Trump tells Duterte of 2 US nuclear submarines in Korean waters

[CaliCat 3,957]

5 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Not a story I started, and I am not perpetuating the Trump bashing.  

 

But keep trying.

 

 

Of course, anything that makes the current administration look bad is not a story. Typical. 

 

[Dashinka 26,238]

15 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

Of course, anything that makes the current administration look bad is not a story. Typical. 

 

If this was actually a story you might have a point.  Taking the obvious and raising it to the level of bashing is just lazy.

 

[CaliCat 3,957]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

If this was actually a story you might have a point.  Taking the obvious and raising it to the level of bashing is just lazy.

 

 

Well, when the obvious is that the so-called president is revealing information that might put our military in jeopardy, then you have a story.

 

 

[Dashinka 26,238]

5 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

Well, when the obvious is that the so-called president is revealing information that might put our military in jeopardy, then you have a story.

 

 

You do know that submarines move around in the ocean right?  And the oceans are really really big?

 

Edited May 25, 2017 by Bill & Katya

[CaliCat 3,957]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

You do know that submarines move around in the ocean right?  And the ocean is really really big?

 

 

Ocean? Singular?  LOL. 

[Dashinka 26,238]

1 minute ago, CaliCat said:

 

Ocean? Singular?  LOL. 

Thank you, I do hate poor grammar. 

 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

34 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

Well, when the obvious is that the so-called president is revealing information that might put our military in jeopardy, then you have a story.

 

 

There are nuclear subs in the Pacific is about as secret as there is water in the pacfic.

[CaliCat 3,957]

7 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

There are nuclear subs in the Pacific is about as secret as there is water in the pacfic.

 

But then, why have submarines at all? They are more expensive to maintain and run, and since everyone knows where they are, why have them at all?

 

Do they offer any advantage over surface vessels?

 

 

Edited May 25, 2017 by CaliCat

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 hour ago, CaliCat said:

 

But then, why have submarines at all? They are more expensive to maintain and run, and since everyone knows where they are, why have them at all?

 

Do they offer any advantage over surface vessels?

 

 

Get a  map the Pacific is really big. Stupid story about nothing.

 

Guess what . We have subs in the Atlantic. 

[Dashinka 26,238]

5 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Get a  map the Pacific is really big. Stupid story about nothing.

 

Guess what . We have subs in the Atlantic. 

 

1 hour ago, CaliCat said:

 

But then, why have submarines at all? They are more expensive to maintain and run, and since everyone knows where they are, why have them at all?

 

Do they offer any advantage over surface vessels?

 

 

Yes, let's get rid of all the submarines, Trump is stupid, the MDL should always be the elite political leaders, so they can regress us right into democratic socialism.

 

Let's see, I think that is worth at least two and maybe three Left Swigs right!

 

Edited May 25, 2017 by Bill & Katya

[CaliCat 3,957]

3 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Get a  map the Pacific is really big. Stupid story about nothing.

 

Guess what . We have subs in the Atlantic. 

 

I did, and yes, the Pacific ocean is huge. 

 

But do you have any idea why the US NAVY has submarines? They cost more to run and maintain, and according to you, everyone knows where they are, because we can locate the oceans in maps.

 

Why do you believe we have them then? Are there advantages in having submarines, when other surface vessels would be able to do the same job? 

 

Is there an operational and/or tactical differentiator that would justify having subs at all?

[Dashinka 26,238]

2 minutes ago, CaliCat said:

 

I did, and yes, the Pacific ocean is huge. 

 

But do you have any idea why the US NAVY has submarines? They cost more to run and maintain, and according to you, everyone knows where they are, because we can locate the oceans in maps.

 

Why do you believe we have them then? Are there advantages in having submarines, when other surface vessels would be able to do the same job? 

 

Is there an operational and/or tactical differentiator that would justify having subs at all?

Unless anyone gave anyone some form of transponder showing an exact location I think the subs are quite safe because we do equip them with means to move.

[CaliCat 3,957]

Just now, Bill & Katya said:

 

Yes, let's get rid of all the submarines, Trump is stupid, the MDL should always be the elite political leaders, so they can regress us right into democratic socialism.

 

Let's see, I think that is worth at least two and maybe three Left Swigs right!

 

 

I am not saying we should get rid of the subs. I am raising a point to another poster who said that everyone knows we have subs in the Pacific, and that everyone knows where the Pacific is, the implication being that when the so-called president disclosed the location of two of our nuclear subs, he did not disclose anything everyone already didn't know. 

 

So, rather than proposing we get rid of them, I'd say we should inquire as to the reasons the Navy keeps them. I am sure they must have a reason, otherwise we would not have subs, wouldn't you agree?

[CaliCat 3,957]

1 minute ago, Bill & Katya said:

Unless anyone gave anyone some form of transponder showing an exact location I think the subs are quite safe because we do equip them with means to move.

 

 

That is true of all our ships. What makes submarines special then? 

 

 

[Dashinka 26,238]

Just now, CaliCat said:

 

 

That is true of all our ships. What makes submarines special then? 

 

 

They can hide.