If this weren't so sad...
 

....it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

If this weren't so sad...
 

On Sun, 08 Mar 2015 15:23:28 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.

===

How could we defend Israel againts their territorial hegemony without
a strong military? You can't have it both ways.

If this weren't so sad...
 

On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Only thing wrong with your account:

The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as
they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one
point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was
to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully
simulated.

What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided
command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even
though they simultaneously played the "enemy".

A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no
sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force
to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub.

If this weren't so sad...
 

On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Only thing wrong with your account:

The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as
they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one
point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was
to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully
simulated.

What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided
command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even
though they simultaneously played the "enemy".

A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no
sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force
to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub.



I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or
disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear
explosive would do it.

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

If this weren't so sad...
 

On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Who gave Canada a submarine?

--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

If this weren't so sad...
 

On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Only thing wrong with your account:

The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as
they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one
point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was
to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully
simulated.

What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided
command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even
though they simultaneously played the "enemy".

A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no
sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force
to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub.



I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or
disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear
explosive would do it.



Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft,
missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range,
anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the
Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet.

In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but
heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an
extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most
of the rest of the world has one each.

If this weren't so sad...
 

On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United
States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise, however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute
has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Only thing wrong with your account:

The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as
they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one
point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was
to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully
simulated.

What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided
command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even
though they simultaneously played the "enemy".

A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no
sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force
to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub.



I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or
disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear
explosive would do it.



Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft,
missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range,
anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the
Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet.

In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but
heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an
extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most
of the rest of the world has one each.



We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone.

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

If this weren't so sad...
 

On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United
States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked
with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise,
however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute
has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years, saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Only thing wrong with your account:

The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war games as
they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one
point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was
to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they successfully
simulated.

What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided
command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even
though they simultaneously played the "enemy".

A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no
sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force
to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub.



I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or
disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear
explosive would do it.



Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft,
missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range,
anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the
Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet.

In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but
heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an
extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most
of the rest of the world has one each.



We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone.



No. But carriers provide mobile platforms for putting a lot of
resources just about anywhere in the world without necessarily relying
on friendly ports or bases.

If this weren't so sad...
 

On 3/8/15 4:53 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United
States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious
Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the
rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked
with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to
not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise,
however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute
has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years,
saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Only thing wrong with your account:

The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war
games as
they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one
point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission was
to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they
successfully
simulated.

What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided
command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally, even
though they simultaneously played the "enemy".

A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no
sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force
to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub.



I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to sink or
disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a nuclear
explosive would do it.



Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft,
missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range,
anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the
Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet.

In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but
heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an
extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most
of the rest of the world has one each.



We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone.



No. But carriers provide mobile platforms for putting a lot of
resources just about anywhere in the world without necessarily relying
on friendly ports or bases.




Ahh, that's why things turned out so well for us in Panama and Grenada,
eh? :)

--
Proud to be a Liberal.

If this weren't so sad...
 

On 3/8/2015 5:03 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:53 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 4:45 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:43 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 4:28 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 3/8/15 4:13 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 3/8/2015 3:23 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
...it would be hilarious...

Lone French Submarine Destroys Myth Of US Naval Superiority

If you listened to the Admirality within the Pentagon, the United
States
Navy is one of the finest in the world. Our focus on the Aircraft
Carrier, split between 10 Supercarriers with four more under
construction, and 10 more lighter carriers, called “Amphibious
Assault
Ships,� has given the US the largest carrier fleets in the world. In
fact, the US Navy has more carriers in active service than the
rest of
the world, and it is the lynchpin of any US Navy actions. The
myth of
the American carrier invulnerability is such that it is taken for
granted in our collective psyche.

And a lone French Submarine, the SNA Saphir, just demonstrated how
vulnerable they are. In a training exercise, the Saphir was tasked
with
attacking U.S. Carrier Strike Group 12, led by the USS Theodore
Roosevelt, CVN-71, along with ballistic defensive warships and
anti-submarine warfare vessels. In a now redacted article, the
French
Ministry of Defense described how the Saphir on its own managed to
not
only approach the Roosevelt, but defeat it in simulated combat.

What the French demonstrated should not come as a surprise,
however. As
the Canadian submarine HMCS Corner Brook demonstrated in 2007,
asymmetrical warfare is the Achilles heel for Aircraft carrier based
naval forces. The issue is so pronounced that the US Naval Institute
has
been arguing against this carrier-first fleet design for years,
saying
that in the modern combat environment, carriers could be “little
more
than slow-moving targets.�

http://tinyurl.com/m3e8r66


What isn't a surprise: the U.S. military wastes trillions with its
arrogance.


Only thing wrong with your account:

The American Task Force and the French sub were practicing war
games as
they would in an actual sea battle. The American Task Force at one
point assumed the role as the "enemy" and the French sub's mission
was
to attack and sink the carrier and other ships, which they
successfully
simulated.

What's missing is that the American Task Force still provided
command/control intel for the French sub as a participating ally,
even
though they simultaneously played the "enemy".

A more accurate test would be to have no communications allowed, no
sharing of command/control intel and to allow the American Task Force
to take offensive/defensive actions against the sub.



I don't think it is necessary to go through all that trouble to
sink or
disable one of our oversized carriers. A "smart" missile with a
nuclear
explosive would do it.



Each task force has very formidable defense systems against aircraft,
missles and submarines. The Achilles Heel may be the long range,
anti-ship missiles reported to have been recently developed by the
Chinese however it has not been demonstrated as of yet.

In a real, extended war it's very likely we'd lose some carriers but
heavy sea battle warfare isn't likely to be like that ... meaning an
extended battle. Plus, we have what, eleven carriers? China and most
of the rest of the world has one each.



We're not going to get into a heavy sea battle with anyone.



No. But carriers provide mobile platforms for putting a lot of
resources just about anywhere in the world without necessarily relying
on friendly ports or bases.




Ahh, that's why things turned out so well for us in Panama and Grenada,
eh? :)



Have you ever stopped to consider why no major adversary has been stupid
enough to start a fighting war with the USA for the past 70 plus years?