War Games Set to Begin Today in the Pristine Gulf of Alaska

a reply to: corsair00

They hold these exercises all the time. There is always an exercise going on somewhere in the US, whether it's at the unit level, or something big like Red Flag or RIMPAC.

The flyover of Canada was part of the Open Skies treaty. It happens every so often over a number of countries.

originally posted by: corsair00
a reply to: LaBaleine

Would this just be considered standard protocol for them to practice... war like this every few years, or is this part of a very sophisticated and planned preparation for imminent war? Because I remember reading several months ago that Russia was given clearance to do a fly-over of all of Canada to verify its military capabilities etc.

Is North America going to be invaded?

This exercise has been going on for 20 years. And their are literally hundreds of exercises in the US every year by all branches and including allied nations on occasion. This is what the military does when it is not fighting a war or on an active mission. Train, exercise, learn from exercise, train some more, exercise etc. etc. Every scenario they can think of.

a reply to: LaBaleine

It sucks that they have to use high powered radar systems, I feel for the critters, however, in the event of a Russia/US war, Alaska would be the first land target by Russian ships and troops, therefore, we need to practice in the gulf.

Would much rather be prepared than save a whale, as bad as that sounds.

a reply to: MrSpad

Oh, a very finely-tuned and essentially "lucrative industry"... I guess at the highest levels, the world's economy depends on all of this high-tech monkey business.

originally posted by: Darkblade71
a reply to: LaBaleine

Would much rather be prepared than save a whale, as bad as that sounds.

The main question is not about "saving a whale". At stake are also the 80,000 jobs and the area's main economy. Though they've been training here before, they've never used sonar in the Gulf.

I've lived in AK most of my adult life, and I know just how much impact the fisheries have. Alaska wouldn't be what it is without them.

a reply to: LaBaleine

They've used sonar in a lot of other areas, without affecting the fish or fishing in those areas.

a reply to: ffx6554

Interesting information. I am always intrigued by the 'behind the scenes' aspects to geopolitics and things like the UFO phenomenon. Actually, although many hate him, David Wilcock's "disclosure" episodes on his Gaiam TV show are very similar to your post. There were a few that detailed a string of anomalous events related to Putin and certain dates back in 2009. I guess it is happening all the time, it's just a matter of connecting the dots, really...

I haven't checked out the thread you posted at the beginning, but I noticed recently that obscenely long html links just don't work when trying to embed on ATS. So what you can do is go to snipurl.com and punch in the long link, and use the snipped url as the embed link instead. However, in this case I think godlikeproductions is a private forum and I am not a member LOL

a reply to: LaBaleine

What does US army care about killing whales.

These guys stood by while government pulled off 9/11 and then went to fight and die for that lie.

They care about nothing.

They know nothing.

a reply to: Zaphod58

You don't care about the whales that is obvious.

I just hope you at least care about the people but I won't hold my breath.

a reply to: PredatorCrackling

Whales have survived decades of the Navy using sonar around them. Including WWII when active sonar was the norm.

My only major issue here:
We've got several major forest fires burning up here right now. Maybe our military could quit playing games for a few days, do something that actually benefits the people who pay their salaries instead of the corporations that pay their commander in chief's side-"salary," and join the Alaskans on the front lines fighting those fires. I know it's a lot to ask the current military, expecting them to break recent tradition and actually fight FOR Americans instead of fighting for foreign countries that hold corporate America's interest, but it would be the right thing to do.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

They're limited in what they can do, which is stupid. The active duty units can send helicopter support, and the National Guard obviously can send firefighters, but they can't deploy MAFFS to assist until all other air tankers are deployed and Forest Service requests it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Whales have survived decades of the Navy using sonar around them. Including WWII when active sonar was the norm.

I suggest you do more research about this issue before making such statements. The Navy acknowledges they harm and kill marine mammals with the use of sonar. It's been investigated and studied thorougly.

And when the Navy asks for permits for these exercises, they are asking for allowed " takes" marine mammals - which means harming or killing them. If I remember correctly, it is around 300,000 for Northern Edge alone.

"NRDC: The Navy estimates increased sonar training will significantly harm marine mammals more than 10 million times during the next five years off the U.S. coast alone."

originally posted by: LaBaleine

originally posted by: Darkblade71
a reply to: LaBaleine

Would much rather be prepared than save a whale, as bad as that sounds.

The main question is not about "saving a whale". At stake are also the 80,000 jobs and the area's main economy. Though they've been training here before, they've never used sonar in the Gulf.

I've lived in AK most of my adult life, and I know just how much impact the fisheries have. Alaska wouldn't be what it is without them.

Since you been in alaska for so long you know how damage the fishing industry has done to the fisheries, and how corporate fishing has hurt the local fisherman, right?
How about getting worked over local contribution to fisheries conservation and replenishment.
As of mid the mid 2000's guess who is the largest single contributor to fisheries conservation in the us is?

a reply to: LaBaleine

It always amazes me to see the things I didn't say.

So Whales didn't survive previous uses of sonar? They didn't survive WWII when active was much more common?

Try responding to what I said instead of what you claim I said.

As of mid the mid 2000's guess who is the largest single contributor to fisheries conservation in the us is?

Good for you for bringing this up. Who are you referring to?

a reply to: LaBaleine

Do you know why they apparently have to do it at the height of fishing season? Because of weather, they don't want to do it on rougher seas in the chilly rain. Seriously? This one makes me mad. Our salmon run in cycles of three to five years depending on species. I believe it's been a few years since they last ran these "games".
Well, they salmon runs have been poor this last cycle. Could this be one of the factors that are keeping the fish out of people's freezers? It pisses me off that they choose to do this right near Kachemak Bay too. This is one of the richest salmon runs anywhere, or at least it used to be.

I'm sorry I didn't have much more than frustration to vent here for this. But our fishermen have been going at each other for a couple of years because their livelihoods are all at stake. Commercial blaming sport fishermen, guides getting mad at the subsistence fishermen etc etc.....though those guides can take their new hissy fit and put it some where deep for corking the river from us subsistence users this year. That's another gripe. But the navy can come on in and start blowing up pristine waters, it's insanity!!! At the very least, ey could look out for the people that they are here to PROTECT and take it away from prime fishing grounds. A lot of regulations are put into place here to protect the resources we have. Those regs do us absolutely no good if the resources just get blown up.

a reply to: Zaphod58

And now our salmon runs have been poor since....
How coincidental is it? There are obviously many factors, but I doubt this one helps much.
They could change the time of year they do this, at least it would be good of them to.

originally posted by: LaBaleine

As of mid the mid 2000's guess who is the largest single contributor to fisheries conservation in the us is?

Good for you for bringing this up. Who are you referring to?

It is Shimano Corp., its sad when a foreign company is the largest single contibutor to fisheries conservation.