SUBSIM Radio Room Forums
Page 8 of 8 « First 4567 8
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   U.S. Navy to Probe Lewd Videos Shown to Carrier Crew (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=178676)

Tribesman 01-06-11 03:04 PM
Quote:
And here's the result: The Highway of Death. Much of the Iraqi army escaped Kuwait in the '91 war, "Highway of Death" images notwithstanding. The Iraqi army that survived suppressed the Kurds after the Coalition pulled out.
What on earth are you on about?

Quote:
And what did the press talk about after the war? "The Highway of Death" and the destruction of fleeing Iraqis there; fine, we'll just go ahead and let them go, then.
Didn't they talk about the sillyness of killing defeated troops from units that had abandoned their positions and were largely made up of shia whose home provinces in the south were in open rebelion against Saddam.
Didn't they also talk how the leaders of the coilition felt it was important that the rebelion in the south failed as it was Iranian backed and they didn't want Saddam ousted and replaced by the supreme council for islamic revolution in iraq as iran was the regional threat not saddam (not to mention the Iranian backed Kurds in the north)

Quote:
The military exists to do the things civilians don't want to do. It's our job to KILL. It's our job to DESTROY.
Perhaps you missed it, its also your job to save and your job to build.

Quote:
It's our job to be the exact opposite of what a civilized society accepts as necessary to operate.
No its your job to do exactly what a civilised society accepts as necessary.

You seem to be getting most of your points completely backwards.

Quote:
But the media will define the entire service by the actions of a few individuals caught on tape.
You really need a reality check, if that were the case then the media would describe every marine as a lying murdering child rapist wouldn't they instead of describing some individual marines as a disgrace to the corps the military and the nation.

Armistead 01-06-11 03:24 PM
Sometimes I think it takes a tyrant like Saddam to keep all the crazy sects in line. Overall Iraq was a secular nation even under a dictator. Iraq invaded Kuwait and started a war, but Bush Sr. had enough sense to know how stupid it would be to overthrow the nation. He even stated it would take generations to bring all the sects together, costing trillions and better to leave the country intact with Sadaam. GW was either too dumb or mostly likely saw all the money to be made.

GW Bush, being a damned fool new the lies, like Hitler created a fevor of fake patriotism and destroyed several nation, we alreadly had surrounded and could cause us no harm. In the end, all his friends got rich off all the no bid contracts at the cost of possibly hundreds of thousands of lives and still we have people that get off on the thought...we put a boot in their arse.

During that time, the Taliban escaped with ol Bin and going stronger than ever. If we ever leave either country now, I bet in a matter of a few years back to the normal fubar, but I assume the people there would refer it.

Iraq war will go down as the biggest blunder in US history. Even if we make it a stable nation, in the end game it won't serve our interest any better for the money that was wasted.

Molon Labe 01-06-11 03:33 PM
http://www.public.navy.mil/usff/Page...nterprise.aspx

Quote:
Originally Posted by US Fleet Forces

NORFOLK, Va., January 4, 2011 – Adm. John C. Harvey Jr., Commander, United States Fleet Forces Command (USFFC), has permanently relieved Capt. Owen Honors of his duties as commanding officer of USS Enterprise (CVN 65) for demonstrating poor judgment while serving as executive officer of that ship.

“The responsibility of the Commanding Officer for his or her command is absolute. While Capt. Honors’ performance as commanding officer of USS Enterprise has been without incident, his profound lack of good judgment and professionalism while previously serving as executive officer on Enterprise calls into question his character and completely undermines his credibility to continue to serve effectively in command.

The foundation of our success in the Navy lies in our ability to gain and hold the trust of our Sailors, including through personal example. This responsibility is so important that it is written into Navy Regulations. When confidence and trust are lost in those who lead, we fail. After personally reviewing the videos created while serving as executive officer, I have lost confidence in Capt. Honors’ ability to lead effectively, and he is being held accountable for poor judgment and the inappropriate actions demonstrated in the videos that were created while he served as executive officer on Enterprise,” said Harvey.

“It is fact that as naval officers we are held to a higher standard. Those in command must exemplify the Navy’s core values of honor, courage and commitment which we expect our Sailors to follow. Our leaders must be above reproach and our Sailors deserve nothing less,” said Harvey. Capt. Dee Mewbourne will be permanently assigned as the commanding officer of Enterprise. Captain Mewbourne most recently commanded USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) and while in command he completed two successful combat deployments supporting Operation Enduring Freedom. Capt Mewbourne is currently serving as the Chief of Staff for Navy Cyber Forces and will assume command of USS Enterprise this afternoon.

“We will support and work with Capt. Mewbourne and the crew of Enterprise to keep them forward focused on their upcoming combat deployment. This is a difficult situation but the men and women of Enterprise are outstanding Sailors who have completed a very challenging and comprehensive predeployment work-up period in a thoroughly professional manner. They are well-trained and I have full confidence in their readiness to execute all missions during their deployment,” said Harvey.

The relief of Capt. Honors occurs as the investigation continues into the inappropriate videos that Honors made while serving as Enterprise's executive officer from 2006-2007. The investigation will continue to look at all aspects of the production of the videos, to include the actions of other senior officers who knew of the videos and the actions they took in response.

Capt. Honors has been reassigned to administrative duties at Commander, Naval Air Force Atlantic.

Growler 01-06-11 03:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman (Post 1568160)
What on earth are you on about?
The fact that the media totally ignored the fact that the military were attempting to do their jobs by eliminating the enemy's ability to wage war, and were instead lambasted in the press, as you so clearly state below:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman (Post 1568160)
Didn't they talk about the sillyness of killing defeated troops from units that had abandoned their positions and were largely made up of shia whose home provinces in the south were in open rebelion against Saddam.
Didn't they also talk how the leaders of the coilition felt it was important that the rebelion in the south failed as it was Iranian backed and they didn't want Saddam ousted and replaced by the supreme council for islamic revolution in iraq as iran was the regional threat not saddam (not to mention the Iranian backed Kurds in the north)
And what are YOU on about? That's international politics dictating to an international military, not one nation's society. "Leaders of the coilition" [sic] would be political leaders from VARIOUS NATIONS. Again, politics deciding military action. Worked like a charm in Vietnam, by the way. Korea, too. Since, you know, the guys in the tanks and the aircraft always have the most current political picture foremost in their mind while they're busy operating expensive taxpayer equipment and trying not to die while they're at it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman (Post 1568160)
Perhaps you missed it, its also your job to save and your job to build.
Uh, no. Pretty sure that there was no "Use your 25mm to build schools" program at Ft. Knox.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman (Post 1568160)
No its your job to do exactly what a civilised society accepts as necessary.

You seem to be getting most of your points completely backwards.
No. You don't call the military when you want civilized. Leave civilized to the politicians. After they realize that civilized words don't stop an invading army, they meet them with another army. Besides - your definition of civilized is likely different than someone else's; if you think differently, tell me how civilized Coventry or Dresden were after a couple minutes' work by the Luftwaffe and RAF/USAAF - both perfectly acceptable acts by the "civilized society" that sponsored them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman (Post 1568160)
You really need a reality check, if that were the case then the media would describe every marine as a lying murdering child rapist wouldn't they instead of describing some individual marines as a disgrace to the corps the military and the nation.
What, you mean they aren't? [/sarcasm]

So what is it that immediately makes you take on a view different than yours as a justifiable means for a personal attack or two?

Tribesman 01-06-11 04:32 PM
Quote:
The fact that the media totally ignored the fact that the military were attempting to do their jobs by eliminating the enemy's ability to wage war, and were instead lambasted in the press, as you so clearly state below
Their job was very specific, they were to prevent Iraqi forces in Kuwait from invading Saudi and get Iraqi forces to leave Kuwait.
Did you miss the memo or did your comprehension problems translate that as KILL DESTROY?

Quote:
That's international politics dictating to an international military, not one nation's society.
Because it was an international issue about international politics. If it was just one nations society then that would be known under the rather unusual term that is never heard which is "civil war".

Quote:
Again, politics deciding military action.
Can you remind me who is in command of your military as you seem to have forgotten.


Quote:
Since, you know, the guys in the tanks and the aircraft always have the most current political picture foremost in their mind while they're busy operating expensive taxpayer equipment and trying not to die while they're at it.
The guys in the tanks are just very small cogs in a very big machine, and I hate to break it to ya but they are disposable assets of the politicians

Quote:
Uh, no. Pretty sure that there was no "Use your 25mm to build schools" program at Ft. Knox.
Are you just pretending to be dumb?

Quote:
No. You don't call the military when you want civilized.
Yes you do, if you didn't want civilized you would just call on the cheapest available undiciplined disposable scum who would work for a pittance and wouldn't have civilised things like laws and regulations to follow.
I won't confuse you with things like Geneva or Hague as some of that foriegn stuff really is too much reading, but have you heard of this thing, its mentioned quite frequently by US servicemen and vets on this forum , its called the uniform code of military justice.
Amazingly it comes originally from this thing called congress which I hear is supposedly made up of the politician thingys which you think don't do military:rotfl2:

Quote:
Besides - your definition of civilized is likely different than someone else's; if you think differently, tell me how civilized Coventry or Dresden were after a couple minutes' work by the Luftwaffe and RAF/USAAF - both perfectly acceptable acts by the "civilized society" that sponsored them.
Can you tell me what law they broke, after all if Coventry and Dresden were so nasty and uncivilised they must have been war crimes eh.:har:

Quote:
So what is it that immediately makes you take on a view different than yours as a justifiable means for a personal attack or two?
Each of those things you quoted was dealing with what you wrote.
If you don't want your views attacked then try and make your views make more sense as currently you appear to be letting your emotions about the services get the better of your judgement on the issues.

Growler 01-06-11 05:05 PM
My quote: So what is it that immediately makes you take on a view different than yours as a justifiable means for a personal attack or two?

Your responses:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tribesman (Post 1568232)
Did you miss the memo or did your comprehension problems ...

... you seem to have forgotten.

Are you just pretending to be dumb?

I won't confuse you with things like Geneva or Hague as some of that foriegn stuff really is too much reading, but have you heard of this thing, its mentioned quite frequently by US servicemen and vets on this forum , its called the uniform code of military justice.
Amazingly it comes originally from this thing called congress which I hear is supposedly made up of the politician thingys which you think don't do military...

Each of those things you quoted was dealing with what you wrote.
If you don't want your views attacked then try and make your views make more sense as currently you appear to be letting your emotions about the services get the better of your judgement on the issues.
So far, what I see here are attacks on me, personally, not "my views." Until you are capable of discerning the difference, I choose not to be trolled any further, and this conversation is over.

The Third Man 01-06-11 05:11 PM
Making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Tribesman 01-06-11 06:10 PM
Quote:
So far, what I see here are attacks on me, personally, not "my views."
Once again you have comments on what you wrote, so on that last lot you quoted.... its obviouisly a comprehension problem where you don't realise that the politicians call the shots and didn't comprehend the nature of the mission in the Gulf.
Seem to forget the chain of command and either deliberately aim to misunderstand or have a real problem with understanding the english language.
Military law, well thats civilised isn't it, you claimed the military don't do civilised:doh:

Quote:
So far, what I see here are attacks on me, personally, not "my views."
So far what I see is a comprehension problem you have, and an emotional clouding which effects your views as evidenced by what you have written and your reaction to comments about what you have written.

So far most of what you have written is either simply false or rather detatched from reality.

Quote:
Until you are capable of discerning the difference, I choose not to be trolled any further, and this conversation is over.
Such a pity, you really would have had to tie yourself in knots to try and make your comments about Coventry and Dresden make any sense simply because of what you wrote:haha:
It really was such a funny thing to follow up with after your strange take on the Gulf war

Aramike 01-06-11 11:03 PM
I admit: I clicked "View Post" here...
Quote:
So far what I see is a comprehension problem you have, and an emotional clouding which effects your views as evidenced by what you have written and your reaction to comments about what you have written.
Really?

Dude, is it too hard for you to consider the possibility that it is a communication problem on YOUR part? Or perhaps your not comprehending a point from a perspective OTHER than YOURS?

Or are *ALL* your debates destined to degenerate to such personal attacks, based upon your assumption that *YOUR* position is the default one, and therefore all arguments must pass such muster?

(By the way, before your rebuttal includes the standard berating that comes with your responses to someone using capitalization, look up the term "emphasis" in the dictionary.)

Really, perhaps you should consider the term "respect" just once. To be honest, to the vast majority of reasonable people on here your responses border on innane trash, relying merely on an attempt at the misconceived notion of "cunning wit" which you seem to fire off any time you can't persuade someone into giving you the last word. While we are all guilty of some form of this at some point, you seem to lean upon it.

Leave it alone, and try a mirror once in awhile. At least you seem to have retreated from your sophmoric attempts at validation through repeated laughing emoticons rather than simply letting your points rest upon their own merits.

Tribesman 01-07-11 05:35 AM
Quote:
Dude is it too hard for you to consider that his complaints about e possibility that it is a communication problem on YOUR part?
Dude is it too hard for you to consider that most of his complaints made no sense.
Especially concerning the media, politics, the command structure, history, the military and its nature.
Another way he showed his commprehension problem was in blindness to the word "also".
As in the military has a job that may involving killing and destroying but also involves saving and building.
Response.....military=KILL DESTROY thats what a 25mm is for



Quote:
Or perhaps your not comprehending a point from a perspective OTHER than YOURS?
I understand his perspective, it is very warped.
Each of those points were dealt with in turn.
As it happens one piece he wrote is very illustrative of my point.
Quote:
The fact that the media totally ignored the fact that the military were attempting to do their jobs by eliminating the enemy's ability to wage war, and were instead lambasted in the press, as you so clearly state below:
It demonstrates that his perception was way off as it was not a fact nor remotely refelected reality.
It also shows that he had a very narrow perception of the job the military were doing, so narrow in fact that its almost meaningless.
For good measure it fully demonstrates his comprehension problems with the English language as the bit he thinks "clearly states" one thing actually states the opposite which in turn comes back to his lack of perception.

Quote:
Or are *ALL* your debates destined to degenerate to such personal attacks, based upon your assumption that *YOUR* position is the default one, and therefore all arguments must pass such muster?
Thats rather a silly assumption you make about my "assumption", my default position on nearly everything is "not sure at all" which switches on some things to "almost sure".

August 01-07-11 08:25 AM
Why do you guys even bother with that troll?

Feuer Frei! 01-07-11 09:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by August (Post 1568707)
Why do you guys even bother with that troll?
I'm also wondering what post count this thread will end up with? Considering the outcome of the 'offending' Captain has come to a conclusion :hmmm:

antikristuseke 01-07-11 09:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ETR3(SS) (Post 1565685)
As much as I like an informed and educated American public, this is one of those things that they don't need to know about. If they would like to know then they can inform themselves by visiting their nearest navy recruiter and doing the job that sailors do on a daily basis. Try as the Navy might to rid itself of the stereotypical sailor image, we do swear, drink, smoke, and goof off in ways that the general public wouldn't find acceptable behavior.

Why the public cares about events that happened 3-4 years ago and are trying to do something about it now is beyond me. Personally I hope Capt. Honors career continues uninhibited.
That sort of behaviour is present in all armed forces, be they naval or ground based or even the chair force. But I suppose a sense of humour is forbidden.

Tribesman 01-07-11 10:04 AM
Quote:
Why do you guys even bother with that troll?
Don't be so cruel about Growler August, he is just very confused:O:
Though of course August if you was to post in relation to what was written for any purpose other than just being a troll a perhaps you could explain how Growler wasn't writing nonsense.
But I doubt you will as you only popped out from under your bridge to troll and added nothing in favour or against the topics in question between growler and myself.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:34 PM.
Page 8 of 8 « First 4567 8
Show 20 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.