The Captain: 25 new messages in 16 topics

sci.military.naval
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval?hl=en

sci.military.naval@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: A great story, Nazi surface raiders - Hans Zimmerman (?)
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/6d220387814ee4aa?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Tues, Jul 22 2008 11:29 pm
From: LIBERATOR

God it's already been 2 years that I read this story but it stuck in
my mind, it was in Military History magazine
http://www.historynet.com/magazines/military_history, and it was about
the near end of the war, how the Nazis were using fishing boats that
they turned into surface raiders, to fight off the British navy that
was using destroyers and frigates to seize (the Balkans) which were
still under possession of the Germans, even though Germany had already
been penetrated.

What really moved me was their leader Hans Zimmerman, they had a photo
of him at the surrender, and the story explained that it took 5
attempts to get him to surrender, he was requested to surrender 5
times and he refused all 5 times, and even after Germany had announced
surrender, he had asked his comrades if they wanted to surrender and
they didn't, and neither did he.

The Brits had attempted to seize these islands and everytime they
rushed the islands, the surface raiders went into action against them
and they would reign supreme in the fire fights, the story explained
"you know the Germans in their shooting, always accurate, the Brits
were again overwhelmed and turned away".

Finally, Hans surrendered and the photo showed him in complete
contempt, and it explained that he was as well as all his noncoms
unquestionably loyal to Nationalist Socialism. After being interviewed
he explained that he had intended to hold out after Germany
surrendered, and hoped to get a vessel or two back up to Germain via a
river, to inform them that he has not been defeated after numerous
attempts by the British, and had no faltering variables in his forces
of which he literally intended to remain at war against the Allies and
could sustain it.

Working from 2 years of memory of the last time I saw this story, it
gave more reflection to Nationalist Socialism and Hans profiling it as
"there is no other system I can live under and I will fight to the
death to defend Nationalist Socialism" as well as the other crew,
although they eventually did surrender. I think Admiral Raeder was the
one that finally told him to surrender, and as I said, I wish I had
that picture, at the table where he had to sign the surrender, he was
looking down to the left away from the paper, in total contempt and he
did not want to sign it, he wouldn't even look at it.

If any movie should be made about exonerating the Nazis and revising
the false history demonstrating their great spirit and fighting
abilities, this man Hans Zimmerman (or Zimmer) should be the subject
matter of the movie. Fishing boats turned into surface raiders and
they could not be beaten by actual naval craft of the British Navy.
Amazing!

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 12:09 am
From: LIBERATOR

On Jul 23, 1:29 am, LIBERATOR <nogeek...@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> God it's already been 2 years that I read this story but it stuck in
> my mind, it was in Military History magazinehttp://www.historynet.com/magazines/military_history, and it was about
> the near end of the war, how the Nazis were using fishing boats that
> they turned into surface raiders, to fight off the British navy that
> was using destroyers and frigates to seize (the Balkans) which were
> still under possession of the Germans, even though Germany had already
> been penetrated.
>
> What really moved me was their leader Hans Zimmerman, they had a photo
> of him at the surrender, and the story explained that it took 5
> attempts to get him to surrender, he was requested to surrender 5
> times and he refused all 5 times, and even after Germany had announced
> surrender, he had asked his comrades if they wanted to surrender and
> they didn't, and neither did he.
>
> The Brits had attempted to seize these islands and everytime they
> rushed the islands, the surface raiders went into action against them
> and they would reign supreme in the fire fights, the story explained
> "you know the Germans in their shooting, always accurate, the Brits
> were again overwhelmed and turned away".
>
> Finally, Hans surrendered and the photo showed him in complete
> contempt, and it explained that he was as well as all his noncoms
> unquestionably loyal to Nationalist Socialism. After being interviewed
> he explained that he had intended to hold out after Germany
> surrendered, and hoped to get a vessel or two back up to Germain via a
> river, to inform them that he has not been defeated after numerous
> attempts by the British, and had no faltering variables in his forces
> of which he literally intended to remain at war against the Allies and
> could sustain it.
>
> Working from 2 years of memory of the last time I saw this story, it
> gave more reflection to Nationalist Socialism and Hans profiling it as
> "there is no other system I can live under and I will fight to the
> death to defend Nationalist Socialism" as well as the other crew,
> although they eventually did surrender. I think Admiral Raeder was the
> one that finally told him to surrender, and as I said, I wish I had
> that picture, at the table where he had to sign the surrender, he was
> looking down to the left away from the paper, in total contempt and he
> did not want to sign it, he wouldn't even look at it.
>
> If any movie should be made about exonerating the Nazis and revising
> the false history demonstrating their great spirit and fighting
> abilities, this man Hans Zimmerman (or Zimmer) should be the subject
> matter of the movie. Fishing boats turned into surface raiders and
> they could not be beaten by actual naval craft of the British Navy.
> Amazing!

Wondering if "The Zimmermann Telegram" is the Zimmermann I'm talking
about.

http://smsmoewe.com/smsmforb.htm

== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 12:32 am
From: Weatherlawyer

On Jul 23, 8:09 am, LIBERATOR <nob.rain@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>
> > this man Hans Zimmerman (or Zimmer) should be the subject
> > matter of the movie.

Sounds Jewish. When did he change his name?

Did he go to live in Britain after the war and then invent a walking
frame made out of scrap periscopes?

== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 12:42 am
From: Weatherlawyer

On Jul 23, 7:29 am, LIBERATOR <nogeek...@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>
> God it's already been 2 years but it stuck in
> my mind, to fight off the British
> was using destroyers and frigates to seize (the Balkans) which were
> still under the Germans been penetrated.
>
> Amazing!

Can we have a regurgitaion of the frigates and destroyers seizing the
Balkans please? So much to learn about military history. And every day
a new totally unknown crops up.

Anyway enough of this old stuff, how about them commies eh? They are
handing out Sony phones to the Tibetan Bloggers now. What do you know
about that?

Fully kited out from the roots up I hear.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 2:25 am
From: Juergen Nieveler

Weatherlawyer <Weatherlawyer@hotmail.com> wrote:

>> > this man Hans Zimmerman (or Zimmer) should be the subject
>> > matter of the movie.
>
> Sounds Jewish. When did he change his name?

Why Jewish? Zimmermann isn't really a typical jewish name, at least not
in Germany... Zimmermann means "Carpenter", and carpenter wasn't really
a common jewish job back in the Middle Ages when last names were
"invented" - AFAIK Jews couldn't become guild members.

"Typical" jewish names in the german-speaking countries are names
starting with Gold- or Blumen-, for example, as Goldsmith was one of
the allowed jobs for Jews back then, and Blumen- and other poetic
sounding names were more likely to be picked up by people with a bit
more education and money, such as merchants and moneylenders (which
also was an area which Jews were allowed to work in).

So a name like "Blumenthal", "Rosenthal" (Hans Rosenthal, for example,
TV star in Germany in the 1960s/70s), or "Goldmann" are names that
might hint at the religion of a person (or at least an ancestor of that
person), but a name like Zimmermann (Carpenter), Meier ("Mayor"),
Schmidt (Smith) would rather hint at a non-jewish ancestry.

Juergen Nieveler
--
Help, I'm trapped in a fortune cookie factory!

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Importance of Madrid conference
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/f6e6f69db053f503?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 12:23 am
From: PakistanPal

Abdul Aziz Valiyaveetil | azizvk@yahoo.com

It is indeed welcoming to know that a three-day interfaith conference
has been organized in Madrid this week by Custodian of the Two Holy
Mosques King Abdullah. I hope the conference, which began on July 16,
will discuss ways for different communities, religions and cultures to
find ways to achieve common human values. God willing, this will be a
groundbreaking event. The selection of the venue is appropriate
because Spain is a country where Muslims, Christians and Jews lived in
peace for centuries.

It is horrific to note that extremism, prejudice and fanaticism are
spreading - something that may eventually lead to a collision. It is a
historical fact that religious, cultural and ethnic differences have
led to misunderstandings, hostilities and conflict.

The root cause of conflict is ignorance, which is also the source of
prejudice. By attacking innocents, the so-called jihadists have proved
that they are in no way better than the imperialists. If we allow this
trend to continue, much innocent blood will be shed and the world will
be in turmoil. There is a general impression that we should retaliate
to overpower and defeat the enemy. However, this view is against the
basic tenets of the religion of peace.

Every Muslim agrees that the monotheistic religions of Judaism,
Christianity and Islam trace their roots back to Prophet Abraham
(peace be upon him). But beyond this concept, the Qur'an has clearly
mentioned that every authentic religion was one and the same in its
original form. The Qur'an (17:70) proclaims that all human beings
should be treated with respect, irrespective of their race and
religion. Religion is the source of the humanitarian vision capable of
bringing together believers and nonbelievers alike for committed
action for peace.

The starting point should be our common humanity, our obligation to
God and respect for one another. Religion, like any other thing, can
be abused. Extremism is not the monopoly of a particular religion.
When religion is twisted to fit a political agenda based on violence,
hate and war, it is an abuse of religion. We understand that
religions, in their true spirit, promote the values of equality,
tolerance, justice, reconciliation and forgiveness.

As history shows, religious faith or belief can often prove to be a
much stronger force than considerations of pure self-interest. If all
religions become less exclusive and more inclusive, less sectarian and
more universal, less ritual-oriented and more value-based in their
approach and orientation, then this would have great impact on world
peace. The increasing influence of the exclusive, sectarian, ritual-
oriented interpretation of religion is one of the most formidable
challenges of our time.

The Madinah Charter that was signed by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be
upon him) with leaders of Judaism and Christianity during his time
provides answers to questions about how people of different faiths can
live harmoniously and settle disputes. It offers a superior model for
the conduct of dialogue in a pluralistic society, and ways to
establish political and social relationships among different groups. A
Muslim should deal with all human beings with love and affection after
understanding these meanings and principles.

The Qur'an encourages Muslims to have dialogue with the People of the
Book. "Dispute not with the People of the Book save in the fairer
manner, except for those of them that do wrong; and say, 'We believe
in what has been sent down to us, and what has been sent down to you;
our God and your God is One, and to Him we have surrendered.'" (29:46)

In two explicit verses, the Qur'an outlines the basic principles for
the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. "God forbids you
not, as regards those who have not fought you in religion's cause, nor
expelled you from your habitations, that you should be kind to them,
and act justly toward them; surely God loves the just. God only
forbids you as to those who have fought you in religion's cause, and
expelled you from your habitations, and have supported in your
expulsion that you should take them for allies. And whosoever takes
them for friends, those - they are the evildoers." (60:8-9) It is very
clear that God has instructed the believers to be kind to non-
Muslims.

Kindness is essential for amicable coexistence. The Madrid conference
called by King Abdullah offers a good platform for leaders of
different religions and ideologies to know each other and remove their
misunderstandings. There is no doubt that through dialogue, we can
promote better understanding and creative cooperation among various
cultures and religions. King Abdullah is trying to establish the fact
that contrary to the Communist principle of "Class War" envisaged by
Karl Marx or the Clash of Civilizations promulgated by Samuel
Huntington, the Islamic faith has a practical solution to establish
peace and harmony in the world.

In this era of conflict, chasms between civilizations, bigotry,
prejudice and war, such an attempt by King Abdullah to restore peace
and harmony has to be lauded and supported by all peace- and justice-
loving people. King Abdullah surely deserves the Nobel Peace Prize.

source: http://arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=111891&d=17&m=7&y=2008&pix=opinion.jpg&category=Opinion%22

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Top Gun 2
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/2881a855a65fcb37?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 12:56 am
From: Weatherlawyer

On Jul 23, 5:45 am, "Mike Kanze" <mikeka...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >Wonder what RAM, RAMN and SMN think of this news?
>
> Not much.
>
> Next silly question...

Not silly at all. Scientology tells you how to get what you wnt by
concentrating on identifying your deepest desires then working towards
the goal.

So.

What does top gun want? To instruct the son of a goose, shag him after
the sex change and then.. hmmm... sounds more like a soap than a
filmscape.

Maybe surround the Balkans with destroyers converted to carry aircraft
in secret? Well, it wants a hook.

Maybe a Peter Pan and the Baby Shambollocks?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Service Dress Khaki May Be Coming Back
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/4b9323089ff3fe91?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 12:59 am
From: "D. Spencer Hines"

It was a really stupid and short-sighted decision by the Navy ever to get
rid of the excellent, traditional Service Dress Khaki uniform in 1975. The
decision to deep-six it was reportedly driven by Admiral Elmo Zumwalt who
was the CNO from 1970-1974.

Now, Service Dress Khaki appears it may be coming back.

SDK is one of he best-looking of the naval uniforms designed for chiefs and
officers.

I've noticed that Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff, has been wearing it for media appearances.

That's a Good Sign.
--
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Navy Tests New Khaki Dress Uniform

June 05, 2008
Navy News

WASHINGTON -- Wear testing for the proposed Service Dress Khaki uniform has
commenced in six major Navy communities.

The wear test encompasses commands in Washington, D.C.; Norfolk; Millington,
Tenn.; Newport, R.I.; Yokosuka, Japan; and Pearl Harbor.

Then-Chief of Naval Operations, (CNO), Adm. Mike Mullen, authorized the wear
testing of the new uniforms for chiefs and officers in March 2006, shortly
before turning over his position to current CNO, Adm. Gary Roughead.

The style of the Service Dress Khaki is reminiscent of the uniform worn
during World War II and Vietnam eras, according to Robert Carroll, Head of
Navy's Uniform Matters Office.

One of the key points stressed was the versatility of the proposed uniform.

"With the service dress khaki, the wearer could easily go from service to
dress just by donning a jacket," said Carroll. "Right now, we're evaluating
fabric, appearance, durability, comfort, fit and maintenance requirements.
We're also out to gauge the desire of the fleet to wear the uniform."

Carroll is optimistic that the proposed uniform could lighten the load of
chiefs and officers' seabags.

"Right now, chiefs and officers have to bring two sets of dress uniforms on
board ship to accommodate the potential and likely seasonal shifts
associated with deployments," he explained. "With the Service Dress Khaki,
they would only need one dress uniform."

The wear test is tentatively scheduled to end in August. Participants are
required to compete an on-line survey and attend focus groups to express
their experience, satisfaction with components and most importantly should
the Navy adopt the uniform as a requirement. A decision will be pending
after the survey and a Business Case Analysis is completed and briefed.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: The History of the nuclear submarine before Rickover
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/f2ce74cf2dff85cd?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 1:03 am
From: Weatherlawyer

On Jul 22, 9:01 pm, BlackBeard <spk_...@msn.com> wrote:
> On Jul 22, 12:34 pm, "Michael Shirley" <mi5ke...@att.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:45:17 -0700, Weatherlawyer
>
> > <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jul 22, 5:39 am, "Raymond O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >> "Weatherlawyer" <Weatherlaw...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > >>news:b9fcd5eb-8bff-4302-8155-bd426bf3c9b5@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > >> > On Jul 21, 4:29 pm, John Mianowski <spamf...@skytex.net> wrote:
> > >> >> On Jul 21, 7:03 am, Jack Linthicum <jacklinthi...@earthlink.net>
> > >> >> wrote:> I have just finished reading Admiral Charles Lockwood's
> > >> biography
> > >> >> Down
> > >> >> > to the Sea in Subs.
> > >> >> ...
> > >> >> > "Captain Rickover did not particularly relish assignment to the
> > >> >> > nuclear energy project and argued over the wisdom of his
> > >> >> > assignment...as such action might damage his future career."
>
> > >> >> I guess he ended up doing pretty well for himself, anyway.
>
> > >> > You mean 'some body -or bodies unknown, did pretty well for him...'
>
> > >> > I believe the US term is "loading the bases".
>
> > >> > Makes you kind of wonder how the chimpanzee found favour though....
>
> > >> > Unless it was Anglo Prsian oversight. But that wouldn't explain
> > >> > Thatcher and BLiarism...
>
> > >> > Unless that really was the CIA....
>
> > >> do you even know who hyman rickover is?
>
> > > A push over for the KGB?
>
> > No. Back when he was alive and in the Navy, on anything nuclear he was God
> > incarnate. And he operated that way too. If some CNO gave him trouble,
> > he'd invoke
> > his connections in the Senate and as far as they were concerned, he was
> > the Senator
> > from the Navy.
>
> > He was the one who pretty much ran the program to build the Nautilus and
> > follow
> > on boats like the Triton.
>
> ... and ended with his personal favorite, the LA class.

Are they the ones that were always imploding?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Future U.S. Navy Shipbuilding
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/aaf30e76f29123bc?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 1:14 am
From: Tiger

Dan Olecki wrote:
> X-No-Archive: Yes
>
> Hi guys:
>
> I think it is fairly uncontroversial that the DDG-1000 program is in
> trouble and losing popularity, both in Congress and in the U.S. Navy.
> I was wondering what happens if the funding gets cut and the class
> limited to two vessels, as seems likely.
>
> What will be the future goals and direction of U.S. Navy
> shipbuilding? Will the focus be on land-attack, or ballistic missile
> defense, or power projection with carriers?
>

You asking a very complex question. More Strategic policy, than
shipbuilding. The basic answer to the above is ALL are of importance.
Support for land ops both USMC & ARMY will continue by ship & Naval
aviation. The Navy will be a prime player in missile defence plans.
Carriers will continue to be the primary focus of naval power projection.

> What types of ships will be built? For example, more amphibious
> assault vessels? More minesweepers? More submarines?

That may be more of a budget issue than a security issue. There does not
seem to be any plans for buying any large numbers of the above. The NAvy
will be faced with maintaining it's size rather than expanding greatly.
The recent rise in fuel costs may also change how the Navy operates &
buys future ships. Minesweepers tend to be a low priority item so don't
expect any. Subs are being built just enough to maintain the production
base from closing.

>
> What types of technologies are maturing and ripening enough to be
> included in near-term future warships? The Navy seems to think that
> stealth technology is important enough that it affected the design of
> the DDG-1000... Electric drives? Directed energy weapons? UCAVs?

Near term, not much. The long term tech stuff again depends on budgets
and world threats. Stealth will be a factor all new designs however.
UCavs will take a back seat till current manned programs like the P8,
V-22, & F35 are underway fully.

>
> What future directions should the U.S. Navy take, and what missions is
> it likely to be given?
>
> thanks
>

The traditional roles & missions will remain. The focus on non blue
water operations will be the big future direction.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: New Labour Enforces Over 1000 Laws Which The State Can Cite To Enter
Your Home Or Business
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/792a5e28f39c7c29?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 1:24 am
From: "D. Spencer Hines"

Yes...

Appalling!

The European Socialist Nanny State in Britain Marches On...

Just the sort of regime Barack Obama and his coterie of Left-Wing Loonies
want to saddle the United States with.
--
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The march of the Big Brother state under Labour was highlighted last
night as it was revealed that there are now 1,043 laws that give the
authorities the power to enter a home or business.

Nearly half have been introduced since Labour came to power 11 years
ago. They include the right to:

• Invade your home to see if your pot plants have pests or do not have
a 'plant passport' (Plant Health England Order 2005).

• Survey your home and garden to see if your hedge is too high (Anti-
Social Behaviour Act 2003).

• Check that accommodation given to asylum seekers is not being lived
in by non-asylum seekers (Immigration and Asylum Act 1999).

• Raid a house to check if unlicensed gambling is taking place
(Gambling Act 2005 Inspection Regulations 2007).

• Seize fridges without the correct energy rating (Energy Information
Household Refrigerators and Freezers Regulations 2004).

The rise in clipboard-wielding state inspectors flies in the face of
repeated pledges by Ministers to curb the power of bureaucrats.

The full extent of the state's 'powers of entry' is revealed in
documents slipped out quietly by the Government last week.

The information was posted on the Home Office website, but in a highly
unusual move, the computer file was locked to prevent it being copied
or printed. A secret Home Office password was required to access the
file.

A Home Office spokeswoman denied the restrictions were an attempt to
stop the state's powers being circulated more widely.

She claimed it was a 'mistake' and the file would be unlocked
tomorrow.

Some 420 new powers of entry are the product of laws introduced since
1997. A further 16 are in laws due to be approved by Parliament in the
next few weeks.

A recent study by the Centre for Policy Studies think-tank warned that
the 'proliferation and variety' of such laws mean householders can no
longer 'realistically be aware' of their rights and legal obligations.

Gordon Brown last year announced a review of 'powers of entry' laws
and said they would be subjected to a 'liberty test' to stop abuses by
the state.

However, new powers set to be approved by Parliament include
inspecting for non-human genetic material, for looted cultural
property from Iraq and for 'undeclared' carbon dioxide, as well as
enforcing bin tax.

Town hall 'bin police' already have the right to enter homes, take
photographs, seize contents of bins, and 'investigate as required'.

Householders can be fined up to £5,000 if they refuse entry or
'obstruct' an official.

Shadow Communities Secretary Eric Pickles said: 'Day by day under
Labour, the rights and liberties of law-abiding citizens are being
eroded.'

<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1036561/Now-1-000-laws-let-state-home.html>

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 3:14 am
From: "William Black"

"D. Spencer Hines" <panther@excelsior.com> wrote in message
news:3WBhk.355$AB3.1314@eagle.america.net...
> Yes...
>
> Appalling!

Flirting with Nazis again David...

If you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas.

I could be posting 'Proven anti-Semite David Hines, a retired US navy
officer is now making common cause with well known proponents of Fascism in
the UK'.

It's painfully obvious that you're pig ignorant of British politics and
every time you open your potato trap you make a complete fool of yourself
and leave yourself open to accusations of consorting with Nazis.

--
William Black

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: talk talk talk talk. We look like cowards!
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/5e3c97d6121336e7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 1:25 am
From: Jim Watt

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:47:38 -0700 (PDT), "deemsbill@aol.com"
<deemsbill@aol.com> wrote:

>On Jul 22, 12:49 am, "Raymond O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com>
>wrote:

> Shoot, many businesses give big bucks to both Democrats and
>Republicans.....just covering all the bases.

Thank heavens the US has never supported terrorists
or sold arms to Iran.

Wonder who armed and trained the Taliban ?
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Hitler missed the boat!?! He didn't have any aircraft carriers ! ? ?
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/b7eee3a1b06b10f0?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 1:32 am
From: Tiger

Rob Arndt wrote:
> On Jul 22, 10:24�pm, Tiger <Lana_sa...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Joe Bruno wrote:
>>
>>>On Jul 22, 11:31 am, "Keith Willshaw" <keithnos...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>Today????????
>>>There are no more Uboats. Todays nuclear subs are much faster and can
>>>stay submerged much longer.
>>>The old Uboats couldn't even do 15 knots submerged. The nukes can do
>>>double that and stay submerged for 6 months.
>>
>>Actually many nations including Germany still use deisel/electric subs.
>>While the cons you note are true, they �have there pros. Mostly being
>>cost & stealth. Only the major navies can afford nucs & their support
>>facilities. A D/E boat is also hard to detect noise wise. LIke a Hybred
>>car, they make liitle noise on battery power.
>
>
> Actually not a true statement about the nukes. The Israelis had the
> Germans modify their torpedo tubes to be able to fire nuke-tipped
> Popeye Turbo cruise missiles. Israel with the German- provided Dolphin
> SSKs has a naval nuclear deterrent and offensive capability in their
> region. The Germans could do theoretically the same thing with the new
> silent Type 212s if they decided to go nuclear in the future...
>
> Also, German fuel cell AIP is silent and safer than a reactor...
>
> Rob

I was refering to nuclear powerplants, not nuclear weapons.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: 15 percent of women in the military have suffered sexual trauma.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/09f8156d45326f72?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 1:37 am
From: Tiger

frank wrote:
> Jeez, you'd think the neanderthals would learn. I remember all the
> crap about women can't fly, can't fly in combat, yadda, yadda, yadda.
> You know who the best damn A-10 pilot is? A woman.
>
> Its time these clowns grow up. This can be stopped really quick by
> giving Article 15s or worse to the perps.
>
> I knew a BG that got retired from his shenanigans that went on way too
> long. Every knew about it, his authority on base was pretty much a
> joke because of it.
>
> Fine, keep them out of the infantry. There are tons of support jobs
> that need to be done. If they need a deck ape to move stuff, assign
> the required number of deck apes. That's a no brainer.
>
> But this is going to go on until the services clean up their act.

I think your mixing apples & oranges..... Sexual crime vs Females &
opportunity.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Navy resigned as DD(X) sinks
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/b2f420c92ac5c393?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 1:46 am
From: Tiger

g lof2 wrote:
> On Jul 22, 12:10 pm, "scott s." <75270_37...@csi.xcom> wrote:
>
>>hcobb <henry.c...@gmail.com> wrote innews:dc39423b-017b-4f06-b582-2f6379dc6888@k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>
>>>http://www.military.com/news/article/cost-could-sink-new-destroyer-pr
>>>ogram.html?col=1186032310810 In a statement released last week , the
>>>Navy seemed resigned to an early end for the program. "Even if we do
>>>not receive funding ... beyond the first two ships, the technology
>>>embedded in DDG 1000 will advance the Navy's future," the statement
>>>asserted.
>>
>>I've seen it suggested that CNO decided to kill the program, using Rep
>>Taylor as the vehicle.
>>
>>scott s.
>>.
>
>
> That or the Navy realize that if the Democrates win the next election,
> they are sunk, and there is nothing they can too do to save itself.
>
> Taylor a real idiot if he thinks the nave will save money by bying
> ships that won't last twenty years because they too expensive to man.

Good bye and good riddance to the DDX. Your manning red herring is a bad
one. For the price of one DDX you can pay the fuel bill for the USN for
a year. The Navy has plenty of warm bodies to man ships.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Russian Bombers Could Be Deployed to Cuba
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/23af54a48bb57c26?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 1:52 am
From: Tiger

Raymond O'Hara wrote:
> "Jack Linthicum" <jacklinthicum@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>
>
> our continued refusal to deal with cuba keeps them in the "enemy" camp.
> we should re-establish relations just to strip russia of an ally.
>
> but how stupid is russia to think bears are any kind of a threat.
>
>

What do we need relations with them for? They need US, we can live
without them.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sub-launched UAVs...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/974b4446092eedc3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 2:30 am
From: Andre Ilausky

Fred J. McCall schrieb:

> :> :> :What's the name of this fiber line controlled UAV you think Juergen is
> :> :> :talking about?
> :> :> :
> :> :>
> :> :> The link was posted at the beginning of the thread. YOU go look it
> :> :> up, since you apparently jumped in without a clue.
> :> :
> :> :A small part of the article you mention is still quoted right above your
> :> :"Not the same system being talked about. Pick a fucking answer and go
> :> :with it...".
> :> :
> :> :The UAV is not controlled by fiber line. It's able to operate
> :> :autonomous. It's supposed to be able to upload the data under
> :> :preset circumstances.
> :> :
> :>
> :> For one proposed system.
> :
> :For the UAV talked about in the source you mentioned.
> :
>
> Uh, *I* didn't mention a source...

You didn't mention a source, as you directed me to the first post in
this thread to read up on the article linked there?

> :> Because it IS a bad idea. If your subs are small and cheap it is a
> :> somewhat less bad idea,
> :
> :A 212 costs about $700 million.
> :
>
> As I said, if your subs are small and cheap,

Compared to an Iranian "sub"? ;)

<http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_cys2T5FgJdo/R7PTXZK84UI/AAAAAAAABtA/0-07NCStBME/s1600-h/divers.jpg>

> :> but I wouldn't do it unless you don't mind
> :> getting your special ops team back in body bags.
> :
> :Use of the sub-launched UAV would be restricted to the discretion of a
> :highly trained submarine skipper or a combination of him and the
> :embarked operators actually doing the infiltration.
> :
>
> Then it will never be used so there is no point in having it.

Then I guess it won't be ordered.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: EU convoys through the Gulf of Aden
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/04d8ff4fb371c5e3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 2:34 am
From: Andre Ilausky

Juergen Nieveler schrieb:
> Andre Ilausky <ai_news@arcor.de> wrote:
>
>> Self-escort!11!!
>>
>> <http://www.pntl.co.uk/pntl-fleet/>
>> The Pacific Teal and Pacific Pintail have been fitted with additional
>> security features that enable them to transport MOX fuel and plutonium
>> dioxide. They have fixed naval guns and other physical protection
>> systems, only some of which are visible from the outside.
>
> Or an even better idea - bring back the Q-ship.
>
> Most of those ships aill be insured by Lloyds, won't they?
>
> Would it be illegal for Lloyds to send out Q-ships, to operate in
> international waters?

I'm not even sure this would be practical. There probably aren't that
many high seas raiders.

> Or rent out services from Blackwater?

They have a single ship/boat/yacht or so.

> Imagine the look on the pirates' faces if they encounter a modern
> version of the HSK Kormoran :-)

Then let's hope the pirates aren't regular navy personnel on a real
warship ;)

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 2:39 am
From: Andre Ilausky

Juergen Nieveler schrieb:

>> But they are already there (War on Terror) - Combined Task Force 150 -
>> they just don't form "convoys" (AFAIK). Maybe a frigate accompanying a
>> ship a little bit - like some Coalition of the Willing ships on their
>> way to Iraq or so.
>
> The problem is that the official mandate only includes "search for
> weapon trafficers in the Gulf of Aden",

It says:

"Gleichzeitig wird ein Beitrag zum Schutz dieser für den Welthandel
strategisch wichtigen Seepassage vor terroristischen Anschlägen geleistet."

Is piracy a terrorist attack on sea lanes?

Anyway, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea says:

"All States shall cooperate to the fullest possible extent in the
repression of piracy on the high seas or in any other place outside the
jurisdiction of any State."

> not "protect civilian shipping
> against piracy in Somalian territorial waters".

Well, let's hope we wouldn't breach territorial waters simply because of
a mandate by Bundestag. Given our track-record, this could very well
lead to World War 3 ;)

BTW: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Territorial_waters>
Territorial sea claims

200 nautical miles (370.4 km): [...] Somalia

They can't even police 12 nm.

>>> under German law, for example, fighting off
>>> pirates would be a police task,
>> Not in "emergency assistance", while another is under attack. Happened a
>> few times this year.
>
> But IIRC they were too far away to claim to be in "hot pursuit".

They are sending a Sea Lynx towards the ship under attack and the
pirates turn tail and run ;)

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 3:24 am
From: "Roger Conroy"

"Andre Ilausky" <ai_news@arcor.de> wrote in message
news:4886fb36$0$19908$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net...
> Juergen Nieveler schrieb:
>> Andre Ilausky <ai_news@arcor.de> wrote:
>>
>>> Self-escort!11!!
>>>
>>> <http://www.pntl.co.uk/pntl-fleet/>
>>> The Pacific Teal and Pacific Pintail have been fitted with additional
>>> security features that enable them to transport MOX fuel and plutonium
>>> dioxide. They have fixed naval guns and other physical protection
>>> systems, only some of which are visible from the outside.
>>
>> Or an even better idea - bring back the Q-ship.
>>
>> Most of those ships aill be insured by Lloyds, won't they?
>>
>> Would it be illegal for Lloyds to send out Q-ships, to operate in
>> international waters?
>
> I'm not even sure this would be practical. There probably aren't that
> many high seas raiders.
>
>> Or rent out services from Blackwater?
>
> They have a single ship/boat/yacht or so.
>
>> Imagine the look on the pirates' faces if they encounter a modern version
>> of the HSK Kormoran :-)
>
> Then let's hope the pirates aren't regular navy personnel on a real
> warship ;)

They "usually" are peasant fishermen (Somali or Indonesian) taking a chance
on a quick profit.
In the case of the Somalis they are often connected to a tribal warlord,
while the Indonesians may be members of "jidadist" organisations.
Carribean pirates are usually part of the drug smuggling networks.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Sea Invasion
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/f2ef2f912a2ee1ae?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 2:47 am
From: Andre Ilausky

Michael Shirley schrieb:

>>>>> Enough to make the air inside the vehicle rather unpleasant to
>>>>> breathe, assuming you were still in shape to draw breath
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't that rather be the HEATed aluminium armor being vaporized by
>>>> e.g. RPG-7 (and not the spall)?
>>>>
>>>>> - not a bulk metal fire.
>>>>
>>>> Which I thought was original claimed by Michael.
>>> Nope, but when it starts burning if it's hot enough it'll burn
>>> more than just the spall.
>>
>> The solid stuff will melt. The "powder" burns.
>
> Depends on how hot it gets.

For melting.

> I'm a little iffy when it comes to the
> physics of the fire that I saw,

Willy Pete inside a M113, right?

>>> Keep in mind that a pound of aluminum has ten
>>> times the energy of TNT if you can get it to burn, which is why you see
>>> it as an additive in both explosives and rocket propellants.
>>
>> Which form would this been in?
>
> Any form that you can get to burn. Powder definitely.

Indeed.

>>> It's also
>>> one of the reasons that we like DU ammo-- it's pyrophoric and if you can
>>> get DU to burn, it'll burn the aluminum.
>>
>> Others are doing just fine using conventional kinetic penetrators.
>
> True, but I kinda like overkill a little. The main reason for that is
> that in a war, I expect that people will get really creative and come up
> with
> techniques and technologies that will mitigate the effectivness of prewar
> weapons. I want to make that as hard as possible.

You will be hard pressed to protect a vehicle against an APFSDS with
tungsten penetrator.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 2:51 am
From: Andre Ilausky

Michael Shirley schrieb:

>>>>> What size would this have to be for burning to take place?
>>>>
>>>> The Ballistics Research Lab at Aberdeen Arsenal considered an
>>>> RPG-7V
>>>> to be an overmatch for a Bradley, if that's any guide.
>>> <http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m2-specs.htm>
>>> Armor Protection: M2A1 / M3A1 Up to 14.5-mm HMG
>>> M2A2 / M3A2 Up to 30-mm cannon
>>
>> Ignoring ERA tiles, it seems.
>
> They weren't tested. They hauled out a Bradley and shot it with a
> 105

I thought with RPG-7V?

> As far as the ERA blocks go, granted they help, but one of the
> effects of those things has been tandem warheads

Which the RPG-7V hasn't.

> and top attack systems like the Bofors BLL.

Which could be a problem if you fight Sweden, Austria or Brazil ;)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Oil Price Drops $6.44/Barrel (only 4.4 % )-- Bush had nothing to do
with it -- supply and demand at work
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/browse_thread/thread/f821a105b591499f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 2:54 am
From: Jack Linthicum

On Jul 22, 9:10 pm, Horvath <Horv...@Horvath.nossepam.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:46:31 -0700 (PDT), Jack Linthicum
> <jacklinthi...@earthlink.net> wrote this crap:
>
>
>
> >> You plan on living without phones and computers?
>
> >Do you repair cellular and wi-fi?
>
> Yes. They work on the same networks.
>
> Horv...@Horvath.net
>
> My T-shirt says, "This shirt is the
> ultimate power in the universe."

I don't know what you think a "network" is after seeing your inability
to handle "schedule" but cellular and wi-fi are radio and cable and
telephone are wire. I think you are just another wire tier and not
what anybody else would call an engineer. Bye.

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jul 23 2008 2:56 am
From: Jack Linthicum

On Jul 22, 10:39 pm, !Jones <h...@there.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:35:13 -0400, in alt.war.vietnam Horvath
>
> <Horv...@Horvath.nossepam.net> wrote:
> >You plan on living without phones and computers?
>
> Remember how computers were supposed to make our lives simpler? We
> have grown used to them; however, I cannot say that I'm any happier
> because of it. They do nothing for my life's fulfillment.
>
> I have everything I need in life; I have *some* of what I want... and
> Wendy (the most beautiful woman in the world) just brought me an
> eggplant sandwich! Can life possibly get any better?
>
> So, I suppose that the answer to your question is: I'm not planning on
> it; however, I certainly will if I have to. The idea holds no deep
> dread for me, let's put it that way.
>
> Jones

And balance the whole budget, not just the stuff that's easy. One of
the Republicans back in primaries said something like "It's easy to
balance the budget, just take the big stuff off-line".

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sci.military.naval"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to sci.military.naval-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.military.naval/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com?hl=en

Wednesday, July 23, 2008

25 new messages in 16 topics - digest

0 Comments: