HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Budget Strains To Cut Car...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 05:34 PM

Budget Strains To Cut Carrier Fleet In (Persian)Gulf To 1

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) U.S. officials say that budget strains will force the Pentagon to cut its aircraft carrier presence in the Persian Gulf area from two carriers to one.

Officials say Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has formally approved a plan to keep just one carrier in the region. There have been two aircraft carrier groups there for most of the last two years.

The USS Dwight D. Eisenhower was in the Gulf but was brought home in December for maintenance. It will return later this month, but plans for the USS Harry S. Truman to deploy to the Gulf this week have been canceled.

Read more: http://www.timesrecordnews.com/news/2013/feb/06/budget-strains-cut-carrier-fleet-gulf-1/

18 replies, 1780 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 18 replies Author Time Post
Reply Budget Strains To Cut Carrier Fleet In (Persian)Gulf To 1 (Original post)
Purveyor Feb 2013 OP
GeorgeGist Feb 2013 #1
madrchsod Feb 2013 #2
HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #3
AtheistCrusader Feb 2013 #4
xtraxritical Feb 2013 #14
HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #15
xtraxritical Feb 2013 #16
HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #17
tabasco Feb 2013 #5
magic59 Feb 2013 #6
Sherman A1 Feb 2013 #7
HooptieWagon Feb 2013 #18
Eugenian Feb 2013 #8
awoke_in_2003 Feb 2013 #9
happyslug Feb 2013 #13
neverforget Feb 2013 #10
Comrade Grumpy Feb 2013 #11
Socal31 Feb 2013 #12

Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 05:49 PM

1. Oh noes

:haironfire:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 05:58 PM

2. cutting back on the carter-reagan doctrine

i guess the soviet union is`t going to take our oil. it`s about time we stop paying security for the oil companies.

the truman will be rotated to the south china seas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 06:13 PM

3. Considering we have air-bases in Turkey. Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia...

And a bomber base in Diego Garcia, plus carrier fleets in the Indian Ocean and Med...I don't see a second carrier fleet in the Persian Gulf as a necessity. I'm not even sure that one is a necessity, seeing as its major purpose is to provoke Iran.

A few destroyers to watch over US shipping, and a couple minesweepers to make sure Hormuz stays clear is sufficient. There is plenty of air power and missiles already in place to respond to Irani aggression without the need of carriers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #3)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 06:17 PM

4. Hormuz is increasingly irrelevant anyway.

New ports have been opened and are increasing capacity as we speak, to counter any threat to that strait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #3)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:35 PM

14. If the carrier group is not there it's somewhere else. How does this save anything?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xtraxritical (Reply #14)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:49 PM

15. More time in SD or Norfolk,

less time at sea. Less wear and tear on equip. Lower manpower costs. Less frequent need to replace ships. Less chances of damage.

I think we only need 5 Carrier groups at sea at a time...North Atlantic, Med, Indian Ocean, North and South Pacific. Others can be in port under maintainence or on standby. Tours can be shortened a bit having ships on standby ready to replace them. Sailors be away from home for a shorter period, thus less stressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #15)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 11:52 PM

16. Alright, sounds reasonable, thanks.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xtraxritical (Reply #16)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 12:12 AM

17. It really takes a huge amount of money to operate a carrier group at sea.

Fuel for all the many ships (carrier, cruiser, several destroyers, 2 or 3 submarines, at least one supply ship, perhaps an assault ship and minesweeper as well). Fuel for all the planes (which includes anti-sub patrols, and air cover 24/7).
Stateside, in port, no air patrols. No burning up ships fuel. No wear and tear. Maintainence work is less rushed, so probably less costly. The ships still could put to sea on fairly short notice, unless they were undergoing a major overhaul, which is one at a time same as now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 06:27 PM

5. Oh goddamn!

We're only going to be able to turn the entire region into a parking lot 18 times over instead of 36!!

That Obammie is weak on defense!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 06:56 PM

6. Great!

 

Lets cut more from the military industrial complex. Why do Americans have to spend trillions of dollars protecting big biz and Europe when 57,000 Americans die each year from lack of health care?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 07:19 PM

7. Cut it to zero

and that would be better in my opinion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sherman A1 (Reply #7)

Thu Feb 7, 2013, 12:23 AM

18. I agree.

We're surrounding Iran on all sides even without a Carrier Group in the Gulf. I don't think absence of carrier groups makes us any less able to respond to Iran.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 08:09 PM

8. Maybe the Navy could hold a bake sale... nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 09:49 PM

9. One carrier battle group...

could destroy most country's navies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to awoke_in_2003 (Reply #9)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:21 PM

13. We used Four against Iraq during Desert Strom,

And any REAL targets will be LAND targets not sea going ones thus the ability of one carrier vs any other navy is irrelevant.

All told this means all the talk of war with Iran has been just talk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 09:59 PM

10. The Navy gets to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:06 PM

11. That's a start.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Original post)

Wed Feb 6, 2013, 10:12 PM

12. As if we don't have Iran circled already.

More of our young men and women home = fine with me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread