Saturday 19th of September 2020

the world, according to the US navy...

world map

Approximately 1,100 Marines and Sailors spent four days enjoying Italian culture, touring local sites and enjoying time off the ship as part of a regularly scheduled deployment that began Feb. 7, 2018.

The port call focused on enhancing relations between the two nations by hosting events aboard the Mayport, Florida, based ship and giving back to the local community. This included a command visit with the Mayor of Gaeta, a tour given to the Italian Civil Servants aboard New York and a community service opportunity in which 20 Sailors and Marines volunteered at the Sicily-Rome American Cemetery and Memorial.

 

Read more:

http://www.c6f.navy.mil/news/new-york-26th-meu-depart-gaeta-italy

Please read also: 

http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/32554

 

impressive, no rubber duckies here...

NORFOLK (NNS) -- The Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group (HSTCSG) departed Naval Station Norfolk, April 11, for a regularly scheduled deployment.

The strike group, including aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75), Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 1, USS Normandy (CG 60), several destroyers of Destroyer Squadron (DESRON) 28 and German frigate FGS Hessen (F 221), is scheduled to conduct operations in the U.S. Navy's 5th and 6th Fleet areas of responsibility.

The deployment is part of an ongoing rotation of U.S. forces supporting maritime security operations in international waters around the globe. Additionally, HSTCSG units will work alongside allied and partner maritime forces, focusing on theater security cooperation efforts, which help to further regional stability.

"I'm incredibly proud of the dedication that the thousands of Sailors from the ships, squadrons and staffs of the Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group have shown in preparing for this deployment, and I'm honored to lead and serve with them," said Rear Adm. Gene Black, commander of HSTCSG. "These Sailors have proven themselves a highly capable team, ready to tackle any mission that our nation calls on them to perform."

For Truman, the deployment follows more than eight months of intense training and preparation that began when the ship completed its on-time periodic incremental availability in July 2017, and culminated in its Composite Training Unit Exercise (COMPTUEX) in March, which certified the ship for deployment.

"The Sailors on this team have been nothing short of spectacular," said Capt. Nicholas Dienna, Truman's commanding officer. "After making Truman the first aircraft carrier -- in a number of years -- to leave the shipyard on time, these men and women continued their level of excellence through one of the most complex work-up cycles ever. Their honed technical skills are what will drive this war-tested vessel to be successful at whatever may come. We are excited to deploy forward and, more importantly, we are ready!"  

The HSTCSG consists of the flagship USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) with embarked staffs of Carrier Strike Group Eight (CSG 8), Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 1 and Destroyer Squadron (DESRON) 28; embarked squadrons of CVW 1; guided-missile cruiser USS Normandy (CG 60); and DESRON 28 guided-missile destroyers USS Farragut (DDG 99), USS Forrest Sherman (DDG 98), USS Bulkeley (DDG 84), USS Arleigh Burke (DDG 51), USS Jason Dunham (DDG 109), and USS The Sullivans (DGG 68). The Sachsen-class German frigate FGS Hessen (F 221) is also operating as part of the strike group during the first half of the deployment. USS Jason Dunham and USS The Sullivans are slated to deploy at a later date and will rejoin the strike group in theater.

Squadrons of CVW 1, commanded by Capt. John Perrone, that will embark Truman during deployment include Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 11 "Red Rippers," VFA 211 "Checkmates," VFA 81 "Sunliners," VFA 136 "Knighthawks," Electronic Attack Squadron (VAQ) 137 "Rooks," Carrier Airborne Early Warning Squadron (VAW) 126 "Seahawks," Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron (HSM) 72 "Proud Warriors," Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 11 "Dragon Slayers" and a detachment from Fleet Logistics Support Squadron (VRC) 40 "Rawhides."

Read more: 

http://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=105078

 

"U.S. Navy's 5th and 6th Fleet areas of responsibility????" "help to further regional stability?????"

Gun boat diplomacy? Sure... Read also: sailing into a junk yard... 

 

allocated areas of destruction and cleaning dunnies...

The Sixth Fleet is the United States Navy's operational fleet and staff of United States Naval Forces Europe. The Sixth Fleet is headquartered at Naval Support Activity Naples, Italy.[2] The officially stated mission of the Sixth Fleet in 2011 is that it

conducts the full range of Maritime Operations and Theater Security Cooperation missions, in concert with coalition, joint, interagency, and other parties, in order to advance security and stability in Europe and Africa.

The commander of the Sixth Fleet is Vice Admiral Lisa M. Franchetti.

The Sixth Fleet was established in February 1950 by redesignation of the former Sixth Task Fleet.[3] Since that time, it has been continually engaged in world affairs around the Mediterranean, and, on occasion, further afield. It was involved in numerous NATO maritime exercises, the U.S. Lebanese intervention of 1958, confrontation with the Soviets during the Yom Kippur War (also known as the October War) of 1973, clearance of the Suez Canal after 1973, several confrontations with Libya during the 1980s (including Operation El Dorado Canyon), and maintenance of task forces in the Adriatic during the wars in former Yugoslavia in the 1990s. Most recently it launched airstrikes on Libya again during the Libyan Civil War of 2011.

 

Read more:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Sixth_Fleet

 

PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE WAS NO LIBYAN CIVIL WAR UNTIL THAT COUNTRY WAS BOMBED BY NATO. NATO created the onsuing civil war.

All of the US navy and army ops have been like cops beating a naked black woman lying on the ground...

See also: 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/black-woman-raped-texa...

the right presence where and when it's needed?...

Today USS Harry S. Truman transited the Strait of Gibraltar, entering the Mediterranean Sea. Read more about how Truman is operating forward to provide the right presence where and when it's needed: https://go.usa.gov/xQKeY

https://www.facebook.com/USSTruman/

 

Please spare us the morality of what's going to happen next.  

 

battle plan...

If you ever been in the navy, you would know that apart from recreation and having a woman in every port that your Armada visits, your ship(s) are always following a battle plan. Whether it's a mocked battle or a real one in a sealed envelope, the battle plan is there for the commanders to follow the wishes of the political lords. Thus what is the battle plan of the 5th and 6th fleets now on both sides of the Arab world, with the big one, approaching the coast of Syria with about 10 other navy ships. On the other side in the Arabian Gulf, the US fleet is also on the ready. Where will the first shot come from? Are they waiting for another "false flag" gassing before hitting something. Are they intimidating the Russians with a massive firepower? Will they strike somewhere else first as a diversion? Will they hit from every corner of the world at once? Will they stay there burning fuel until they get tired of playing games. We shall see. The thing they should not do is start WW3. That we know off, but does the "Kommandatur" know this? That is the question...

URGENT: battle plan update...

Okay. Gus got the secret battle plan for the USSS Truman and its fleet of destroyers, planes and rockets, from one of his mates at the DoD (US). The document in the sealed envelope, possibly unopened by the commander of the fleet yet, specifies the target is not Syria, but Iran. The problem with Syria is the presence of the Russians. Hitting Iran directly bypasses this annoying obstacle. The specific targets are of course all the Iranian nuclear facilities, etc. Details are very specific. As well, a very serious threat (US submarines, not mentioned in the official communiqués, but under the command of the Truman captain) is maintained on the Russian fleet in Tartus.

At this stage there is of course coordination with the Gulf US fleet and A MAJOR DISTRACTION from the Israelis who will attack something (possibly in Damascus) in Syria. Not specified exactly in this document. Busy with all this, Russia will be taken unawares and dithering on its response, BECAUSE NO RUSSIAN TARGETS WILL BE INVOLVED. At the same time, the Saudis and their mates of the Gulf States (minus Qatar) will attack Syria AND Iraq. 

The US fleet is now approaching Cyprus (though not mentioned on its website).

This plan may be a diversion in itself with the ultimate intent being to outflank the "Russian might" nonetheless... by provoking a reaction that will place the onus (and the blame) of the next step on Russia. WW3 or not.

 

May Allah be with Iran. Gus is an atheist, but on this occasion, one could not be too cautious.

 

Note: Pompeo, blowhard Haley and Bolton have bamboozled Trump on this one...

Note: if Russian assets in Iran are hit, there will be US apologies indicating that the US had no idea there was Russian assets in the designated areas.

Note: Innocent population collateral damage to be ignored as usual.

battle plans are in tatters...


Russia can sink all airplane-carriers navigating in East Greenland



by  Valentin Vasilescu

In his previous article, Valentin Vasilescu demonstrated that it was impossible for the Pentagon to establish an anti-Russian blockade in the Mediterranean nor anywhere else. In this article, he applies his thesis and he shows us that the US no longer has the capacity to lead a naval war against Russia in East Greenland. Moscow has already demonstrated the superiority of its weapons on the ground in Syria. Even if the clash between the two Great Powers has been avoided with care, what is clear, is that today, Russia no longer fears the possibility of a conventional US attack.


The United States is in an isolated geographic position and has the most powerful naval force.

It is capable of intervening anywhere in the world. Yet a US Minister, Ryan Zinke declared in Pittsburg, during a Consumer Energy Alliance meeting that the possibility of the US imposing a blockade on Russia in the Black Sea and the Mediterranean is almost zero. This is because the new Russian hypersonic missiles Kh-47M2 Kinzhal and 3M22 Zircon can neutralize a United States naval group, from the Gibralta Straits.

The United Kingdom has announced that it is going to send 800 commandos to North Norway to confront a potential “Russian” aggression.

In the midst of the deployment of further NATO troops in the Baltic countries and Poland, the United States’ Navy has announced the reactivation of its Second Fleet, seven years after its deactivation. This US naval force must operate in the North, the Baltic and the Arctic Ocean.

The enclave of Kaliningrad in the Baltic and the North Stream gas pipeline are Russia’s chief vulnerabilities on the east flank of Nato. Could the United States, with NATO support, use its Second Fleet to impose a naval blockade against Russia in the Atlantic, the Baltic Sea and the Arctic? The airplane carriers are not risking operating in the Arctic because they can be blocked in the ice. As for the two other areas, it is possible to operate there, but without any chance of success.

JPEG - 68.5 kb

Russia is able to attack any naval group that would attempt to organize the blockade. How? By launching hypersonic missiles against the surface ships, as soon as these ships enter the Strait of Skagerrak, which links the North Sea to the Baltic.

Furthermore, Russian Submarines with nuclear propulsion, armed with hypersonic missiles can strike any US naval group that it encounters when it is 1000 kilometres from the East side of the Atlantic Ocean, at the South of Iceland.

The Russians can also launch KH-47M2 hypersonic missiles carried by long range bombers Tu-160 and Tu-23M3, if the US Naval Group reaches South Greenland. In order to avoid being intercepted, the Russian airplanes would pass from above from the North Pole.

JPEG - 63.4 kb

What are the odds that the US Naval Group will survive? In the event of an attack using hypersonic missiles, the Pentagon would have very little time to react. This is due to the accelerated speed at which these missiles move and the minimum time needed for hypersonic missiles to enter the reaction zone of the AA systems. The Kinzhal Missile has a range of 2000 km, a speed of 12 250 km/h and a maximum altitude for crossing of 40 000 to 50 000 m. The Zirkon missile has a range of 1000 km, a speed of 9 800 km/h and a maximum altitude for crossing of 40 000 m.

The probability of destroying an airplane carrier with these two types of hyper sonic missile, piercing the AA defense is 88%. This means that, if 100 hypersonic missiles are launched, 88 will pierce the AA defences and destroy their targets.

Applying the math to the specific case of the United States: if 11 Russian hypersonic missiles are launched against the 11 existing US airplane carriers, only 1.3 missiles would fail to reach their targets. This means that after the first storm of Russian hypersonic missiles, there would only be two airplane carriers at the Pentagon, one of which would already be damaged. This would be a very serious catastrophe for the US Navy.

Valentin Vasilescu

Translation 
Anoosha Boralessa

 

Read more:

http://www.voltairenet.org/article203462.html

 

 

And vice versa... Until the day there is no-one left, apart from a couple of gay guys named Abel and Cain... We know the rest.

 

Read from top.

about military geography...

PAUL JAY: Welcome back to Reality Asserts Itself. I’m Paul Jay on The Real News Network. And we are back with Lester Earnest, one of the creators of artificial intelligence, or machine language, as he would prefer to call it. Thanks again for joining us.

LESTER EARNEST: My pleasure.

PAUL JAY: So you work at MIT, and you’re part of a program which is a big fraud. You’re finding crazy stuff going on in the technology with Bomarc missiles. One thing after another, the irrationality of this and how much of this is driven by profit-making, not actually worried about a real, an existential danger from the Soviet Union, what’s this do to your own belief system?

LESTER EARNEST: Well, I was going downhill, getting more and more frustrated with my job. The people I was working with were good people. They had, most of them, come out of MIT. And bright. But our goals were strangely twisted. When we were working at MIT, the goal, technological goals were stated in advance, and we were assessed based on the degree to which we met those goals. Once we went into Mitre we started using the Defense Department’s criteria for success, the goal being to spend all the money in the budget by the end of the fiscal year. And if you did that you would likely get more, whether you accomplished anything or not. There was no assessment of success or failure other than spending the money.

PAUL JAY: And by this point that’s your, your understanding of it, at this point. That this is no longer about defending the nation. This is about making-

LESTER EARNEST: It wasn’t just my understanding. That’s the way it actually worked.

PAUL JAY: I believe that. But I’m asking you—that’s what you believed at that point, too.

LESTER EARNEST: Yeah. Yeah, I had to work toward those goals.

PAUL JAY: So everybody’s cynically involved in all this making money, while the rest of the population thinks they’re about to get blown up.

LESTER EARNEST: Yep. So that was a real reversal of common sense. And so all of these projects were designed to make money, not to accomplish anything. And in general, they did not accomplish anything.

PAUL JAY: All right. 1963-’64, you are questioning, I guess, everything you thought was true turns out to increasingly be a crock, and be about money; true meaning the mission of the United States, the, you know, the mission of the armed forces to defend the country, for democracy, turns out to be how do we make a lot of money. And the Vietnam War’s really starting to unfold. When do you start to really decide that what you believe in is not true?

LESTER EARNEST: Well, I knew that I was doing dirty work from way back. And I was being well paid for it. But I was getting increasingly bothered by the fact that I was costing taxpayers a lot of money for no good at all. And this whole thing wasn’t going anywhere. But I still struggled ahead a while longer. I worked in Los Angeles for several months doing a technological prediction which was supposed to help the planning. And I also criticized the way they had been building systems.

PAUL JAY: They being the armed forces.

LESTER EARNEST: Correct. But the head guy in our group, a colonel, said we can’t say they’re doing things wrong. So he took my report and censored it so that none of that got out.

I then came back to Boston and was recruited to go to Washington, DC to work for the Joint Chiefs of Staff, designing the so-called worldwide military command and control system—another giant mess. And dealing with the Joint Chiefs and their staff was no more pleasure than dealing with the rest of the folks. One of the first things I realized was that geography to the military commands is different from the rest of the world’s view. We draw boundaries of countries and counties, states, and things. The military have command boundaries, which are quite different. Many commands cover multiple countries. So it’s all a very different system.

So the first thing I wanted to do was learn about the military geography. So I sent a guy over to the Pentagon to collect that information. And an hour later I received a call from a colonel, maybe it was a general, saying get that guy out of here and never send him back. I said, what’s the problem? He said, he has a beard. We don’t allow anyone with a beard in our office. So that gave me another insight.

And we went on from there. I listened to the morning briefings of the Joint Chiefs. They had, it was in a two-story room, they had a balcony enclosed, and the presentation was down below with three display screens. And other lowlifes like me were kept down on the lower level. And I saw what a fraud that was. The good stuff came from commercial news sources. The intelligence stuff was phony to the core, a lot of it. Some of it was real. But there was a whole lot of phony stuff going through there.

PAUL JAY: Yeah, we learned from our interview with Daniel Ellsberg that in 1962-63, the Air Force was telling the President and the country of this enormous missile gap; that supposedly the Soviet Union had 40-60 ICBMs aimed at the United States. And of course, this required an enormous expenditure to not only close the gap, but to significantly surpass the Soviet Union. It was discovered—Ellsberg found out—that they figured out by satellite photography, and by—I believe it’s ‘62 or ‘63—that, in fact, the Soviet Union had four ICBMs. The whole thing was a crock created by the Air Force. In fact, the Army and the Navy had a much more accurate assessment, far, far lower than 40. Khruschev, it turned out, was bluffing that he had parity. Nowhere near parity. But the Army and Navy had more or less figured out that. But the Air Force was telling everybody, in order to spend enormous amounts of money on a whole whack of ICBMs.

And the other important part of this thing is if they only have four ICBMs, then how real is this strategy for global domination? It turns out that whole thing’s mythology. Did you start to get a sense of that? That this is more about American hegemony than it is about defense?

LESTER EARNEST: Yeah. It’s, it’s basically a money-making system. That’s what it’s about. And has nothing to do with real defense.

PAUL JAY: In the next segment of our interview we’ll talk about how this big fraud helped create the conditions for the internet. Please join us for the continuation of Reality Asserts Itself with Lester Earnest on The Real News Network.

 

Read more:

https://therealnews.com/stories/dod-criterion-for-success-spend-all-your...

 

 

Read from top.

thomas b. modly is not happy...

WASHINGTON (NNS) -- Statement from the Acting Secreatry of the Navy Thomas B. Modly, regarding the relief of the Commanding Officer of USS Theodore Roosevelt.

---------------

Good afternoon. Thank you again for your diligence and courage in keeping the American people informed as we all deal with the profound ramifications, and rapid developments, associated with this crisis.

I am here today to inform you that today at my direction, the Commanding Officer of the USS Theodore Roosevelt, Captain Crozier, was relieved of command by the Carrier Strike Group Commander, Rear Admiral Stuart Baker.

The Executive Officer, Captain Dan Keeler, has assumed command temporarily until such time as Rear Admiral Select Carlos Sardiello arrives in Guam to assume command. Rear Admiral Select Sardiello is the former commanding officer of the Theodore Roosevelt so he is extremely well-acquainted with the ship, many members of its crew and the operations and capabilities of the ship itself. He is the best person in the Navy right now to take command under these circumstances.

As Secretary of the Navy, I could not be more proud of our men and women serving as part of the Navy and Marine Corps team. I can assure you that no one cares more than I do about their safety and welfare. I myself have a son in uniform, who is currently serving right now on active duty in Korea—one of the first nations in the world to have a significant spike in Coronavirus cases. I understand, both as a parent and a veteran, how critical our support lines are for the health and well-being of our people, especially now in the midst of a global pandemic.

But there is a larger strategic context, one full of national security imperatives, of which all our commanders must all be aware today. While we may not be at war in a traditional sense, neither are we truly at peace. Authoritarian regimes are on the rise. Many nations are reaching, in many ways, to reduce our capacity to accomplish our national goals. This is actively happening every day. It has been a long time since the Navy and Marine Corps team has faced this broad array of capable global strategic challengers. A more agile and resilient mentality is necessary, up and down the chain of command.

Perhaps more so than in the recent past, we require commanders with the judgment, maturity, and leadership composure under pressure to understand the ramifications of their actions within that larger dynamic strategic context. We all understand and cherish our responsibilities, and frankly our love, for all of our people in uniform, but to allow those emotions to color our judgment when communicating the current operational picture can, at best, create unnecessary confusion, and at worst, provide an incomplete picture of American combat readiness to our adversaries.

When the Commanding Officer of the USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT decided to write his letter of 30 March 2020 that outlined his concerns for his crew in the midst of a COVID-19 outbreak, the Department of the Navy had already mobilized significant resources for days in response to his previous requests. On the same date marked on his letter, my Chief of Staff had called the CO directly, at my request, to ensure he had all the resources necessary for the health and safety of his crew.

The CO told my Chief of Staff that he was receiving those resources, and was fully aware of the Navy’s response, only asking that the he wished the crew could be evacuated faster. My Chief of Staff ensured that the CO knew that he had an open line to me to use at any time. He even called the CO again a day later to follow up. At no time did the CO relay the various levels of alarm that I, along with the rest of the world, learned from his letter when it was published two days later.

Once I read the letter, I immediately called the Chief of Naval Operations, ADM Gilday, and the Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet, ADM Aquilino. ADM Gilday had just read the letter that morning as well, and ADM Aquilino had it the day before. We had a teleconference within minutes of my reading of that article, including the Commander, SEVENTH Fleet, VADM William Merz, ADM Aquilino, ADM Gilday, the Department of the Navy’s Surgeon General, RADM Bruce Gillingham, and others. That evening, we held another teleconference with the entire chain of command.

The next day, I spoke with the CO of the THEODORE ROOSEVELT myself, and this morning, I have spoken to the TR’s Carrier Strike Group Commander, RDML Stuart Baker. RDML Baker did not know about the letter before it was sent to him via email by the CO. It is important to understand that the Strike Group Commander, the CO’s immediate boss, is embarked on the Theodore Roosevelt, right down the passageway from him. The letter was sent over non- secure, unclassified email even though that ship possesses some of the most sophisticated communications and encryption equipment in the Fleet.

It was sent outside the chain of command, at the same time the rest of the Navy was fully responding. Worse, the Captain’s actions made his Sailors, their families, and many in the public believe that his letter was the only reason help from our larger Navy family was forthcoming, which was hardly the case.

Command is a sacred trust that must be continually earned, both from the Sailors and Marines one leads, and from the institution which grants that special, honored privilege.

As I learned more about the events of the past week on board USS THEODORE ROOSEVELT (CVN-71), including my personal conversations with the Strike Group Commander, Commander, SEVENTH Fleet, Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet, the Chief of Naval Operations, and CAPT Crozier himself, I could reach no other conclusion than that Captain Crozier had allowed the complexity of his challenge with COVID breakout on the ship to overwhelm his ability to act professionally, when acting professionally was what was needed most. We do, and we should, expect more from the Commanding Officers of our aircraft carriers.

I did not come to this decision lightly. I have no doubt in my mind that Captain Crozier did what he thought was in the best interests of the safety and well-being of his crew. Unfortunately, it did the opposite. It unnecessarily raised alarms with the families of our Sailors and Marines with no plan to address those concerns. It raised concerns about the operational capabilities and operational security of the ship that could have emboldened our adversaries to seek advantage, and it undermined the chain of command who had been moving and adjusting as rapidly as possible to get him the help he needed.

For these reasons, I lost confidence in his ability to lead that warship as it continues to fight through this virus, get the crew healthy, so that it can continue to meet its national security requirements. In my judgement relieving him of command was in the best interests of the United States Navy and the nation in this time when the nation needs the Navy to be strong and confident in the face of adversity. The responsibility for this decision rests with me. I expect no congratulations for it, and it gives me no pleasure in making it. CAPT Crozier is an honorable man, who despite this uncharacteristic lapse of judgment, has dedicated himself throughout a lifetime of incredible service to our nation.

Pursuant to this action, and with my full support, the Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Gilday has directed the Vice Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Robert Burke, to conduct an investigation into the circumstances and climate of the entire Pacific Fleet to help determine what may have contributed to this breakdown in the chain of command. We must ensure we can count on the right judgment, professionalism, composure, and leadership from our Commanding Officers everywhere on our Navy and Marine Corps team, but especially in the Western Pacific. I have no indication that there is a broader problem in this regard, but we have obligation to calmly and evenly investigate that nonetheless.

To our Commanding Officers, it would be a mistake to view this decision as somehow not supportive of your duty to report problems, request help, protect your crews, and challenge assumptions as you see fit.

This decision is not one of retribution. It is about confidence. It is not an indictment of character, but rather of judgement. While I do take issue with thevalidity of some of the points in Captain Crozier’s letter, he was absolutely correct in raising them.

It was the way in which he did this, by not working through and with his Strike Group Commander to develop a strategy to resolve the problems he raised, by not sending the letter to and through his chain of command, by not protecting the sensitive nature of the information contained within the letter appropriately, and lastly by not reaching out to me directly to voice is concerns, after that avenue had been provided to him through my team, that was unacceptable.

Let me be clear, you all have a duty to be transparent with your respective chains of command, even if you fear they might disagree with you. This duty requires courage, but it also requires respect for that chain of command, and for the sensitivity of the information you decide to share and the manner you choose to share it.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I would like to send a message to the crew of the Theodore Roosevelt and their families back here at home. I am entirely convinced that your Commanding Officer loves you, and that he had you at the center of his heart and mind in every decision that he has made. I also know that you have great affection, and love, for him as well. But it is my responsibility to ensure that his love and concern for you is matched, if not exceeded by, his sober and professional judgement under pressure.

You deserve that throughout all the dangerous activities for which you train so diligently, but most importantly, for those situations which are unpredictable and are hard to plan for. It’s important because you are the TR, you are the Big Stick, and what happens onboard the TR matters far beyond the physical limits of your hull. Your shipmates across the fleet need for you to be strong and ready—and most especially right now they need you to be courageous in the face of adversity.

The nation needs to know that the Big Stick is undaunted, unstoppable —and that you will stay that way as we as a Navy help you through this COVID-19 challenge. Our adversaries need to know this as well. They respect and fear the Big Stick, and they should. We will not allow anything to diminish that respect and fear as you, and the rest of our nation, fights through this virus. As I stated, we are not at war by traditional measures, but neither are we at peace. The nation you defend is in a fight right now for our economic, personal and political security, and you are on the front lines of this fight in many ways.

You can offer comfort to your fellow citizens who are struggling and fearful here at home by standing the watch, and working your way through this pandemic with courage and optimism and set the example for the nation. We have an obligation to ensure you have everything you need as fast as we can get it there, and you have my commitment that we will not let you down. The nation you have sworn to defend is in a fight, and the nations and bad actors around the world who wish us harm should understand that the Big Stick is in the neighborhood and that her crew is standing the watch.

Thank you, and I am ready to answer any questions you may have.

 

Read more:

https://www.navy.mil/submit/display.asp?story_id=112537

 

Read from top.

 

Sounds impressive but it's not the way the war on the coronavirus is going to play out. I trust that Acting Secreatry of the Navy Thomas B. Modly will one day regret this decision — though in the army, or the navy, commanders never regret anything. The troops will suffer more from the virus under his edict than under Captain Crozier. There could be other issues which we do not know about and the virus might have been an opportunity to shaft Captain Crozier...

I don't think that in his conscience, Captain Crozier, would regret what he has done, unless he was cleverly pushed by some officer(s) who wanted his job, to write the letter...

 

See also:

The Blob Sucked Away Your Public Health And Gave You War Instead

Trillions down the drain for overseas operations and the national security state is still agitating for more.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-blob-sucked-away-yo...

 

a chilling message...

US defence leaders are standing firm on the Navy’s decision to fire a ship captain who sought help for his cornonavirus-stricken aircraft carrier, even as videos showed sailors cheering him as he walked off the vessel.

Videos went viral on social media Friday (local time), showing hundreds of sailors gathered on the ship chanting and applauding Navy Captain Brett Crozier as he walked down the ramp, turned, saluted, waved and got into a waiting car.

 

Captain Crozier was faithful to his duty—both to his sailors and his country. Navy leadership sent a chilling message about speaking truth to power. The poor judgment here belongs to the Trump Admin, not a courageous officer trying to protect his sailors. pic.twitter.com/AkGFdlYjwt

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) April 3, 2020

 

 

 

Acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly abruptly fired Mr Crozier on Thursday, saying the commander created a panic by widely distributing a memo detailing the escalating virus outbreak on his ship and pleading his leadership for help. Mr Modly said Mr Crozier “demonstrated extremely poor judgment” in the middle of a crisis.

 

Read more:

https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/coronavirus/2020/04/04/sailors-cheer-sac...

 

Read from top. I repeat:

Thomas B. Modly sounds impressive but it's not the way the war on the coronavirus is going to play out. I trust that this Acting Secreatry of the Navy will one day regret this decision — though in the army, or the navy, commanders never regret anything. The troops will suffer more from the virus under his edict than under Captain Crozier. There could be other issues which we do not know about and the virus might have been an opportunity to shaft Captain Crozier...

 

I don't think that in his conscience, Captain Crozier, would regret what he has done, unless he was cleverly pushed by some officer(s) who wanted his job, to write the letter...

 

155 cases have so far been identified...

The testing of the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier's crew for COVID-19 is being conducted after an coronavirus outbreak aboard the ship was revealed through the efforts of the vessel's captain, Brett Crozier, who has since been relieved of his command.

The US Navy has announced that the number of sailors infected with COVID-19 among the crew of the USS Theodore Roosevelt has increased by 13 percent.

Having tested about 44 percent of the ship's crew, which numbers nearly 5,000, a total of 155 cases have so far been identified .

The Navy said that 1,548 of the carrier's sailors have been moved ashore, and that none of those who were infected have been hospitalized.

 

 

Read more:

https://sputniknews.com/us/202004041078835282-155-crewmembers-of-us-airc...

 

 

Read from top.

a code that is not easy to live by...


REALISM & RESTRAINT


Captain Crozier Was Right, And His Sailors Knew It

 

He put Men before the Mission. That the brass removed him and killed his Navy career calls into question their own judgment.


As a fledgling officer long, long ago, I was taught to abide by the hierarchy of Mission first, then Men, and then Self. Simple enough in theory, that code is not easy to live by. 

For mere mortals, the requirement to subordinate self is almost unnatural. Anyone who serves in the military for more than a few weeks will likely encounter leaders whose personal cod—never to be spoken aloud—is Me First. Their approach to accomplishing the mission and taking care of their troops blends seamlessly with their own career ambitions. The hierarchy becomes a triangle, each element connected to the others. There is no need to choose.

Now we have the case of U.S. Navy Captain Brett E. Crozier, until recently commander of the USS Theodore Roosevelt, one of the 11 nuclear aircraft carriers that form the backbone of the fleet. Command of an aircraft carrier is a prize appointment, given to upwardly mobile officers. We can safely say that barring Congressional intervention on his behalf, Captain Crozier’s upward mobility has ended.

On April 2, the Navy relieved Captain Crozier of his command. Relief is a polite term for being fired. In each of the services, this happens from time to time. In the Navy of late, commanders have been fired for allowing lax discipline which resulted in accidents. In 2017, for example, the USS Fitzgerald and the USS John S. McCain were involved in collisions. Both captains were fired as was the three-star admiral commanding the 7th Fleet to which both ships were assigned. Senior authorities had lost confidence in their ability to command.

Captain Crozier’s offense was of a different order. Soon after a show-the-flag port call at Da Nang, Vietnam, undertaken at the Pentagon’s direction, members of his crew had tested positive for COVID-19. Crozier reacted as the Trump administration, not to mention various slow-on-the-switch governors and mayors, should have: He saw the onset of the Coronavirus as posing a lethal threat to the Roosevelt’s entire crew of several thousand sailors. 

So he sounded the alarm, sending a letter to 19 senior military officials. The gist of that letter was a recommendation to disembark and isolate the Roosevelt’s crew, treating those infected and subjecting the entire ship to a thorough cleaning to eliminate the virus. “We are not at war,” Crozier wrote. “Sailors do not need to die. If we do not act now, we are failing to properly take care of our most trusted asset—our Sailors.” While the ship’s operational readiness would momentarily suffer, Crozier was intent on ensuring that none of the men and women under his command would “perish as a result of this pandemic unnecessarily.”

 

Read more:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/captain-crozier-was-rig...

 

 

Read from top

he then fired himself...

The acting secretary of the US Navy has resigned amid uproar over his handling of a coronavirus outbreak on an aircraft carrier.

Thomas Modly fired the USS Theodore Roosevelt's captain after he pleaded for help in a letter leaked to media.

Mr Modly apologised on Monday after it emerged he had called Captain Brett Crozier's actions "naive" and "stupid". 

The secretary's exit comes a day after US President Donald Trump signalled he might get involved in the dispute.

Army Undersecretary James McPherson is expected to replace Mr Modly.

Capt Crozier was fired last week, and footage of his crew sending him off the warship with applause went viral.

 

Read more:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52209105

 

 

Read from top.

trump has the last word...

President Trump said Tuesday that acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly didn’t have to resign for giving a profane speech justifying his firing of USS Theodore Roosevelt commander Capt. Brett Crozier, but Trump said he hopes it will end the controversy.

Crozier warned last week that COVID-19 was spreading among his 5,000-man crew. Modly removed him from command, telling his former crewhe was “too naive or too stupid” if he believed the email would not leak.

“The whole thing was very unfortunate,” Trump said at a press conference Tuesday night.

“The captain should not have written a letter, he didn’t have to be Ernest Hemingway. He made a mistake but he had a bad day,” Trump said.

He added on Modly’s resignation: “I had heard he did because he didn’t want to cause any disturbance for our country…  because he wouldn’t have had to resign, I would not have asked him. I don’t know him. I didn’t speak to him, but he did that I think just to end that problem. And I think in really many ways that was a very unselfish thing for him to do.”

Trump offered Monday to mediate between Modly and Crozier. On Tuesday, Modly resigned after meeting with Defense Secretary Mark Esper, according to reports.

 

Read more:

https://nypost.com/2020/04/07/trump-says-he-wouldnt-have-asked-navy-sec-...

 

Read from top.

mchale's mc-covid navy...

The Pentagon “failed to adequately respond” to the COVID-19 pandemic, charged ten Democratic lawmakers in a letter sent to the Pentagon Monday. The lawmakers say “lack of clear guidance” from Defense Secretary Mark Esper has put service members at risk because there has not been a clear coronavirus policy across the Defense Department.

The Trump administration decided in April to send the largest U.S. fleet ever to the Southern hemisphere to interdict “corrupt actors” in the Carribean, which led to the destroyer USS Kidd turning back for San Diego after reporting 47 cases of COVID-19. Last week, Fort Rucker had 100 percent of its nearly 2,000 soldiers wait nearly 10 hours for a drug test. As soldiers waited until nearly 2 a.m. for the test, they began to bring out couches and order pizza, in clear violation of social distancing. Post officials justified their decision to conduct a 100 percent urinalysis because they also had a test  “back in January” i.e. before COVID-19 hit U.S. shores. As it stands, the Army may have held the largest gathering in America during the pandemic.

There are plenty of examples like these to fuel the accusation that Esper’s response to the pandemic placed political considerations ahead of service members health. The Senators’ letter specifically focuses on other cases.

The Senators write that Esper placed politics above the health of the military forces and their families when he urged overseas commanders to not “make any decisions… that might surprise the White House or run afoul of President Trump’s messaging on the growing health challenge.”

There was no force-wide protocol because Esper delegated decision-making on how to address the pandemic to individual commanders of units, installations and vessels, which led to confusing and contradictory responses. While U.S. Forces in Korea acted quickly to contain the spread of the virus,  Navy commanders allowed the carrier Theodore Roosevelt to visit Vietnam, which resulted in more than 840 cases of COVID-19 on the vessel.

“Although local commanders know their units and operating environments better than anyone in the Pentagon, they are not public health experts,” the senators wrote. “They are now left to make decisions they should never have to make.”

Read more:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/state-of-the-union/army-may-have...

 

 

Read from top.