The US 7th fleet involved in ANOTHER collison

a reply to: EA006

And this was a minor bump that MIGHT end up with some dock side repair work, and wasn't the fault of 7th Fleet, or the Benfold. Again, how exactly are they supposed to avoid a tug that loses power 10 feet away from them?

Yes, I get it, "erhmagerd 7th Fleet! The US Navy is helpless!" This is another case of the media blowing something totally out of proportion to make a story.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: EA006

And this was a minor bump that MIGHT end up with some dock side repair work, and wasn't the fault of 7th Fleet, or the Benfold. Again, how exactly are they supposed to avoid a tug that loses power 10 feet away from them?

Yes, I get it, "erhmagerd 7th Fleet! The US Navy is helpless!" This is another case of the media blowing something totally out of proportion to make a story.

I was trying to get that across without you having to write out another post lol

You'll agree then this has been done for a reason?

a reply to: EA006

Of course it was. Because the media wants people to be afraid and "if it bleeds it leads", which is the point I'm making. This is a trivial incident being blown out of proportion by the media, as usual.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: EA006

Of course it was. Because the media wants people to be afraid and "if it bleeds it leads", which is the point I'm making. This is a trivial incident being blown out of proportion by the media, as usual.

Trivial, but when combined with other similar stories to form a bigger story garnering more attention, it's a direct attempt to draw "someone" into war.

a reply to: EA006

No, it really isn't. Because the only people that are in the area that they'd be trying to draw into a war by doing this, they're not stupid enough to draw into a war. And the people on the other side are going to know our capabilities extremely well and how fast we can have replacements there. As well as the kind of damage this ship is looking at.

Contrary to popular belief, sometimes accidents are just accidents, without some super complex nefarious plot going on in the background.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: EA006

No, it really isn't. Because the only people that are in the area that they'd be trying to draw into a war by doing this, they're not stupid enough to draw into a war. And the people on the other side are going to know our capabilities extremely well and how fast we can have replacements there. As well as the kind of damage this ship is looking at.

Contrary to popular belief, sometimes accidents are just accidents, without some super complex nefarious plot going on in the background.

So I take you back to my original point which was not who, it's about perception.

You might see through it but the vast majority won't.

Of course it's part of a nefarious plot, why put it out as a story in the first place.....

a reply to: EA006

Why wouldn't they? The media really does report stories you know. Just because it's not bad enough to destroy the ship or kill a bunch of people doesn't mean they're going to ignore it.

I'm not the one that matters when it comes to seeing through it, and neither is anyone else reading about it online. The ones that matter are the intelligence agencies that have a much better grasp on our capabilities than the average reader of Yahoo.

a reply to: Zaphod58

It's not aimed at yahoo readers specifically is it?
It's on yahoo but it'll be on other platforms.

It's been highlighted for the world to see....

It's about perception.

It's irrelevant talking about the intel agencies and them knowing the capabilities of the fleet since the story wasn't posted for them?

a reply to: EA006

I simply used Yahoo because that was the source page in the OP.

You really think that they're trying to start a war by writing articles for the average person? Seriously? What, you think the average person in another country is going to rise up and demand that their government go to war with us because they read some articles on the Internet? Because their leadership isn't going to be getting their information from Yahoo and CNN.

The US Navy has more problems than collisions with other ships - www.newsweek.com... - "What China's New Missiles Mean for the Future of the Aircraft Carrier"

a reply to: BryanRebenstorf

That's only the 50th time since WWII that the carrier has been rendered obsolete.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BryanRebenstorf

That's only the 50th time since WWII that the carrier has been rendered obsolete.

Really? What and when were all the other 49 times of which I've never heard?

a reply to: BryanRebenstorf

It was sarcasm. Every time a new weapon comes along carriers are rendered obsolete, and yet not only are they still around, more of them are being built.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BryanRebenstorf

It was sarcasm. Every time a new weapon comes along carriers are rendered obsolete, and yet not only are they still around, more of them are being built.

No problem. Well, of course, we won't really know unless the US ever goes to war with Russia or China or vice versa.

a reply to: FredT

I rekon whats going on with these collisions is that someone is giving someone else a message that you might have more guns and bombs than us but look at what we can do to your computers and computer chips.

Not all wars are fought with guns and bombs.

War is fought on many levels.

a reply to: Azureblue

So they're shutting down tugs now?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Azureblue

So they're shutting down tugs now?

Why not? If the goal was to make the military look incompetent, it was a success .

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Azureblue

So they're shutting down tugs now?

dunno mate.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Yes, because when a tug that is there to tow you loses power it makes you look incompetent.

a reply to: Azureblue

The tug lost power, so if it was someone messing with computers or something they'd have to mess with the tug too.