SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - What U.S. naval assets are likely to be near Libya?

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - What U.S. naval assets are likely to be near Libya? (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=180590)

There's two major naval installations in Rota, Spain and Naples, Italy that could dispatch some ships.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._installations

Kaye T. Bai wrote . . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kaye T. Bai (Post 1610514)

There's two major naval installations in Rota, Spain and Naples, Italy that could dispatch some ships.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of..._installations

Rota is truly massive. I was dispatched there on temporary duty for two weeks in the early 90s [I was USAF, myself] and I walked and walked that installation in every direction. One day I was WAY distant from the main part of the base, and a U.S. diesel sub was docked at a very remote dock, and I talked my way on board for a short tour [luckily had my active duty military ID]. The rest is history -- it was the genesis of my love for all things naval.

Quite an update on U.S. naval assets located off Libya, by New York Times here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/07/wo...y.html?_r=1&hp

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tribesman (Post 1603933)

Castout, the global war on terror has drained the US, they simply cannot afford another open ended deployment.
What is needed is strong action by the UN, but that isn't going to happen until the big 5 have worked out who they think is going to be the winners to back and what contracts they think they can get out of the winner, that will drag on and on until al 5 are reasonably happy about what they think they are going to get out of it.
If they don't all agree that their favourite is on to a winner and they are going to benefit then you will end up with the all too frequent weak gesture a few weeks or months down the line.

Don't tell me there's nothing they could do to help. I just don't believe that. People are getting killed there. The civilians are forced to take up arms since Gaddafi are massacring the peaceful protesters.

The rebels have asked for air support from US or Europe. I think they are playing the waiting game. But I applaud president Obama plain and strong statement that Gaddafi needed to go.

I expect a lot from the British Prime Minister as well. David Cameron and Obama in my honest opinion are the two greatest state leaders the world have at the moment. I hope whatever they are trying to do that they do it sooner than later.

Someone mentioned that there's price to pay for action taken and inaction as well. I'm aware the fleet they are deploying is putting some kind of pressure on Gaddafi but that's not enough. What we have now is nothing but warlord trying to hold a city and regain the country through sheer violence and intimidation. These are human lives we are talking about. Persons just like you and me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vois2 (Post 1610666)

The USAF also operates surface ships, strangely enough. :up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ates_Air_Force

I would like to see us help finish Quidaffi off. I know there are no guarantees, but the next regime has at least a possibility of being better.

I doubt Obama will do much of anything. IMO, a no-fly zone is pointless; it merely locks in a stalemate. It would be better to bomb his air bases and solve the problem that way. No-fly zones are just a substitute for action. If we didn't want to get 'directly' involved, we could send some small ground units, quietly; say a couple batteries of artillery and AA. It wouldn't take that much to tip the balance. At least, that is my guess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorpX (Post 1614492)

IMO, a no-fly zone is pointless; it merely locks in a stalemate. It would be better to bomb his air bases and solve the problem that way. No-fly zones are just a substitute for action. If we didn't want to get 'directly' involved, we could send some small ground units, quietly; say a couple batteries of artillery and AA. It wouldn't take that much to tip the balance. At least, that is my guess.

Yeah I agree they need to be involved not just in enforcing no fly zone but actively helping the rebels.

No fly zones, eh? Takes me back to the 1990s.

TLAM, is another update available on the listing of assets? (The last update was 02 March- I don't know whether you are in charge of the update at the site used before).

National Public Radio (in USA) was saying that USS Enterprise was diverted from Arabian Sea to go hang out in the Red Sea.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vois2 (Post 1615142)

I've heard nothing new.

But I did find some pics of the PLAN escorting some of the ships leaving libya.

http://china-defense.blogspot.com/20...join-more.html

I guess Obama has set out to answer the question from Platapus (post #7).

Nonetheless, Ghaddafi, who resides in his own version of reality at all times, can be trusted to continue attacks or killings where he feels that he can get away with it; not to mention that the allied forces don't seem hardly ready to take real action. TLAM may correct me on that though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vois2 (Post 1622628)

Allied TO&E as of now...

10-12+ F-16s
6 CF-18s
A French Frigate, Charlies De Gaulle on 72 hour alert to sail (28-35 Aircraft)
Italian Carrier Giuseppe Garibaldi with up to 16 AV-8B Harrier IIs in AO, plus Tornado ECR SEAD aircraft on alert.
A Belgian Frigate
UK Tornadoes and Typhoons plus A2A tankers.
Other NATO tankers
Plus other assets mentioned in this thread.

The only other major US asset I now know to be in the Med is the USS Florida SSGN 728

USS Providence launching Tomahawks against enemy land forces?

....this won't end well