(mini-rant) Haiti, aircraft carriers, and stupid people

[Safe-Keeper]

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2010/01/could_an_80-year-old_tacoma_dr.php

So I was reading this article, considering the idea to have a nuclear sub or carrier dock at a Haititan city to be used as a floating power plant. It's an ingenious idea, harnessing the peacetime power of a giant warship to fuel a city struck by disaster. Made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

But then I read the comments:

NO NO NO NO NO. The people in Haiti need water, food, and medicine, not WAR MACHINES and TROOPS. What the **** is wrong with you military fetishists? The US and UN military already in Haiti are getting the way of relief delivery and distribution and making the situation even more chaotic. I'm appalled at how ****ing ignorant the Seattle Weekly is.

Fortunately, that was the only such comment there (not that there were more than four in total), but seriously, what the hell? I mean, it's one thing to be a pacifist, but how is it "military fetishism" to use weapons of war to save lives in a peaceful way? Surely if you hate the military this should be a welcome move?

What's wrong with people.

:damn:

[Schroeder]

This is a typical ultra left reaction. The moment anything is related to the military it has to be evil by default.:damn:

[lorka42]

This is a typical ultra left reaction. The moment anything is related to the military it has to be evil by default.:damn:
[mimes hitting a nail with a hammer] :damn: but, seriously, any nimitz-class COULD power a town, easily. theyd just have to shut down flight ops. p.s. notice the other 3 are shooting down the lefty, LOL

[antikristuseke]

The post is stupid but shows no political bias either way.

[ETR3(SS)]

I used to be stationed out there when I was in the Navy, can't say I'm surprised by the comment. :shifty:

[SteamWake]

Stupid comment... enough said.


But I dont see how you would use a Carrier to power a city. There are several logistic issues to contend with.

For one thing the voltage phase and frequency most likely would not match. Then how to deliver the power? It's not like plugging in an extension cord. Then theres the safety issues ... overcurrent protection, arc fault protection, physical protection.

Finally theres the unseen factor. Lets say you ran some heavy copper cables to transmitt the power. It is almost assuredly only a matter of time before someone tries to steal that copper. It's Haitai thats how they do things.

No personally I think there efforts would be better put into re-establishing what little infrastructure they had there to begin with.

[nikimcbee]

WE just want the haitian oil for our glorious empire! Viva haliburton:woot:.

It should only be renewable green energy, such as bio-diesel or hemp oil, not the evil atom power.:haha:

[gutted]

It should only be renewable green energy, such as bio-diesel or hemp oil, not the evil atom power.:haha:

I say we just stack all the liberals in a big pile.. light em on fire.. and harness their green minded asses for fuel.

[antikristuseke]

To burn a human body takes more energy than it releases.

[gutted]

I wasn't being serious. :rotfl2:

[antikristuseke]

I realize that, but occasionally I like to post factualy correct information regardless of wether the the post I am replying to is serious or not.

[AVGWarhawk]

Some countries just have an issue with nuke boats in their ports. -shrugs-

[SteamWake]

Some countries just have an issue with nuke boats in their ports. -shrugs-

Now that he mentions it doesent a carrier require a deep water port?

I'm not so sure Haitai has any.

[Oberon]

Some countries just have an issue with nuke boats in their ports. -shrugs-

*cough* Spain *cough* :har:

[mookiemookie]

I say we just stack all the liberals in a big pile.. light em on fire.. and harness their green minded asses for fuel.

Actually, I think we'd get more energy if we could harness the irrational hate and ignorance of the right. :sunny:

[AVGWarhawk]

Actually, I think we'd get more energy if we could harness the irrational hate and ignorance of the right. :sunny:

D'ems be fi'tin words. Let me get my guns and religion. The we have a go at'er Mookie :stare:

:O:

[Snestorm]

Some countries just have an issue with nuke boats in their ports. -shrugs-

Danmark doesn't allow nukes, and it's not a left/right thing.

[Snestorm]

Now that he mentions it doesent a carrier require a deep water port?

Affirmative.

[gutted]

Actually, I think we'd get more energy if we could harness the irrational hate and ignorance of the right. :sunny:

Maybe, but im neither right nor left.

So have at it.

[AVGWarhawk]

Danmark doesn't allow nukes, and it's not a left/right thing.


Exactly. I think it was the tsunami in Burma were the US offered assitance but they did not want the nuke carrier in their port. Some countries are just that way with a nuke boat. -shrugs-

[ETR3(SS)]

But I dont see how you would use a Carrier to power a city. There are several logistic issues to contend with.

For one thing the voltage phase and frequency most likely would not match. Then how to deliver the power? It's not like plugging in an extension cord. Then theres the safety issues ... overcurrent protection, arc fault protection, physical protection.

Finally theres the unseen factor. Lets say you ran some heavy copper cables to transmitt the power. It is almost assuredly only a matter of time before someone tries to steal that copper. It's Haitai thats how they do things.

No personally I think there efforts would be better put into re-establishing what little infrastructure they had there to begin with. It is quite possible. Tacoma used the Lexington's boilers like a homeowner would a generator drug out of the garage after an outage, powering a quarter of the city from December through January of the next year. All of the equipment is onboard the carrier. The only thing needed would be the shore power cables.

[ETR3(SS)]

Some countries just have an issue with nuke boats in their ports. -shrugs- Spain, Italy, Japan...the list goes on.

[August]

Exactly. I think it was the tsunami in Burma were the US offered assitance but they did not want the nuke carrier in their port. Some countries are just that way with a nuke boat. -shrugs-

Burma is run by a military junta which brings xenophobic paranoia to a whole new level, but I think their main reason for refusing assistance is that the damage occurred in areas where most of their domestic opposition lived. To the junta it's much easier just to let those folks die than allow foreign rescuers in to help them (and by extension let the outside world find out how bad it is there).