Well, this post is garnering a whole Helluva lot of attention around the ‘sphere today: "We Are Going To Hit Iran. Bigtime." Like a lot of folks, I consider the piece to be just so much Leftie blathering. First and foremost, I just cannot conceive of a naval officer committing what is obviously treason. And I don’t throw the T-word around lightly. But something here doesn’t ring true. Do you believe this, as written?
I asked her about the attack, how limited and so forth.
"I don’t think it’s limited at all. We are shipping in and assigning every damn Tomahawk we have in inventory. I think this is going to be massive and sudden, like thousands of targets. I believe that no American will know when it happens until after it happens. And whatever the consequences, whatever the consequences, they will have to be lived with. I am sure if my father knew I was telling someone in a news organization that we were about to launch a supposedly secret attack that it would be treason. But something inside me tells me to tell it anyway."
I asked her why she was suddenly so cynical.
And the piece goes on. If the
I passed this post on to the ONI AG - Office of Naval Intelligence AG to have a look-see and see if they can find this young lady - if she exists and have a chat. An active duty officer on a ship preparing for operations giving out the op plans to said operation is called - treason.
Good on Macranger. As for the “LSO?” She can run, but there ain’t many places she can hide on a carrier at sea. But, personally, I have serious, serious doubts about the veracity of the Kos diarist's piece. The nutroots are eating it up, tho. There are over 1,200 comments on this diary entry as I write.
Good for someone for taking notice and sending this filth to the proper authorities.
ReplyDeleteI'm calling B.S...no way that's a naval officer. "Her term was up"? Officers don't serve terms; their commission never expires. They are free to resign their commission whenever they please, assuming you haven't signed some sort of contract guaranteeing service after attending some sort of school or training. Her career path, though plausible (I think) is rather unique: Cobras to Hornets and then over to the Navy.
ReplyDeleteNext, the grumbling in the Naval ranks...the Navy hasn't really been hit hard by the war. A few surge deployments here and there, but it should say something that the Air Force has been hit harder by an increase in deployments due to the war than the Navy. The Navy does 6 month cruises rain, shine, peacetime, World War III, regardless.
The mysterious reassignment of anyone who questions attacking Iran? Please. This supposed LSO is pretty dang well connected, knowing the inner feelings and thoughts of senior officers well enough to know that they are against attacking. Although I shouldn't be surprised since the supposed LSO is also interfacing with administration officials. Not sure why the administration would need to talk to someone whose job is to land planes on air craft carriers, but what do I know.
The discussion of Tomahawks betrays a large ignorance in how the Navy works logistics.
The incident in the "galley"...the LSO must be involved in the preparation of food, since the galley is where food is cooked; the officers would be eating in the Wardroom, flight crew more than likely in the dirty shirt wardroom. In any case, someone should have taken the young Ensign to task and shown him the error of his ways, since I'm pretty sure that discussing the Iranian nukes would fall under "politics," a taboo subject.
"Red Alert." I don't even know how to respond to this...maybe her the CO of her carrier happens to be named Picard, I don't know.
And it's supposed to be a war warning when an aircraft carrier is practicing traps and ACM?
Anyway, sorry for the length of the comment, but I wouldn't worry about treason. Some Kos diarist wanted to get their traffic numbers up. You would think they could do a better job of faking it though...just read a couple Tom Clancy novels and you'd have a better understanding of naval ops than this yahoo. And that's saying something.
Seargent,
ReplyDeleteWow, 1200 comments. No interest in reading them. Here's your third though.
I'm twenty years removed from the Navy. An enlisted snipe (engineroom worker) for that matter, and even to me this sounds like BS-- more theft of valor by a pretender. Blech.
Mike, come WWIII or OIF, Navy ships will stay on station as long as necessary. But there are seriously diminishing returns after about six months, what with breakdowns and such. For instance, I think this is the story of the "Mission Accomplished" deployment:
http://www.news.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=7312
Probably already saw it, but Lex did a good take down over at his place. Hit some of the points I laid out and several I missed. He's hoisted the flag as well.
ReplyDeleteReese, I wouldn't disagree about the diminishing returns. My only point was that (to the best of my knowledge) the Navy hasn't been hit particularly hard in that arena, especially compared to the Army and Marines.
Well, darn. What happened to the story??
ReplyDeleteDAILY KOS
Sorry. I can't seem to find that story.
1349 comments
Sure is great to read a real military take on all of this. I really shows up the silliness.
Yeah, they must of already pulled the plug!
ReplyDeleteBut hell, let's go for it!
Re: The missing post... Just in case you haven't already seen it, the original post was removed by its author. There's a brief explanation at the link, but the author of this drivel said:
ReplyDeleteI think after reading all these vets comments that there is so much doubt now in my own mind that I will take the post down.
And Markos hisownself disowned the post, too.
And as for all the freaking comments at Kos (on almost any given post)... who in their right mind would want to read over a thousand comments, anyway?
Mike, there's a visual out there somewhere for your point. Side by side pictures of some soldiers or Marines sleeping in a mud-filled trench and some Navy pilots catching rays on a flight deck in a small swimming pool.
ReplyDeleteAnd, wow, Buck. I tried reading some of those comments. Just wow. For instance someone suggested that V.P. Cheney was planning to sacrifice CVN-65 (and all aboard) as a pretext for attacking Iran, and hey, it's an old carrier anyway.
Did I tell you about the student we hired for the summer who every day came in the office and asked, "Are we at war with Iran yet?"
ReplyDelete