Observing the Massive Naval Preparations in the Pacific

reply to post by JanusFIN


High bets for High stakes.

It would seem apparent that the Stakes have never been so high.

I suppose the same could be said about a lot of things recently, what with the political nature of discussions between Bush and our friends in Russia, considering both are going to be out coming next year (hopefully).

Perhaps what we're looking at is indeed the dynamic shift in world affairs we've been waiting for.

I can feel the cold fingers of fear running down my spine even as i type.



Feels kinky.

reply to post by Throbber


I agree.

All my friends call me to Mr Doomsday.

If you live in the "tube" you wake up every morning and do your work, look your Hollywood B/S and go to sleep without even knowing a tiny part what is going on: In that Matrix everything is finally ok.

But its not.

I believe that we have been on the edge of WW3 many times after year 2000. Diplomacy is running hot and bets are high. 2006 was the closest one this far: Tanks was in every road that leads to Syria from Israel, and it was the next night when Russia armed Syria with new missiles and puts their strategic bombers near by. It was not matter of days, but hours, do they drive their tanks from positions over the border. Its glad that they didnt.

MSM - No mention.

We have False Flags 911, 7/7, in Hormuz, strange B-52 flying around with warheads, china shooting satellites, Assassinations, and much more... But not in the Tube - those are only news.

And in the Tube nobody puts these actions together to the straight time lines. News without backgrounds are just news, and they dont tell the history, or think the big picture in small events, witch trigger them. Everything happen like supprise, what they really are not.

Those who are living in the tube, they are ruining their reason to be.

It's an interesting development but nothing that unusual. If you read the article two CBG's will be forwards deployed in sectors east and near Taiwan (probably near Okinawa). This is of course a show of force and support for Taiwan should China feel the need to act out in intimidation, like they have done in the past. The Regan CBG is near California on a separate mission and one other CBG is somewhere in the pacific, my guess probably returning from a WESTPACK back to home port. Just because there are four carriers sailing at once in the vast Pacific does not mean much. There won't be any war or action over Tibet, that's just nonsense. If the US was going to war in the PACRIM you would see massive forward deployments of aircraft at regional bases.

There are currently 5 carriers homeported in the Pacific. According to the articles the blog links to, the Kitty Hawk and Nimitz carrier groups are moving into the western pacific, the Lincoln carrier group deployed last week for its 6 month deployment and is near Hawaii, and the Reagan carrier group is in a stage of exercises for a deployment later this year, but will be at sea doing those exercises over the next few weeks.

If the blog is accurate, and that is a credible navy blog for those who don't know, that means the 5th Pacific carrier (USS Stennis) is probably in dry dock or repairs.

It is interesting, not sure if it is alarming, but clearly the US is taking the election in Taiwan seriously. As the blog implies, the Tibet issue looks more like a Chinese problem, but while they are having that problem Taiwan could go do something to stir the pot, like declare independence from China for example.

reply to post by darksided


Thanks from knowledge. These are so big movements and groups that somebody has to know more.

reply to post by darksided


USS Carl Vinson is undergoing refuelling and is part of the 3rd Fleet but will not be combat capable till 2009; USS Stennis is in dock in Bremerton undergoing standown and 6 months maintenance - so thats 6 ships total ; 1 long term stand down , 1 short term , 1 in transit , 1 exercising of calif and 2 in western pacific.


3rd fleet accounted for , sir!

[edit on 20/3/08 by Harlequin]

Originally posted by Harlequin
USS Carl Vinson is undergoing refit and is part of the 3rd Fleet - so thats 6 ships

Technically it has to transfer when doing the nuclear refuel, similar to the USS GW, who is still 2nd fleet but will be 7th fleet in a few months.

If you want something to think about . The USS TR is at sea in the Atlantic doing exercises for its upcoming deployment, and the USS GW is preparing to depart for a deployment through South America which will eventually take it to the Pacific when it replaces the Kitty Hawk later this year.

That blog also does an order of battle every weekend which lists all the ships in the 5th fleet (middle east theater) AOR, and the list last week was very large.

I've been a fan of that blog for a few months now, you can learn a lot about the Navy reading the commentary and the professional responses, I've seen many times where active duty Captains and XOs respond in the comments. Got to love the internet.

The U.S Navy has 15(+3) attack Carriers
Also there are 4+ in reserve

2 Roosevelts 1984

3 Nimitz 1972-1980

1 Enterprise 1960

1 John F Kennedy 1967

3 Kitty Hawk 1960-1964

4 Forrestal 1954-1958

1 Midway 1945-1946

13 (+3)
amphibious assult helicopter carriers

35+
Nuclear ballistic missile submarines

42+
Cruisers

63+
Destroyers

100+
Frigates

This is a conservative listing from about 3 years ago i have the naval institute guide to comabt fleets of the world 2005/2006

The thing to find out is have the UK deployed any ships or any other allied nations?

The US can't afford another war I don't think this is anything to worry about....

reply to post by ian990003100


That's including just the basic ship hulls itself though. When you consider how many ships we currently have operational the numbers are lower. It is a common joke that the USN reserve fleet is the second largest in the world but that's because the majority of ships decommissioned are stored instead of disposed of.

Pray THE PLAN was just a plan....

Link: Project Camelot - Deacon

"What did 'Henry Deacon' have to say about an upcoming war with China?

"I know that there’s a planned war between the US and China scheduled for late 2008. This is also geopolitical and not concerned with Black Ops as such. These were both just events that I got to hear about in passing. I have no detailed information about them.

"The Pentagon started the planning in 1998. You have to understand that China and the US are hand in glove with everything. This war is a joint op between the US and China. Most wars are set up that way and have been for a while."

This brief mention was enough to (pardon the expression) raise a red flag."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
News Link:Taiwan News Link:



[edit on 20-3-2008 by baynard]

reply to post by ian990003100


Uhm Ian, you couldn't be more wrong.

THe official active listing for US Navy vessels can be found on the official naval registery website.

This is public information.

reply to post by darksided


Great thanks, you give the link that I have been looking for...

Anyway, US Naval power is huge, breath taking. Super Power, no question about that...

Originally posted by JanusFIN
reply to post by darksided

 

Great thanks, you give the link that I have been looking for...

Anyway, US Naval power is huge, breath taking. Super Power, no question about that...

Hmm....I wonder what the one 'other' navel vessel is?

Originally posted by ian990003100
....

This is a conservative listing from about 3 years ago i have the naval institute guide to comabt fleets of the world 2005/2006

The thing to find out is have the UK deployed any ships or any other allied nations?

The US can't afford another war I don't think this is anything to worry about....

For people that were wondering about UK deployments, you can see them all on this map. here

Also the video on the top right of that link shows where everyone is and it shows one UK ship being deployed to the Pacific. A question I can't help asking is, is it wise to announce the positions of your entire fleet to the world over the internet?

reply to post by ian990003100


2 Roosevelts 1984 actually they are nimitz

3 Nimitz 1972-1980 see above - all 9 are in service with George HW Bush due next year

1 Enterprise 1960 active due for replacment in 2012>2015 by ford class - damn fine carrier

1 John F Kennedy 1967 *retired 2008*

3 Kitty Hawk 1960-1964 *all retired except kitty hawk* ( constellation, america and kitty hawk)

4 Forrestal 1954-1958 *all retired* (forrestal , saratoga, independance and ranger)

1 Midway 1945-1946 unbuilt (cv50>cv57)


so the real list is 11 carriers : 9 nimitz class , kitty hawk which isn`t in the best condition and the big E of the rest , only the JFK could be returned to service *maybe* , america has been sunk , and constellation is a hull only as is the rest of the forrestal`s.


and as of now , 2 nimitz are in refit so that leaves 9 carries available , and we know where 4 of them are (list above)

Are you kidding?

We don't have any reserves or are not slooooowly building one just in case?

That is crazy

DAVUROO

If you think that picture is accurate then you are mistaken. It's close, but not that close.

reference to the original post I'm thinking dis-information.

Originally posted by 4thDoctorWhoFan
Hmm....I wonder what the one 'other' navel vessel is?

Answer: USS Constitution

Don't mess with old iron sides.

US Navy deployments to the Pacific are all part of PNAC. America knows that the biggest threat to its superpower status in China. China is spending money on its military likes its going out of fashion. China's anti ship missile sytems can get through to any ship in the US navy as they have no known counter measures to deal with missiles such as Sunburn and Sizzler.

Also its highly probable that if a confrontation took place China would go nuclear and nuke the carrier battle groups. In reality its the best way to take them out and its probally China's only option. To take out an entire fleet by just 1 missile must be very attractive to the Chinese. Therefore the threat of several battle groups would not appear to deter China from its ambitions.

The Chinese do not have the same sentiments as westeners do and would not balk at using such weapons. The problem is if this happened how would the US Goverment react. In hitting back would they risk a nuke attack on the US. Would the loss of thousands be worth the loss of millions. Its a very serious situation because in reality America dose not have the means to beat the Chinese and the Chinese know that.

All in all there is much to lose and very little to gain, but I'm affraid the lunatics are in charge of the assylum so it will probally mean war.

This makes me wonder about something I read the other day in an unrelated thread about the falling cost of the USD.

One guy got on and said he had a friend in the white house that had told him that the president was going to announce something BIG this weekend.

I don't like jumping the gun, but it's hard not to get alarmed about the smallest things with the current state the world is in at the moment.

Lets all hope it's nothing.