Sunday 15th of September 2019

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:

Please read also:


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:


"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:



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

See also:

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:


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

Anoosha Boralessa


Read more:



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:



Read from top.