharged from the Navair Pinglist.
This is a medium to low volume pinglist.
9 posted on
11/09/2007 5:01:36 PM PST by
magslinger
(cranky right-winger)
To: fanfan
Is this a new incident? I think it shows the folly of investing a lot of money in new surface fleets. I think the surface warship may be obsolete. But we HAVE to have something to fly the planes from right? Maybe it’s purely a missile world and we should just brandish hordes of them. Offensive and defensive.
10 posted on
11/09/2007 5:01:54 PM PST by
ichabod1
("Self defense is not only our right, it is our duty." President Ronald Reagan)
To: fanfan
looks as though the clintons or some other traitor(s) has / have sold off more than missle technology, maybe....?
11 posted on
11/09/2007 5:02:26 PM PST by
no-to-illegals
(God Bless Our Men and Women in Uniform, Our Heroes. And Vote For Mr. Duncan Hunter, America! TLWNW)
To: fanfan
Sneaking up on us is a lot easier for the ChiComms now because they are using stolen US technology... well, except for the stuff Bill Clinton gave to them.
13 posted on
11/09/2007 5:02:50 PM PST by
navyguy
(Some days you are the pigeon, some days you are the statue.)
To: fanfan
this is bad, but how is this a bad thing? Better they show up our defences in a mock drill as opposed to actual war.
14 posted on
11/09/2007 5:02:57 PM PST by
steel_resolve
(Think pitch forks.)
To: fanfan; Doohickey; judicial meanz; submarinerswife; PogySailor; chasio649; gobucks; Bottom_Gun; ...
Single ping, low power, to the
Steely-Eyed Killers of the Deep Penetrating a CVBG is trivial for a submarine, really. With no more Perry class frigates or Spruance and Kidd class destroyers, who is the ASW platform? The Arleigh Burkes? Ha!
15 posted on
11/09/2007 5:03:10 PM PST by
Doohickey
(Giuliani: Brokeback Republican)
To: fanfan
Gives “testing the water” a whole new meaning - China wants to see if her new technology can get past ours - bad sign
17 posted on
11/09/2007 5:05:23 PM PST by
maine-iac7
("...but you can't fool all of the people all of the time" LINCOLN)
To: fanfan
19 posted on
11/09/2007 5:06:52 PM PST by
Brad from Tennessee
("A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.")
To: fanfan
Pay no attention to real subs today, our main enemy is one who think about developing weapons sometime in the future to attack us. Or so it is written.
21 posted on
11/09/2007 5:07:38 PM PST by
ex-snook
("Above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
To: fanfan
Is this the same navy that wants to give the oceans to the UN?
23 posted on
11/09/2007 5:14:00 PM PST by
timer
(n/0=n=nx0)
To: fanfan
Well, considering that the USN dismantled most of its ASW capabilities back in the early 1990s during the New World Order nonsense, I guess the admirals shouldn’t be too surprised...
24 posted on
11/09/2007 5:14:17 PM PST by
Virginia Ridgerunner
(“We must not forget that there is a war on and our troops are in the thick of it!” --Duncan Hunter)
To: fanfan
To: fanfan
didnt Clinton give away our quiet prop technology?
27 posted on
11/09/2007 5:17:28 PM PST by
spanalot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-55 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson