34 warships will not be going to India for Obama visit

Hi everyone. Rather than taking the originally posted story at face value, I decided to do a little research on my own concerning this seemingly ludicrous claim.

First off, you can always go here, Status of the Navy to find out which ships are deployed and where. Updated daily and from the official navy.mil website.

Right now, there are five Aircraft Carriers Deployed, and if perhaps the "Status of the Navy" page is too vague, I've took a look to see what the ships are up too. This is what I've found:

USS Nimitz (CVN 68) - Is currently in the Pacific Ocean conducting operations off the California Coast. Link

USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) - 5th Fleet GULF OF OMAN (Nov. 1, 2010) Link

USS George Washington (CVN 73) - East China Sea / Just returned to Yokosuka, Japan Link

USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) - 5th Fleet Arabian Gulf supporting maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of responsibility. Link

USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) - Pacific Ocean completing a composite training unit exercise in preparation for an upcoming deployment. Link

Oh, and Stars & Stripes also had an article (posted today) regarding this as well.

Will 34 warships accompany Obama to India?

Come on guys...a carrier strike group only consists of 6 or 7 ships! What this paper from India is describing would be a force of Normandy proportions!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/284309bc256c.jpg[/atsimg]

USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76) - Pacific Ocean completing a composite training unit exercise in preparation for an upcoming deployment.


and where exactly might our Reagan be deployed to after playing in the pacific ocean?

Fair point, but is it still costing 200 million per day? That's what everyone is up in arms about. At least anyone who isn't so rich they don't care about money any longer.

reply to post by asperetty


Dunno. But I highly doubt they will meet up with 33 other ships and get to India within the next 48 hours or so.

reply to post by Juston


Here is more info on others that were not mentioned and some that you already mentioned. Also, this article is from 2 days ago and mentions nothing about Obama's trip! This may be something else all together!




US deploys fourth submarine in PG
Tue Nov 2, 2010 5:13PM

In what is seen as an unprecedented buildup of naval and air power, the US has sent its fourth submarine to the Persian Gulf.
The United States has deployed its fourth submarine in the Persian Gulf region following the deployment of three others near the Bahrain Port.


This comes as the USS Abraham Lincoln and French Charles de Gaulle aircraft carriers are heading toward the region.

The United States maintains twenty combat vessels, namely the USS Harry Truman aircraft carrier, as well as fifty-three logistical vessels, in the Persian Gulf and the Sea of Oman.

A total of thirty combat vessels are currently deployed in the region, including those belonging to Britain and France.

The USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier with 5,000 crew members, including sailors and pilots, has entered the territory of the US Fifth Fleet.

Abraham Lincoln is accompanied by USS Cape St. George and battlecruisers as well as four destroyers.

NN/HGH/MMN

reply to post by Seti_Starr


Sorry forgot to add the source: www.davidicke.com...

The original source of the "34 warships" article is also the original source of the "$200-million a day" article. The war ship story is bunk; thus, it is most likely that the $200-million story is as well. Until I see an itemized estimate of costs, I don't buy that price tag.

"""Until I see an itemized estimate of costs, I don't buy that price tag"""


$200 million won't get you far in DOD. It may cover the first 3 hours of a military exercise. That's about IT!

Originally posted by Pervius
"""Until I see an itemized estimate of costs, I don't buy that price tag"""


$200 million won't get you far in DOD. It may cover the first 3 hours of a military exercise. That's about IT!

Well, if the military presence is already there, then it's not really a cost, huh?

To the OP, there were roughly 7,000 ocean going vessels involved in the invasion of Normandy, so your comparison is absolutely ludicrous. A number of ships ranging around 34 is nothing unheard of in terms of task forces, and exercise maneuvers. It is believable that they did in fact task a 34 ship convoy to head to India ahead of our President's visit.

reply to post by TheAgentNineteen


Thank you for the history lesson, and pardon my Hyperbole.

And yes, it is possible for 34 United States Navy ships to sit off the coast of India for the sole purpose of a visiting President. But that's not the case here I'm afraid.

I'm glad for the show of intelligence and the fact that you decided to actually research it and get an answer for yourself, not just take an articles word for it.

I also understand that your reference to Normandy was in jest. I thought it was obvious.

Originally posted by carlitomoore
I'm glad for the show of intelligence and the fact that you decided to actually research it and get an answer for yourself, not just take an articles word for it.

I also understand that your reference to Normandy was in jest. I thought it was obvious.

I'm glad that it was obvious to you at least

A few hours after I posted this I saw the same thing on Fox News too. I don't understand why everyone is getting sucked in by "news" reports that originated from one article from an online paper in India.

reply to post by Juston


You are immensely right. Is this story confirmed on other sites?

Pentagon Dismisses Reports of 34 Warships for Obama Trip Security

The Pentagon did not mince words in dismissing as “absolutely absurd” and “comical” media reports from Indian news outlets that the US Navy was sending 34 warships off the coast of Mumbai as part of the security preparations for President Obama’s upcoming trip to India.

Well, I guess the POTUS-star Galactica won't be leading that ragtag, fugitive fleet, on a lonely quest—for a shining nation known as India after all. *Queue Stu Philips*

34 warships is 10% of our current active fleet (I didn't actually realize that!). If we don't have even that many warships in the Persian Gulf, and active zone, then it just didn't make sense to have that many follow the POTUS. This should have been debunked much sooner.

Thank you for helping dispel the darkness of ignorance bred by the propaganda machine hard at work.

Originally posted by Aggie Man
Pentagon Dismisses Reports of 34 Warships for Obama Trip Security

The Pentagon did not mince words in dismissing as “absolutely absurd” and “comical” media reports from Indian news outlets that the US Navy was sending 34 warships off the coast of Mumbai as part of the security preparations for President Obama’s upcoming trip to India.

Well, I mean, if the Pentagon says it it must be true. We know the Pentagon would NEVER lie!!!

reply to post by jjkenobi


actually, i found out, it's not exactly $200 million.. no body knows what it is.. for safety sake the government can't release the exact amount, because if they did, they'd have to itemize it, which could reveal information that could be used by "badguys".
that $200m,illion was something someone just tossed out there, and it became the reported amount...

reply to post by wcitizen


Don't wanna trust the Pentagon? That's fine I suppose...after all, this is ATS. There are 5000+ sailors stationed onboard a carrier. I'm sure that if you wanted to you could get the word straight from one of them. They have social networking sites and *gasp* ATS at sea to you know.

reply to post by Juston


Well, I don't believe everything I read. ESPECIALLY when it is printed by the government. I think it is still possible with all of it's implications and this could be a disinfo campaign by the Pentagon. Just a thought.
Seeashrink