On topic: Support the troops
 

This is old news:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...st-guard_x.htm

But, I was driving home from the post office earlier and turned on Hush
Bimbo's radio show, to see what message he was giving his audience of loyal
droolers today. "We conservatives stand for this that & the other things,
and giving our troops what they need to protect this country".

Except for the Coast Guard.


"The Bush administration wants to increase the amount of time it will take
to replace a fleet that's among the oldest on the globe - older even than
fleets owned by nations such as Algeria and Pakistan. The "deepwater"
replacement program, conceived in 1998 as a $20 billion, 20-year plan to
replace the fleet, could be increased to 25 years under a White House plan."

Stephen Flynn, a maritime security expert and former Coast Guard officer,
says the agency is "operating at the level, in many instances, of a Third
World navy."

On topic: Support the troops
 

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
Stephen Flynn, a maritime security expert and former Coast Guard officer,
says the agency is "operating at the level, in many instances, of a Third
World navy."

I like that phrase "operating at the level, in many instances, of a
Third
World navy."

In many instances yes, they are. But in many, many more instances,
they sure the heck arn't.

The B-52 bomber is 51 years old. and primitive, as well as thed
Browning 50 cal. machine gun (ma deuce) But are still main stay
defense weapons.

So I suppose the whole US armed forces is "operating at the level, in
many instances, of a Third World military"

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Oct 2, 12:10?pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
This is old news:http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...st-guard_x.htm

But, I was driving home from the post office earlier and turned on Hush
Bimbo's radio show, to see what message he was giving his audience of loyal
droolers today. "We conservatives stand for this that & the other things,
and giving our troops what they need to protect this country".

Except for the Coast Guard.

"The Bush administration wants to increase the amount of time it will take
to replace a fleet that's among the oldest on the globe - older even than
fleets owned by nations such as Algeria and Pakistan. The "deepwater"
replacement program, conceived in 1998 as a $20 billion, 20-year plan to
replace the fleet, could be increased to 25 years under a White House plan."

Stephen Flynn, a maritime security expert and former Coast Guard officer,
says the agency is "operating at the level, in many instances, of a Third
World navy."

With a stretch like that, you ought to audition for the live Broadway
adaptation of the Gumbi movie.

On topic: Support the troops
 

"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 2, 12:10?pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
This is old
news:http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...st-guard_x.htm

But, I was driving home from the post office earlier and turned on Hush
Bimbo's radio show, to see what message he was giving his audience of
loyal
droolers today. "We conservatives stand for this that & the other things,
and giving our troops what they need to protect this country".

Except for the Coast Guard.

"The Bush administration wants to increase the amount of time it will
take
to replace a fleet that's among the oldest on the globe - older even than
fleets owned by nations such as Algeria and Pakistan. The "deepwater"
replacement program, conceived in 1998 as a $20 billion, 20-year plan to
replace the fleet, could be increased to 25 years under a White House
plan."

Stephen Flynn, a maritime security expert and former Coast Guard officer,
says the agency is "operating at the level, in many instances, of a Third
World navy."

With a stretch like that, you ought to audition for the live Broadway
adaptation of the Gumbi movie.




Adm. Thomas Collins, commandant of the Coast Guard, says he supports the
White House plan and has enough refurbished equipment to operate the fleet.
But this month, he told Congress his equipment is failing at unacceptable
rates:

.. In fiscal 2004, the engines on the Coast Guard's 95 HH-65 helicopters
suffered power losses at a rate of 329 per 100,000 flight hours, up from 63
per 100,000 flight hours in fiscal 2003. The comparable Federal Aviation
Administration standard is 1 per 100,000 flight hours.

.. There have been 23 hull breaches - holes that let in water - requiring
emergency dry-dock repairs in the 49 110- and 123-foot patrol boats since
2001.

.. Each of the dozen 378-foot cutters, most of which operate in the Pacific,
suffers a significant engine or hydraulic or refrigeration system breakdown
on every patrol.

.. For all major cutters and patrol boats, the number of unscheduled
maintenance days was 742 in fiscal 2004, up from 267 in fiscal 1999. The
loss of cutter days in fiscal 2004 equated to losing 10% of the major fleet
for an entire year.

On topic: Support the troops
 

If this be the case, I would say it is a matter of mismanagement
rather than misfunding.


JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 2, 12:10?pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
This is old
news:http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...st-guard_x.htm

But, I was driving home from the post office earlier and turned on Hush
Bimbo's radio show, to see what message he was giving his audience of
loyal
droolers today. "We conservatives stand for this that & the other things,
and giving our troops what they need to protect this country".

Except for the Coast Guard.

"The Bush administration wants to increase the amount of time it will
take
to replace a fleet that's among the oldest on the globe - older even than
fleets owned by nations such as Algeria and Pakistan. The "deepwater"
replacement program, conceived in 1998 as a $20 billion, 20-year plan to
replace the fleet, could be increased to 25 years under a White House
plan."

Stephen Flynn, a maritime security expert and former Coast Guard officer,
says the agency is "operating at the level, in many instances, of a Third
World navy."

With a stretch like that, you ought to audition for the live Broadway
adaptation of the Gumbi movie.




Adm. Thomas Collins, commandant of the Coast Guard, says he supports the
White House plan and has enough refurbished equipment to operate the fleet.
But this month, he told Congress his equipment is failing at unacceptable
rates:

. In fiscal 2004, the engines on the Coast Guard's 95 HH-65 helicopters
suffered power losses at a rate of 329 per 100,000 flight hours, up from 63
per 100,000 flight hours in fiscal 2003. The comparable Federal Aviation
Administration standard is 1 per 100,000 flight hours.

. There have been 23 hull breaches - holes that let in water - requiring
emergency dry-dock repairs in the 49 110- and 123-foot patrol boats since
2001.

. Each of the dozen 378-foot cutters, most of which operate in the Pacific,
suffers a significant engine or hydraulic or refrigeration system breakdown
on every patrol.

. For all major cutters and patrol boats, the number of unscheduled
maintenance days was 742 in fiscal 2004, up from 267 in fiscal 1999. The
loss of cutter days in fiscal 2004 equated to losing 10% of the major fleet
for an entire year.

On topic: Support the troops
 

"Tim" wrote in message
oups.com...
If this be the case, I would say it is a matter of mismanagement
rather than misfunding.

Misfunding?

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Oct 2, 4:22 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message

oups.com...

If this be the case, I would say it is a matter of mismanagement
rather than misfunding.

Misfunding?

OK, let med chang the phrasing. Lack of funds

On topic: Support the troops
 

"Tim" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Oct 2, 4:22 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message

oups.com...

If this be the case, I would say it is a matter of mismanagement
rather than misfunding.

Misfunding?

OK, let med chang the phrasing. Lack of funds



OK. Lack of funding sometimes comes from mismanagement, but not always.
Could you please expound on this theory? Mismanagement by whom? Did the CG
not request funding, or did they request it, and it was denied?

I love details. Give me details.

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Oct 2, 6:42 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message

I love details. Give me details.

I'm sure you do. It was my opinion not stated as fact.

Look around and draw your own conclusion

On topic: Support the troops
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

. There have been 23 hull breaches - holes that let in water - requiring
emergency dry-dock repairs in the 49 110- and 123-foot patrol boats since
2001.

. Each of the dozen 378-foot cutters, most of which operate in the
Pacific, suffers a significant engine or hydraulic or refrigeration system
breakdown on every patrol.

. For all major cutters and patrol boats, the number of unscheduled
maintenance days was 742 in fiscal 2004, up from 267 in fiscal 1999. The
loss of cutter days in fiscal 2004 equated to losing 10% of the major
fleet for an entire year.



Yep.

What, exactly, is the mission of the Coast Guard?

Eisboch

On topic: Support the troops
 

"Tim" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 2, 6:42 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:
"Tim" wrote in message

I love details. Give me details.

I'm sure you do. It was my opinion not stated as fact.

Look around and draw your own conclusion



Well, the article stated a fact about the White House playing games with CG
funding, but who on earth would believe that?

(beware - sarcasm)

On topic: Support the troops
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

. There have been 23 hull breaches - holes that let in water - requiring
emergency dry-dock repairs in the 49 110- and 123-foot patrol boats since
2001.

. Each of the dozen 378-foot cutters, most of which operate in the
Pacific, suffers a significant engine or hydraulic or refrigeration
system breakdown on every patrol.

. For all major cutters and patrol boats, the number of unscheduled
maintenance days was 742 in fiscal 2004, up from 267 in fiscal 1999. The
loss of cutter days in fiscal 2004 equated to losing 10% of the major
fleet for an entire year.



Yep.

What, exactly, is the mission of the Coast Guard?

Eisboch


Let's play with this one, especially since, in many locations, there is
nobody else who can handle it.

National Defense: Defend the nation as one of the five U.S. armed services.
Enhance regional stability in support of the National Security Strategy,
utilizing the Coast Guard’s unique and relevant maritime capabilities.

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 20:02:31 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

. There have been 23 hull breaches - holes that let in water - requiring
emergency dry-dock repairs in the 49 110- and 123-foot patrol boats since
2001.

. Each of the dozen 378-foot cutters, most of which operate in the
Pacific, suffers a significant engine or hydraulic or refrigeration system
breakdown on every patrol.

. For all major cutters and patrol boats, the number of unscheduled
maintenance days was 742 in fiscal 2004, up from 267 in fiscal 1999. The
loss of cutter days in fiscal 2004 equated to losing 10% of the major
fleet for an entire year.

Yep.

What, exactly, is the mission of the Coast Guard?

To be the short water Navy?

Or as we used to call 'em...

The Short Pants Navy.

~~ snerk ~~

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Oct 2, 7:08 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


National Defense: Defend the nation as one of the five U.S. armed services.

"one of the five U.S. armed services?"


But technically are they an "armed service"?

Wondering because they fall under the Dept. of the Treasury, and not
the Dept. of Defense.

In the cold war days I asked a Navy recruiter a hypothetical question
sort of like the days of Red October

"OK, supposingly a soviet sub was found in the mouth of the
Mississippi Delta, then would the Coast Guard fall under the Dept of
the Navy?

he said: "I would certianly hope so!"

On topic: Support the troops
 

"Tim" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Oct 2, 7:08 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


National Defense: Defend the nation as one of the five U.S. armed
services.

"one of the five U.S. armed services?"


But technically are they an "armed service"?

Wondering because they fall under the Dept. of the Treasury, and not
the Dept. of Defense.

"The United States Coast Guard is a military, multimission, maritime service
within the Department of Homeland Security and one of the nation's five
armed services."

Unless the dep't of homeland insecurity is part of the treasury dep't, then
things have changed.



In the cold war days I asked a Navy recruiter a hypothetical question
sort of like the days of Red October

"OK, supposingly a soviet sub was found in the mouth of the
Mississippi Delta, then would the Coast Guard fall under the Dept of
the Navy?

he said: "I would certianly hope so!"


Maybe the mission is sometimes defined as "when there's nobody else to do
the job". For instance, a certain amount of nervousness exists with regard
to nasty people coming across Lake Ontario from that terrorist haven to the
north. If a suspicious boat needs boarding and a management change, who's
going to do the job? Our sheriffs, who can't find their own noses? Or, the
Coast Guard, who's at least got the necessary speed, boats, and heavier
armaments than the local toddlers?

On topic: Support the troops
 

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in
:

"The Bush administration wants to increase the amount of time
it will
take to replace a fleet that's among the oldest on the globe -
older
even than fleets owned by nations such as Algeria and Pakistan.
The
"deepwater" replacement program, conceived in 1998 as a $20
billion,
20-year plan to replace the fleet, could be increased to 25
years
under a White House plan."


Under the Bush bankers' "New World Order", protecting non-
existant borders from invasions by foreigners will be unnecessary
so I believe you are seeing CG being phased out as the NAU, North
American Union, agreement Bush made with the Canadians and
Mexicans, also the reason why nothing needs to be done about
Mexican illegals, is implemented...without Congress' or your
consent and approval.

The bankers are all set to print the new "Amero" to replace the 3
currencies printed by the bankers' central banks, like the
Federal Reserve Bank Corporation...which has as much to do with
the US Government as Federal Express does.

Once the NAU is implemented, the banking elite can start working
the "New World Order" towards consolidation of the newly existing
"unions", including the EU and NAU, into its One World
government, headquartered in Washington, DC, and designed by
Freemasons for such purposes long before our time.

You'll be notified, forced if necessary, to exchange your
freedome for your NAU ID card, chip implantation and your "Amero
Card", which will eliminate the need to print unbacked paper
script like the bankers are printing, now, having stolen all the
gold for themselves. Your Amero account will have a computer
based balance for you to draw against, giving the Illuminati
bankers full tracking of every Amero on the planet, so they can
suck off their cut from every slave.

CG's role may turn from one of protection to one of
"enforcement" along with the other, now-unnecessary, military
bureaucracies. The NAU police state must protect itself from its
slaves to maintain "order"....."New World Order".

The 1000-year Reich is alive and well behind the counters of the
world's central banks......where it never faltered during any
wars.

Unfortunate for your children, but nearing our final days,
possibly hastened by the collapse of the Socialist Security
debacle forcing the Illuminati to "lighten the load" caused by
their WW2 profiteering, us post-war baby boomers now demanding
payments, we won't be subjected to it. They'll simply continue
to erode away silly democracy's illusionary nonsense until
complete control can be achieved.

Nothing can be done as long as "they" are printing and
controlling the people's purse strings.

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:16:52 -0700, Tim wrote:

On Oct 2, 7:08 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:


National Defense: Defend the nation as one of the five U.S. armed services.

"one of the five U.S. armed services?"


But technically are they an "armed service"?

Yes.

Read up on the history.

Wondering because they fall under the Dept. of the Treasury, and not
the Dept. of Defense.

Neither. Homeland Security.

In the cold war days I asked a Navy recruiter a hypothetical question
sort of like the days of Red October

"OK, supposingly a soviet sub was found in the mouth of the
Mississippi Delta, then would the Coast Guard fall under the Dept of
the Navy?

he said: "I would certianly hope so!"

My Dad was USCG right before WWII and when it began, all assets were
transferred to the Navy as I understood it.

On topic: Support the troops
 

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:16:52 -0700, Tim wrote:

On Oct 2, 7:08 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

National Defense: Defend the nation as one of the five U.S. armed services.
"one of the five U.S. armed services?"


But technically are they an "armed service"?

Yes.

Read up on the history.

Wondering because they fall under the Dept. of the Treasury, and not
the Dept. of Defense.

Neither. Homeland Security.

In the cold war days I asked a Navy recruiter a hypothetical question
sort of like the days of Red October

"OK, supposingly a soviet sub was found in the mouth of the
Mississippi Delta, then would the Coast Guard fall under the Dept of
the Navy?

he said: "I would certianly hope so!"

My Dad was USCG right before WWII and when it began, all assets were
transferred to the Navy as I understood it.

It also was part of the Navy during Viet Nam

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Oct 3, 5:00 am, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:16:52 -0700, Tim wrote:
On Oct 2, 7:08 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

National Defense: Defend the nation as one of the five U.S. armed services.

"one of the five U.S. armed services?"

But technically are they an "armed service"?

Yes.

Read up on the history.

OK.

Wondering because they fall under the Dept. of the Treasury, and not
the Dept. of Defense.

Neither. Homeland Security.

The USCG has been pased around and has worn many hats, I forgot that
they had been trasfered out of the USDOT and now to Homeland Security
just 5 years ago.

In the cold war days I asked a Navy recruiter a hypothetical question
sort of like the days of Red October

"OK, supposingly a soviet sub was found in the mouth of the
Mississippi Delta, then would the Coast Guard fall under the Dept of
the Navy?

he said: "I would certianly hope so!"

The above was stated in about 1978 well before the 2003 transfer

My Dad was USCG right before WWII and when it began, all assets were
transferred to the Navy as I understood it.

Thanks for his service!

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Oct 3, 5:39 am, "Reginald P. Smithers III"
wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:16:52 -0700, Tim wrote:

On Oct 2, 7:08 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

National Defense: Defend the nation as one of the five U.S. armed services.
"one of the five U.S. armed services?"

But technically are they an "armed service"?

Yes.

Read up on the history.

Wondering because they fall under the Dept. of the Treasury, and not
the Dept. of Defense.

Neither. Homeland Security.

In the cold war days I asked a Navy recruiter a hypothetical question
sort of like the days of Red October

"OK, supposingly a soviet sub was found in the mouth of the
Mississippi Delta, then would the Coast Guard fall under the Dept of
the Navy?

he said: "I would certianly hope so!"

My Dad was USCG right before WWII and when it began, all assets were
transferred to the Navy as I understood it.

It also was part of the Navy during Viet Nam- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Didn't realize that, Reg.

Thanks!

On topic: Support the troops
 

On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 04:25:23 -0700, Tim wrote:

On Oct 3, 5:00 am, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Tue, 02 Oct 2007 19:16:52 -0700, Tim wrote:
On Oct 2, 7:08 pm, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote:

National Defense: Defend the nation as one of the five U.S. armed services.

"one of the five U.S. armed services?"

But technically are they an "armed service"?

Yes.

Read up on the history.

OK.

Wondering because they fall under the Dept. of the Treasury, and not
the Dept. of Defense.

Neither. Homeland Security.

The USCG has been pased around and has worn many hats, I forgot that
they had been trasfered out of the USDOT and now to Homeland Security
just 5 years ago.

In the cold war days I asked a Navy recruiter a hypothetical question
sort of like the days of Red October

"OK, supposingly a soviet sub was found in the mouth of the
Mississippi Delta, then would the Coast Guard fall under the Dept of
the Navy?

he said: "I would certianly hope so!"

The above was stated in about 1978 well before the 2003 transfer

My Dad was USCG right before WWII and when it began, all assets were
transferred to the Navy as I understood it.

Thanks for his service!

That's how he met my Mother actually. She was one of the female radio
operators at the USCG station in Atlantic City, NJ and later one of
the chief operators at the famous USCG radio station on Cape Cod.

Her discharge papers indicate that she wasn't no mere operator either
- CPO. She never talked much about it, but when I first became
interested in radio, she taught me Morse and we used to converse in
Morse all the time. Even at 80 YO, she could still copy a solid 30
WPM. When she passed on, I put her favorite "bug" in the casket with
her.

One of my Dad's sisters was a Army Air Force transfer pilot - flew
B-25s and Stratofortress across the Atlantic to England and later in
the war, flew P-51 Mustangs to Continental Europe - unarmed into some
hot zones.

Amazing people that WWII generation - duty, honor and sacrifice was a
part of their general social gestalt.