US Navy Disaster Relief Task Force

[August]

If the US Navy were to create a naval task force dedicated to disaster relief, what capabilities, ship, aircraft, equipment and personnel do you think it might consist of?

[Oberon]

The Comfort, obviously
One or Two America class Amphib Assault carriers with helos and Marine loadout
Several tenders and units from the Military Sealift Command
A few Whidbey Island class Dock Landing craft with ACLCs
A Tico or two to act as air traffic organisation (if needed)
Arleigh Burkes and OHPs for fleet protection (against pirates and the like)

The ACLCs and Helos would probably be some of the most important items in the fleet. The ACLCs able to use beaches to deploy supplies instead of waiting for ports, and the Helos able to ferry supplies to designated and protected LZs in the location where aid hubs can be established along repaired transportation networks.
Obviously getting ground pounders in with the Engineering corps is important too and if the airports in the area are screwed then the Engineers would have to come in by boat or helo and their equipment ferried in the same way.

[Snestorm]

How about adding some LSTs to the mix.
They don't require a dock to unload right on the beach.
And at that close proximity they could make good use of their desalinization plants, and abilty to generate electricity.

[Oberon]

How about adding some LSTs to the mix.
They don't require a dock to unload right on the beach.
And at that close proximity they could make good use of their desalinization plants, and abilty to generate electricity.

Good idea :up:

[Snestorm]

Oh! How dumb of me to forget.

CBs. Lots and lots of CBs.

[Catfish]

Hello,
anyway the US did far more than other nations already again, you can say against it what you want. Secure the airport and do something, that's the point.
I mean it's closer to the US but I wonder where our ships are, after all those days. But at least the german THW and some water-cleaning device containers seem to be there.

Greetings,
Catfish

[Snestorm]

I was watching TV2 (Danmark), and the US forces seem to be doing a magnificent job.

The reporters were out on the street helping the people, who were hard at work with rescue efforts. A baby girl, who had been buried in rubbel for 3 days, was finaly dug out, and was in surprisingly well physical shape. Unfortunately, it looks like her uncle is the closest, and only, living family.

USA's military is doing one hell of an impressive job!

[MothBalls]

If the US Navy were to create a naval task force dedicated to disaster relief, what capabilities, ship, aircraft, equipment and personnel do you think it might consist of?

Shouldn't this be done by the United Nations? Why does it always start with the US?

It's funny in a way. For all the bitching and moaning about how bad America is, when it comes to things like this, the first place everyone looks is to the US.

[Snestorm]

Shouldn't this be done by the United Nations? Why does it always start with the US?

Because, thankfuly, the United Nations has no military.
Let's keep it that way.

[MothBalls]

Because, thankfuly, the United Nations has no military.
Let's keep it that way.Who said anything about forming a navy or a military? We were talking about a Disaster Relief Task Force.

To say the United Nations doesn't have a military would be incorrect. There are "UN Peacekeepers" deployed globally, and they have guns and act just like a military.

[Snestorm]

As far as I know, and I may be wrong, the only assets owned by the UN, is a building in New York City, which seems to be funded, for the most part, by US taxpayers.

A NATO Task Force is certainly a good idé.

Sorry. I just have no love for the UN, and would prefer them/it to quietly "ride off into the sunset" never to be heard from again.

Oh! Most of the supplies coming in by sea will be on danish ships (MAERSK).
They work very closely with the US government.
(The US Merchant Marine is, for all practical purposes, nearly extinct).

http://www.maersklinelimited.com/aboutus_flagfleet.php

[MothBalls]

As far as I know, and I may be wrong, the only assets owned by the UN, is a building in New York City, which seems to be funded, for the most part, by US taxpayers.
Take a look. http://www.un.org/ NY is just one of many assets.

Sorry. I just have no love for the UN, and would prefer them/it to quietly "ride off into the sunset" never to be heard from again.No love or hate here. However I do think they serve a purpose.

Oh! Most of the supplies coming in by sea will be on danish ships (MAERSK).
They work very closely with the US government.
(The US Merchant Marine is, for all practical purposes, nearly extinct).
Not in the very near future. Although I did read somewhere MAERSK is send a ship, or ships, to help solve the problem of unloading. Currently the docks in Haiti are closed. http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showpost.php?p=1237809&postcount=73


Back to the original topic. It would be tough to make a list as each disaster has it's own unique challenges. Suffice to say, enough assets to put food, waters, and rescue personnel on the ground, anywhere in the world, within 18 hours. In some situations, like Haiti, a peacekeeping force asap as well. People start getting desperate and they'll do anything to survive, including killing other people for food and water.

[Snestorm]

Take a look. NY is just one of many assets.
I thought I might have been wrong on that. This is certainly the case. Thanks for the link.

Although I did read somewhere MAERSK is send a ship, or ships, to help solve the problem of unloading. Currently the docks in Haiti are closed.
They are looking into coming in through the Dominican Republic. Should this option be selected a smaller ship will be needed to shuttle the goods. It will get done, one way, or the other.

[ETR3(SS)]

How about adding some LSTs to the mix.
They don't require a dock to unload right on the beach.
And at that close proximity they could make good use of their desalinization plants, and abilty to generate electricity.No more LST's for the USN anymore, only LSD's. The last of the Newport Class LST's were sold off or scrapped in the early to mid 90's

[Snestorm]

No more LST's for the USN anymore, only LSD's. The last of the Newport Class LST's were sold off or scrapped in the early to mid 90's

Whoa!
I have to recover from the shock from that one.

Thanks for the info.
Now I need a big eraser to change some of my thinking.

[August]

Suffice to say, enough assets to put food, waters, and rescue personnel on the ground, anywhere in the world, within 18 hours. In some situations, like Haiti, a peacekeeping force asap as well.

That's a reasonable target capability but for it to be efficient and resilient enough to be effective i'd think it has to be integrated and controlled by a single command structure created and trained for the purpose rather than just created ad hoc for each situation with the assets at hand.

[Snestorm]

That's a reasonable target capability but for it to be efficient and resilient enough to be effective i'd think it has to be integrated and controlled by a single command structure created and trained for the purpose rather than just created ad hoc for each situation with the assets at hand.

Already have it. USN, USMC, MSC.

http://www.msc.navy.mil/

All comes under USN.

[OneToughHerring]

The US? To help people without any political reasons such as close proximity as is in the case of Haiti or profit motives such as oil? Don't be ridiculous.

[Snestorm]

The US? To help people without any political reasons such as close proximity as is in the case of Haiti or profit motives such as oil? Don't be ridiculous.

Happens all the time.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

LOL...I think w/OTH, the U.S. can do no right. If we do something, we aren't doing enough. If we don't do anything, we won't hear the end of it. We can't win!!! :damn:

(Yeah, I know the above is a strawman, but not much of one, I'm guessing)

[OneToughHerring]

Name cases where the US has actually helped nations in peril where the US had either no immediate political or profit motives involved.

[Snestorm]

LOL...I think w/OTH, the U.S. can do no right. If we do something, we aren't doing enough. If we don't do anything, we won't hear the end of it. We can't win!!! :damn:

(Yeah, I know the above is a strawman, but not much of one, I'm guessing)

Don't feel too bad. USA doesn't top his list.
Here is the OTH Top Four:
1: Danmark
2: Norway
3: England
4: USA

[August]

Already have it. USN, USMC, MSC.

http://www.msc.navy.mil/

All comes under USN.

That's my point. The USNs mission is to fight wars, not provide disaster relief so using regular combat units is not going to be very efficient.

I'm thinking a specialized command with dedicated assets is in order if we really want to maximize our effectiveness.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Don't feel too bad. USA doesn't top his list.
Here is the OTH Top Four:
1: Danmark
2: Norway
3: England
4: USA

Well, as an American, I WILL notice when he rips on the U.S.

Of course, as someone of primarily Norwegian descent w/some Danish and a dash of English, that complicates things..

[Buddahaid]

Name cases where the US has actually helped nations in peril where the US had either no immediate political or profit motives involved.

Do you look for monsters under your bed still? Where is the massive expensive Finnish aid during any disaster? Sometimes the US puts its wealth and blood on the line so little countries like Finland can still exist. Sure it's not always true, and sure sometimes it's mutually beneficial, but would you prefer to be part of Germany or the USSR now?

[Torplexed]

Too bad we don't still have the 'peacetime' hospital ship Hope around. After a long career she was scrapped in 1975.

http://carlosandlucreciareyes.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/ss2hope.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HOPE_(USA)

[Snestorm]

That's my point. The USNs mission is to fight wars, not provide disaster relief so using regular combat units is not going to be very efficient.

I'm thinking a specialized command with dedicated assets is in order if we really want to maximize our effectiveness.

Good idé but, can you afford it?

[Tribesman]

I'm thinking a specialized command with dedicated assets is in order if we really want to maximize our effectiveness.
So a FEMA for overseas?

[Snestorm]

Well, as an American, I WILL notice when he rips on the U.S.

Of course, as someone of primarily Norwegian descent w/some Danish and a dash of English, that complicates things..

Good stock!

[Snestorm]

Too bad we don't still have the 'peacetime' hospital ship Hope around. After a long career she was scrapped in 1975.

http://carlosandlucreciareyes.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/ss2hope.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_HOPE_(USA)

She certainly is (was) a pretty ship.

[nikimcbee]

Shouldn't this be done by the United Nations? .

:har:
No, this is a bigboy job. These guys need help now, not three months from now.

[nikimcbee]

I think they need the Seebees in there to build some airfields so the supply planes can get in and out quicker.

[TarJak]

Getting planes in and out isn't the problem. There are few trucks for distribution to outlying regions. Security is also a problem. There has already been a few aborted rescue mission by a US chopper when it was rushed by locals looking for assistance.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/17/2794135.htm

[OneToughHerring]

Do you look for monsters under your bed still? Where is the massive expensive Finnish aid during any disaster? Sometimes the US puts its wealth and blood on the line so little countries like Finland can still exist. Sure it's not always true, and sure sometimes it's mutually beneficial, but would you prefer to be part of Germany or the USSR now?

Well to be honest I don't think things would be so different today had that happened (Finland been a part of Germany or USSR). Would there have been more killing of people in a cold war of some kind or less? More natural disasters and either a weaker or a stronger response to them?

Finland has always paid it's dues to the UN and has a long history of serving in the UN peace keeping forces whereas the US does things like the 1993 Mogadishu operation and the UN (Pakistanis, lol) has to come in and save their sorry butts.

[Buddahaid]

Well to be honest I don't think things would be so different today had that happened (Finland been a part of Germany or USSR). Would there have been more killing of people in a cold war of some kind or less? More natural disasters and either a weaker or a stronger response to them?

Finland has always paid it's dues to the UN and has a long history of serving in the UN peace keeping forces whereas the US does things like the 1993 Mogadishu operation and the UN (Pakistanis, lol) has to come in and save their sorry butts.

In the case of Uncle Joe's time, there was a tremendous loss of life amongst the intelligencia (sp) and the Jews who supported communism against nationalists. This would have spilled into Finland to what effect is anyone's guess. I've never heard of any Finnish ghettos, but I would have expected some form of purges.

I just get tired of the US getting slammed no matter what is done. Yes, we are a big country with plenty of so called Christians who are nothing more than self-serving fascists, but we are also filled with many others who are quite selfless and give back.

[Jimbuna]

One thing that can't be denied is the fact that this time the US have been in the van of those quickest to respond and all those countries that are truly compassionate and understanding of the Haitians needs right now should be moving supplies and personnel as quickly as possible in an effort to support them.

[Platapus]

I'm thinking a specialized command with dedicated assets is in order if we really want to maximize our effectiveness.

We could call it "International Rescue".

We might need to specialized equipment though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbirds_%28TV_series%29

[CaptainHaplo]

Just out of curiosity OTH - what political or profit motives do we have in helping haiti?

Spending Millions in DONATED aid - donated by the average citizenry - into charities like the red cross - doesn't profit anyone politically.

As for monetary profit - how exactly is donating that money making us more money? Oh thats right - it doesnt.

We do it out of the goodness and charity of our hearts.

[OneToughHerring]

jimbuna & Capt Haplo,

well the US is right next to Haiti, would look really bad if the US just stood idly by. Even then it looks like the US has spent several precious days and flights rescuing it's own nationals from Haiti while at the same time ignoring the plight of the Haitians themselves.

During Clinton's time the US made a military landing in Haiti with the aim of trying to 'Christianize' them. It looks like more of the same this time.

[Schroeder]

Just out of curiosity OTH - what political or profit motives do we have in helping haiti?

Spending Millions in DONATED aid - donated by the average citizenry - into charities like the red cross - doesn't profit anyone politically.

As for monetary profit - how exactly is donating that money making us more money? Oh thats right - it doesnt.

We do it out of the goodness and charity of our hearts.

Well it does keep a few thousand refugees of off Florida. But that is pretty much all it gives you except for a polished up reputation in the world.

Though I'm not a huge fan of the US (I don't hate it either ;)) I have to admit that I'm impressed with the amount of help coming from the US. Our government doesn't even provide planes for the relief organisations as far as I know.:nope:

[MothBalls]

Even then it looks like the US has spent several precious days and flights rescuing it's own nationals from Haiti while at the same time ignoring the plight of the Haitians themselves.

You are cordially invited to go fu*ck yourself. You need a porthole put in your stomach, you have your head so far up your ass you can't see the world around you.

<Edit>
My apology to Neal, the mods, and the rest of the fine people at Subsim. If I get pinged or brig time for this breach of protocol, so be it. I'll accept it. But what I said, stands.

[MothBalls]

then it looks like the US has spent several precious days and flights rescuing it's own nationals from Haiti You're God Damn right we did. That rescue is reflex, a given, goes without saying. When we have American citizens trapped in a disaster area with no food, water, medical aid, or security, you can bet your ass that in a short amount of time you're going to see a rescue operation coming over the horizon.

It's something I can't explain to you. Only an American who has lived in this country all of his life and understands American values will appreciate this. It doesn't matter how much it costs, what the political fallout might be be, or how dangerous it might be. If our citizens are in harms way, that will be our first priority. You won't here one American complain that we spent too much or our tax dollars are being wasted, or we have the wrong priority.

You forgot to mention the initial US choppers were full of rescue personnel, supplies and equipment. We dropped off properly equipped and trained people, and removed the citizens that didn't need to be there.

[CaptainHaplo]

well the US is right next to Haiti, would look really bad if the US just stood idly by. Even then it looks like the US has spent several precious days and flights rescuing it's own nationals from Haiti while at the same time ignoring the plight of the Haitians themselves.

During Clinton's time the US made a military landing in Haiti with the aim of trying to 'Christianize' them. It looks like more of the same this time.

Ok - first off you mentioned "political" gain by us helping - but haven't provided any information how we GAIN by helping. Instead, you turn the arguement to what we would look like if we DIDN'T help - which is a different thing entirely.

Second - you then make an accusation - but provide absolutely no documentation to back it up. Care to point to where you have "heard" this info - or are you adopting tribesman's topics of just making stuff up? When you make accusations, your going to need to provide sources, or be seen as just throwing stuff out there in the hopes it might stick.

As for Clinton - where in the world did you get the idea that the whole episode had anything to do with religion?????

[nikimcbee]

Look out pilgram, here we come:salute::woot:
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b348/fuzzkennels/john_wayne.jpg

[OneToughHerring]

You are cordially invited to go fu*ck yourself. You need a porthole put in your stomach, you have your head so far up your ass you can't see the world around you.

<Edit>
My apology to Neal, the mods, and the rest of the fine people at Subsim. If I get pinged or brig time for this breach of protocol, so be it. I'll accept it. But what I said, stands.

:roll:

[Snestorm]

well the US is right next to Haiti

True

would look really bad if the US just stood idly by.

USA doesn't get overly worried about world opinion.

Even then it looks like the US has spent several precious days and flights rescuing it's own nationals from Haiti while at the same time ignoring the plight of the Haitians themselves.

ALL nations put their own citizens first. For a government to do otherwise would be a betrayal of it's people.

Zero days were lost to "ignoring the plight of the hatians".

During Clinton's time the US made a military landing in Haiti with the aim of trying to 'Christianize' them. It looks like more of the same this time.

Here you seem to possess more information than the rest of us.
Would you care to elaborate?

[August]

Good idé but, can you afford it?

We're paying for it now by having to re-task military forces away from their original missions. That's going to have to be made up somehow.

I'm just thinking that maybe dedicated assets could do a better job for around the same amount.

[August]

I think they need the Seebees in there to build some airfields so the supply planes can get in and out quicker.

Maybe after the initial response but building airfields does take time regardless of how good the crew is. That's not gonna help in the first days.

[CaptainHaplo]

*Sarcasm warning*

Maybe we should just pull all our people out, then nuke the whole area in the humanitarian gesture of putting all these people out of their misery. After all, they are poor, have nothing really to offer us, and are now living under the most horrible of conditions. Such an act by us would be merciful.

*Sarcasm complete*

I post the above to show the difference between what we REALLY do as a country - which is individual giving to assist those in need (regardless of where they may be) - as compared to what some on here seem to think we would do if it were not for "public opinion" of the world.

Now - before everyone piles onto Finland - its important to note that the latest numbers show they have committed aid to Haiti in the form of 2 information specialists, related equipment, and monetary aid which is estimated at a worth of about $1.8 Million USD. This information is from reliefweb.int in case anyone wants to check it. The US has committed just above $100 Million USD. Private donations - of which approximately 50% are from the US - are nearly $150 Million USD. That makes $75 Million in aid given by US citizens out of the humanity of the heart. So we have $175 Million in aid, not counting the cost of the forces (Naval and Marine) being deployed, as well as not counting the donations from all those "EVIL" corporations in the US that are giving in rather large amounts as well.

Private citizens on average - in most countries, really don't give a crap what other countries think of them. No way the US could recoup the costs of the aid they are sending.....

Could it be the US isn't nearly as horrible as some jealous and envious people would love to believe?

Naw... .couldn't possibly be that....:rotfl2:

[stabiz]

There was an American doctor on tv today, who basically said the disaster is being treated wrongly. He pointed out that rescuing a few hundred buried under rubble looks great on tv, but the real problem are the thousands on thousands of survivors roaming the streets looking for water and food, and that their needs should be dealt with first.

Btw, why do the Americans here feel they have to find "evidence" that America cares (most) about the entire world? Who cares who rescued who, as long as people are being helped? Everything has to be a freakin competition.

[Buddahaid]

There was an American doctor on tv today, who basically said the disaster is being treated wrongly. He pointed out that rescuing a few hundred buried under rubble looks great on tv, but the real problem are the thousands on thousands of survivors roaming the streets looking for water and food, and that their needs should be dealt with first.

Btw, why do the Americans here feel they have to find "evidence" that America cares (most) about the entire world? Who cares who rescued who, as long as people are being helped? Everything has to be a freakin competition.

Because of the insinuation that the US only helps those we exploit.

[Buddahaid]

Now - before everyone piles onto Finland - its important to note that the latest numbers show they have committed aid to Haiti in the form of 2 information specialists, related equipment, and monetary aid which is estimated at a worth of about $1.8 Million USD. This information is from reliefweb.int in case anyone wants to check it.


Glad to hear it.

[Tribesman]

or are you adopting tribesman's topics of just making stuff up?
Find a single example of me making stuff up Haplo.
What I write may not be popular but it isn't made up.
BTW any luck understanding scripture or science yet:rotfl2:

[CaptainHaplo]

Stabiz - I wasn't posting to "neener neener neener America is better because look how much we give" - but to demonstrate that the accusation that we are doing this for "gain and profit" and some kind of religious force feeding is inaccurate. Had the accusations not been made, I would not have had a need to point out the facts.

Personally, I was quite gratified to see the reliefweb.net numbers - because they show that the PEOPLE as well as countries around the world are pitching in.

In cases like this - its not "how much" you give - its if your willing to step up and help. Its why I noted that Finland is doing what it can - everyone is - and that is why we should all be proud of humanity everywhere standing up and doing what it can - regardless of who or where those helpers come from.

[Onkel Neal]

You are cordially invited to go fu*ck yourself. You need a porthole put in your stomach, you have your head so far up your ass you can't see the world around you.

<Edit>
My apology to Neal, the mods, and the rest of the fine people at Subsim. If I get pinged or brig time for this breach of protocol, so be it. I'll accept it. But what I said, stands.


Ok, it's said, but please, no repeats. I know it's hard to resist replying to a troll post, but we cannot have this either. Seriously, you do not have to read it, Edit Ignore List (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/profile.php?do=ignorelist).

[Onkel Neal]

Finland has always paid it's dues to the UN and has a long history of serving in the UN peace keeping forces whereas the US does things like the 1993 Mogadishu operation and the UN (Pakistanis, lol) has to come in and save their sorry butts.

Look, do not post this and then report a bad post when someone replies in anger. You know you trying to provoke a strong reaction.:nope:

[Tribesman]

We're paying for it now by having to re-task military forces away from their original missions. That's going to have to be made up somehow.

I'm just thinking that maybe dedicated assets could do a better job for around the same amount.
The problem there is what dedicated assets?
Each disaster is different and requires a different approach and different assets.
Pakistans was localised, distribution required helicopters and land transport, while the bulk shipping could use the countries ports and the main airports were unaffected. The regional US bases(and deployments) could be used together with assets already there.
The christmas tsunami on the other hand was very widely dispersed it hit different areas to different extents, that meant that a very varied set of assets was required operating from a wider variety of areas.
Now if you look at this one in Haiti, its localised and needs a whole different set of assets and approach using a whole different area of deployment.

It just isn't practical for the US to have a dedicated agency with all the assets it may need and a handy way to get them to all the places it may need to go.

[Buddahaid]

The problem there is what dedicated assets?
Each disaster is different and requires a different approach and different assets.
Pakistans was localised, distribution required helicopters and land transport, while the bulk shipping could use the countries ports and the main airports were unaffected. The regional US bases(and deployments) could be used together with assets already there.
The christmas tsunami on the other hand was very widely dispersed it hit different areas to different extents, that meant that a very varied set of assets was required operating from a wider variety of areas.
Now if you look at this one in Haiti, its localised and needs a whole different set of assets and approach using a whole different area of deployment.

It just isn't practical for the US to have a dedicated agency with all the assets it may need and a handy way to get them to all the places it may need to go.

Which is exactly why much aid comes in the form of the armed forces which have these different modalities.

[August]

Which is exactly why much aid comes in the form of the armed forces which have these different modalities.

Exactly and it's an expensive and inefficient way to do it. Allowing the military to create and equip a command for the mission might be a better way.

[Tribesman]

Which is exactly why much aid comes in the form of the armed forces which have these different modalities.
Yep.
So while Augusts thought on the situation is an interesting one, it just isn't practical to have a dedicated agency with all the assets instead of using the military and its available assets.

Edit...with that last post thats gone full circle , from saying the military shouldn't be doing the job there should be an agency all the way round to saying the military should do the job as the agency

[Snestorm]

It just isn't practical for the US to have a dedicated agency with all the assets it may need and a handy way to get them to all the places it may need to go.

This, I tend to agree with. The current system works well, and covers the entire maritime world. The MSC merchant ships are on station 24/7/365 for any emergency that may arise, civil or military. The USN has to keep the ball, or it becomes a beaurocratic nightmare. (Too many chefs spoil the soup).

[Snestorm]

Exactly and it's an expensive and inefficient way to do it. Allowing the military to create and equip a command for the mission might be a better way.

The military has a command for the mission.
It's called The United States Navy, which comes with it's own army called The United Syates Marine Corps.

[Buddahaid]

Exactly and it's an expensive and inefficient way to do it. Allowing the military to create and equip a command for the mission might be a better way.

It seems to me it would still be expensive in terms of equipment and training, and there would be a need for security anyway. And, what you describe seems already there as the National Guard to some degree.

[August]

Edit...with that last post thats gone full circle , from saying the military shouldn't be doing the job there should be an agency all the way round to saying the military should do the job as the agency

You'll note that the title of this thread is "US Navy Disaster Relief Task Force". It was always my position that this should be a military command. You are the one who started talking about agencies.

[August]

The military has a command for the mission.
It's called The United States Navy, which comes with it's own army called The United Syates Marine Corps.

Both of which are designed, constituted, equipped and trained to kill people and destroy stuff, not help huge numbers of civilians recover from natural disasters.

Look guys, what we're really talking about here is primarily a transportation command along the lines of the USAF's Military Airlift Command. This could easily be a joint service command too. It doesn't have to be owned and operated by the US Navy although they are the ones who would have to do most of the heavy lifting.

[Snestorm]

Both of which are designed, constituted, equipped and trained to kill people and destroy stuff, not help huge numbers of civilians recover from natural disasters.

Look guys, what we're really talking about here is primarily a transportation command along the lines of the USAF's Military Airlift Command. This could easily be a joint service command too. It doesn't have to be owned and operated by the US Navy although they are the ones who would have to do most of the heavy lifting.

There already is such a command.

MSC (as in MSC SHIPS) stands for Military Sealift Command.
It is, and has to be, owned and operated by the US Navy.

[August]

There already is such a command.

MSC (as in MSC SHIPS) stands for Military Sealift Command.
It is, and has to be, owned and operated by the US Navy.

Their boss would be a much better choice I think.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/dod/transcom.htm

Even so it's not all about transportation. They'd need everything from medical staff to construction specialists

[Tribesman]

You'll note that the title of this thread is "US Navy Disaster Relief Task Force". It was always my position that this should be a military command. You are the one who started talking about agencies.
:har::har::har::har::har:
Could you tell me what an agency is?
Could you tell me what a department is?
Could you perhaps start with the US Army Corps of Engineers and work it out from there by yourself, or would you like some help?

[August]

:har::har::har::har::har:
Could you tell me what an agency is?
Could you tell me what a department is?
Could you perhaps start with the US Army Corps of Engineers and work it out from there by yourself, or would you like some help?

Smart ass posts like that is why half this board ignores you. If you want to have a discussion learn some civility.

[Tribesman]

If you want to have a discussion learn some civility.
If you want to have a discussion then learn.
If you wish to challenge the use of the word "agency" then make sure you know what the word means before you question its use.

Still I take it from your response that you have now learned that a military command can be an agency, I suppose you have also learned that it can be part of a non-military organisation.
If you had bothered thinking before you you wrote....You are the one who started talking about agencies. ....you wouldn't have written it at all as the agency I initially mentioned has throughout the years been variously both a civilian and military command under different depts.


None of which of course changes the problem that a dedicated national agency for international disaster relief with its own allocated assets is simply not a practical proposal as the scale is too vast and needs too diverse.

[Snestorm]

Their boss would be a much better choice I think.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/dod/transcom.htm

Even so it's not all about transportation. They'd need everything from medical staff to construction specialists

Good post. Very educational.

[August]

blah blah blah

TLDR

[Tribesman]

TLDR
Which is why you lack basic knowledge.:har:

[Buddahaid]

Which is why you lack basic knowledge.:har:
You'd make a fine mentor. All pleasant and patient. :har:

[August]

Which is why you lack basic knowledge.:har:

I didn't read it because frankly your constant trolling is becoming boring. :down:

[Tribesman]

I didn't read it because frankly your constant trolling is becoming boring
And you complaing that people mention agencies when what you yourself are suggesting would be an agency is damn funny.

[August]

bla bla bla

TLDR

[MothBalls]

Tribesman, August, next recess you guys meet me by the swing-sets on the playground and we'll settle this once and for all.

[nikimcbee]

Tribesman, August, next recess you guys meet me by the swing-sets on the playground and we'll settle this once and for all.

Sweet:woot:

[CaptainHaplo]

I like my ignore list - though granted Tribesman is the only one on it.... I don't even have to see his inane posts anymore. :yeah:

August - you should just add him to it and stop wasting time with a troll.

[August]

I like my ignore list - though granted Tribesman is the only one on it.... I don't even have to see his inane posts anymore. :yeah:

August - you should just add him to it and stop wasting time with a troll.

I think ignore lists are detrimental to the long term well being of the forum so I won't use them. I'll just have to ignore him manually. :DL

[Platapus]

I like my ignore list - though granted Tribesman is the only one on it.... I don't even have to see his inane posts anymore. :yeah:

August - you should just add him to it and stop wasting time with a troll.


Adults should not need an ignore list.

We all don't have to agree with each other, nor does every post require a reply.

Modus vivendi

[August]

Adults should not need an ignore list.

We all don't have to agree with each other, nor does every post require a reply.

Modus vivendi

I don't judge people who use them. The software is there to be used.

[CaptainHaplo]

Platypus - I disagree with alot of people on here. August, OTH, Aramike, Skybird, etc etc all disagree with me at length on something - but we move past it.

My decision to use the ignore function was based on the fact that you can't have a debate on facts with someone who wants instead to argue and never provide any basis for his claims - no matter how many times he is challenged to do so. That makes it impossible to have a discussion.

Its true that not every post requires a response - but most people have a hard time seeing insanity that they can demonstrate is false just letting it lay there for other people to see - never getting a counterpoint with foundational support.

So instead of wasting my time trying to discuss when someone merely wants to argue, I choose ignore - and it works rather nice. :) I bet he is still probably chasing me and posting with idiocy, all to no avail. Makes this place a lot more enjoyable for me.

[Tribesman]

My decision to use the ignore function was based on the fact that you can't have a debate on facts with someone who wants instead to argue and never provide any basis for his claims - no matter how many times he is challenged to do so.
Wow a creationist who is unable to understand scripture mentioned fact.
That is an interesting post, I wonder how a young earth creationist would define fact.
And there was me thinking I was on Haplos ignore list for pointing out that he is about as Christian as Bhuddas left toe, still you learn something new everyday :up:
One point though
That makes it impossible to have a discussion.

No, what makes it impossible for Haplo is when he wishes to challenge points but has no understanding of the point apart from "not liking it".

So instead of wasting my time trying to discuss when someone merely wants to argue, I choose ignore - and it works rather nice.
Actually it means I can take your posts which are there for discussion, show up the major flaws in them and expose your lack of rational thought while you choose to remain in blissful ignorance like a child standing in the middle of the room hiding under a blanket.

[TLAM Strike]

If the US Navy were to create a naval task force dedicated to disaster relief, what capabilities, ship, aircraft, equipment and personnel do you think it might consist of?

The Comfort, obviously
One or Two America class Amphib Assault carriers with helos and Marine loadout
Several tenders and units from the Military Sealift Command
A few Whidbey Island class Dock Landing craft with ACLCs
A Tico or two to act as air traffic organisation (if needed)
Arleigh Burkes and OHPs for fleet protection (against pirates and the like)

The ACLCs and Helos would probably be some of the most important items in the fleet. The ACLCs able to use beaches to deploy supplies instead of waiting for ports, and the Helos able to ferry supplies to designated and protected LZs in the location where aid hubs can be established along repaired transportation networks.
Obviously getting ground pounders in with the Engineering corps is important too and if the airports in the area are screwed then the Engineers would have to come in by boat or helo and their equipment ferried in the same way.

Well 1st off there would need to be two. One for the Atlantic one for the Pacific. Probaly devide the Indian ocean at DG or base a small TF at Manama.

I kinda agree with Obie but I think he is being a little excessive. I don't think they need that much military hardware. It should be choped on a as needed basis. Some nations might not want a bunch of Marines coming ashore even durring a disaster.

I would say:
1 Mercy class AH (like the USNS Comfort)
1 Fast Ferry type ship with medical facilities. For rapid deployment of life saving equipment that may not be in country.
1-3 Container ships modified as Heli Carriers (Like the Atlantic Conveyor)
- Each AKH (I just made that up; Aux, Cargo, Heli) would have 6 UH-1s and 2 MH-60 Knight Hawks. The Hueys would be for medivac missions and the Hawks for lifting pallets of supplies.
1 Water Desalination Ship. Probaly a modified Tanker to purify seawater and pump it ashore.
2 RO/RO ships each with 2-6 LCACs.
6 USCG WPBs and 1 SEABEE type cargo ship to transport them. WPBs for basic securty operations and SAR.

[August]

I like it TLAM.

I would also add a Naval Construction unit with rapid deployment capability to those assets as well. If we'd have gotten a battalion of Seabees and their equipment ashore in Haiti a day or two our distribution problems would have been mostly solved by now.