Posted on 08/23/2017 4:29:32 PM PDT by Jagermonster
0311 he was good for him.
I hear him, and you after reading that post. My son just last weekend was forced to watch a cross dressing video, and how to do it while in the military, you can only guess what the Marines were saying who were forced to watch it.
You son has said what I have said about women. They flirt, they use drama and while my son was at Parris Island he said the females got it much easier, and for the crucible he said most of them were not carrying packs either, but still graduated.
At MCT at Camp Geiger I saw first hand how women were flirting, and then twirking ion front of the men. I was disgusted, and I am a vet guy, but not disgusted because females did this, but because this was on base in uniform, and while they were in training it was unprofessional.
My son on firewatch said one female tried to sneak into their room to sleep with a guy who that guy told my son do not let her in as she is a skank.
You have got me going on rants so I will stop right now about all of this.
Chances are that the University of Puerto Rico in San Juan (the skipper's school) doesn't have courses in seamanship. And I'll bet the Exec's school at the University of Bayamon doesn't either. Also makes me wonder if the two Sanchezs (Skipper and Exec) are related? Seamanship 101!
Go and see the kind of people joining the Navy today, most want their freebies
probably too busy cross dressing or having sex with the females, or in obama;s military males
Used to make fun of them, now one can make fun of them and know it is the truth.
Word from a Surface Warfare Officer today who's been in this area is that it's definitely possible it was an accident.
From the IT side of things, if the Chinese have some cool cyber weapon to hack our ships' nav systems, they're not going to waste it on some individual ship during peacetime.
Nailed it. The reason it sounds right out of the lobbyist playbook is that we have some prime choice DC swamp-critter lobbyists quoted in the article, e.g. Bryan McGrath, deputy director of the Center for American Seapower at the Hudson Institute in Washington.
Or this guy Bryan Clark, "former special assistant to the chief of naval operations, the Navy’s highest ranking military officer." - “It can all be taken back to this major root cause, which is supply not being able to keep up with demand,” adds Mr. Clark, who is now a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA).
This is prime deep-state stuff here.
Problem is fixing lack of seamanship is a matter of personnel training conducted by leadership, including a lot of time at sea, providing ship maneuvering drills. Takes time, not lots of acquisition system money or even better, inside the beltway contractor support, which is where the big slice of pie is going these days.
Perhaps, but that has nothing to do with seamanship - ship maneuvers to avoid hitting merchants that are in plain sight. In fact, the suggestion is rather silly, actually.
This article is pure crap. While in the navy I went on two west-pacs, located directly in the area both cans were struck. Navy vessels are a world unto themselves. Budget woes do not affect the daily life. Port, starboard, and aft watch ensures eyes on watch 360 degrees around vessel. I remember a device called “radar” that seemed effective.
Possibly today’s navy relies entirely on automation?
This is utter bullcrap. It does our sailors a disservice by distracting from the real leadership and training issues leading to poor seamanship.
As long as wild theories are being tossed about, was the crew on watch somehow incapacitated, perhaps an induced mental blackout? Perhaps a patterned electrical noise acting upon the nervous system?
The federal government has reduced the size of the Navy so they can pay antifa and other group members a living wage which allows them to stay home with their mothers and become an army when the deep state is threatened.
JoMa
I couldn’the agree more with your comment. Absolute tragedy that is in the hands of the senior leaders.
An earlier comment stated that all U.S. Naval officers should be required to pass the Coast Guard 3rd mates exam. That should be a minimum requirement for any officer that serves as OOD on one of our vessels.
Things are really bad. Talking to some folks they admitted that the last time their carrier went out half the phalanx gun emplacements were not working and the primary radar was not working because a contractor who was hired for the upgrade job screwed up the install. The ship still went to sea near China. This is normal for the navy these days.
>How about a little OPSEC there big mouth.
Happened years ago. And I if I know it, then I’m sure the Chinese do as well.
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.