Navy's Top Admiral recommends reinstating Capt. Brett Crozier of USS Roosevelt

[Rigby5]

Who do you think I am going to listen to? The dismissed (acting) Sec. of the Navy? Or Capt. Crozier?

Clearly, solutions were not easy to find, or the Capt. would not have been fired for speaking out in trying to find them. Neglect is not a solution to the problem of a outbreak sweeping across this carrier. As far as to who leaked this letter to the Chronicle, it has never been confirmed that it was Crozier, to my knowledge. Apparently the only solution you could come up with was supporting Modley and dismissing the captain of this ship. If silencing the captain is your only solution, then you don't have one.

And I notice not a single suggestion as to what could have been done better. In fact, not a single condemnation of those on Guam and how they handled this, or any proof that those on board were being neglected.

And the simple fact is, this letter should never have been sent in a way where it could have been leaked. At a minimum, this should have been classified as "Secret", and never been sent in the open across unsecured lines. That alone has seen people put in jail.

This is how I look at it. I ignore all politics, that is irrelevant to the actual issue. Was the attention given to the crew the best that the Navy could do under the circumstances? Either it was, or it was not. And the lack of any apparent care over the treatment before or since this letter shows me that nobody gives a damn about that, they only care about the politics.

Nonsense.
There are dozens of solutions, and the situation was lethal.
Not only would everyone quickly gotten the virus on the ship, but there were no medical facilities to prevent any of the easily prevented deaths, with the use of ventilators at ANY port.
They would have been better off sent to land in China than to be condemned to death at sea.
And the proof there is a simple solution is that the ship finally did land at Guam and the crew disembarked.
They NOW are surviving.
And if not for Crozier, hundreds would likely be dead by now.

 

[Mushroom]

You have it totally backwards.
The facilities at Guam were built up in the 1970s, 1980's, and 1990's.
No facilities there were ever torn down.

And as always, you completely fabricate things and do not even bother to do any kind of research.

The Navy in 1995 announced the closure of its Ship Repair Facility, as part of the base closure and realignment process. The Navy leased it to the Guam Economic Development Authority, which in October 1997 subleased it to Guam Industrial Services.

Guam Ship Repair Facility Ownership Negotiations Fail - December 19, 2012

Check out this article from PIR

web.archive.org

That is what is known as a "reference". The shipyard was finally closed in 1997, victim of the 1995 BRAC, as I already said.

In July 1993, the BRAC Commission recommended that Agana Naval Air Station be closed. Operational functions were assumed by other Naval Air Stations in Hawaii and the continental United States. The base was closed on March 31, 1995.

Naval Air Station, Agana

www.globalsecurity.org

There, yet another reference.

And I can go on, but no, those facilities at Anderson are long gone. Do you really think the military would pay to maintain buildings built in the 1950's for decades after they did not have a purpose? In fact, one of the main reasons they left was the Clinton administration pushed to close and relocate as a way to save money as opposed to replacing buildings that were at the end of their lifespan.

But as usual, I expect you to just deny this, and claim once again you are right and nothing was closed, and buildings abandoned 25 years ago were left standing and maintained so they could be used.

But here, please feel free to take a look yourself. This is Andersen AFB today.

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

goo.gl

The scars where there used to be a lot of buildings are still visible. Large blocks of empty field, where there were once barracks and offices. Just look South of the runway. Hell, you can see the streets of at least 2 housing projects. The streets are still there, but the housing was all destroyed decades ago and never rebuilt.

No, there was no "build up" in the 1990s. The Cold War was over, we won. If you look at any military base from Okinawa to California, Texas to Alabama, you will see similar scars. Where Cold War era buildings (and entire bases) were removed. I can tell you have never served a day in the military, and do not know a damned thing about how it operates.

But yes, in a few rare occasions they did decide to leave buildings in place and "mothballed" for eventual reuse. Remember the uproar about Walter Reed, and the poor quality and mold? That was after less than 5 years of non-use. And you think that buildings 15 years later would be useable?

Just stop it, you are constantly embarrassing yourself.

 

[Mushroom]

And you also are wrong about hot racking.
US submarine crews always have and always will have shared bunks.
I assumed that the USS Roosevelt did as well since it had such a large crew, but it does not really matter.

Only the lowest 3 rankings on Fast Attack submarines. Those in the ranks of E-4 and above have their own racks. Boomers are large enough that they have not needed to do that for decades. In the FA subs, there are 94 racks for 135 sailors. So the lowest ranking 40 or so do share racks. But not the Petty Officers, not the Chiefs, and certainly not the Officers.

Hell, even in a FA boat the Officers still have their own kitchen and eating area.

And that last sentence really says it all. You constantly assume, and do not bother to do a single bit of research.

Sleeping space is in particularly short supply. In fact, Virginia-class submarines like the Missouri have fewer beds than sailors -- about 94 for the 135 crew. That requires what the crews not so affectionately call "hot-racking," where sailors share bunks and sleep in shifts.

Life aboard a U.S. submarine | CNN Politics

Sailing on a U.S. nuclear attack submarine is a trip into a cramped, timeless, windowless undersea world. My team and I got an exclusive trip on the USS Missouri during exercises in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Florida.

www.cnn.com

And I have "hot racked" myself. Each person has their own linen, and remove theirs then spray the mattress down with disinfectant when their sleep shift is over. But no, only a fraction of the crew does that, and only in one category of submarines.

 

[Rigby5]

You have it totally backwards.
The facilities at Guam were built up in the 1970s, 1980's, and 1990's.
No facilities there were ever torn down.

And as always, you completely fabricate things and do not even bother to do any kind of research.

The Navy in 1995 announced the closure of its Ship Repair Facility, as part of the base closure and realignment process. The Navy leased it to the Guam Economic Development Authority, which in October 1997 subleased it to Guam Industrial Services.

Guam Ship Repair Facility Ownership Negotiations Fail - December 19, 2012

Check out this article from PIR

web.archive.org

That is what is known as a "reference". The shipyard was finally closed in 1997, victim of the 1995 BRAC, as I already said.

In July 1993, the BRAC Commission recommended that Agana Naval Air Station be closed. Operational functions were assumed by other Naval Air Stations in Hawaii and the continental United States. The base was closed on March 31, 1995.

Naval Air Station, Agana

www.globalsecurity.org

There, yet another reference.

And I can go on, but no, those facilities at Anderson are long gone. Do you really think the military would pay to maintain buildings built in the 1950's for decades after they did not have a purpose? In fact, one of the main reasons they left was the Clinton administration pushed to close and relocate as a way to save money as opposed to replacing buildings that were at the end of their lifespan.

But as usual, I expect you to just deny this, and claim once again you are right and nothing was closed, and buildings abandoned 25 years ago were left standing and maintained so they could be used.

But here, please feel free to take a look yourself. This is Andersen AFB today.

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

goo.gl

The scars where there used to be a lot of buildings are still visible. Large blocks of empty field, where there were once barracks and offices. Just look South of the runway. Hell, you can see the streets of at least 2 housing projects. The streets are still there, but the housing was all destroyed decades ago and never rebuilt.

No, there was no "build up" in the 1990s. The Cold War was over, we won. If you look at any military base from Okinawa to California, Texas to Alabama, you will see similar scars. Where Cold War era buildings (and entire bases) were removed. I can tell you have never served a day in the military, and do not know a damned thing about how it operates.

But yes, in a few rare occasions they did decide to leave buildings in place and "mothballed" for eventual reuse. Remember the uproar about Walter Reed, and the poor quality and mold? That was after less than 5 years of non-use. And you think that buildings 15 years later would be useable?

Just stop it, you are constantly embarrassing yourself.

I am beginning to doubt your rationality.

There not only are 12 open US bases in Guam, with about 7000 people in total, but the bases that are closed have been retained.
Even your own map of the Anderson Air Force base shows more than ample hanger space to house 4,000 sailors from the USS Roosevelt.

But Guam's total population is 160,000, so they would have more than sufficient civilian accommodations to handle this tiny Roosevelt population.

Nor did the Pacific ever have anything to do with the Cold War.
The Russians and Chinese never had a navy capable of projecting power in the Pacific.
The Pacific was always about oil, minerals, tropical produce, lumber, labor, markets, etc.

 

[Rigby5]

And you also are wrong about hot racking.
US submarine crews always have and always will have shared bunks.
I assumed that the USS Roosevelt did as well since it had such a large crew, but it does not really matter.

Only the lowest 3 rankings on Fast Attack submarines. Those in the ranks of E-4 and above have their own racks. Boomers are large enough that they have not needed to do that for decades. In the FA subs, there are 94 racks for 135 sailors. So the lowest ranking 40 or so do share racks. But not the Petty Officers, not the Chiefs, and certainly not the Officers.

Hell, even in a FA boat the Officers still have their own kitchen and eating area.

And that last sentence really says it all. You constantly assume, and do not bother to do a single bit of research.

Sleeping space is in particularly short supply. In fact, Virginia-class submarines like the Missouri have fewer beds than sailors -- about 94 for the 135 crew. That requires what the crews not so affectionately call "hot-racking," where sailors share bunks and sleep in shifts.

Life aboard a U.S. submarine | CNN Politics

Sailing on a U.S. nuclear attack submarine is a trip into a cramped, timeless, windowless undersea world. My team and I got an exclusive trip on the USS Missouri during exercises in the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Florida.

www.cnn.com

And I have "hot racked" myself. Each person has their own linen, and remove theirs then spray the matress down with disinfectant when their sleep shift is over. But no, only a fraction of the crew does that, and only in one category of submarines.

Again you make no sense.
The point is that life is way too crowded on a carrier, for social distancing.
What I read says ALL submarines have always hot-racked most of the crew.
But the point is that any Navy ship at sea is going to be unhealthy for an epidemic, and should be evacuated.
Anyone who does not get that is incompetent.
Clearly some people above Cozier need to be fired, and he needs to be promoted.

Nothing you write is relevant to the subject at hand.

 

[Mushroom]

Nor did the Pacific ever have anything to do with the Cold War.
The Russians and Chinese never had a navy capable of projecting power in the Pacific.
The Pacific was always about oil, minerals, tropical produce, lumber, labor, markets, etc.

Oh wow, you are so absolutely wrong there. The Pacific was a major part of the Cold War.

Did you think it was by accident? Almost all of the bombers that were used in Korea and Vietnam came from Guam. It was the home of 3 entire B-52 bomber wings, and they were either in the air or ready to go at all times. Okinawa was the major "holding pen" for Marines in that region, hosting an entire Division and Air Wing full of forces at all time. It also housed recon elements, refueling and support elements, and fighter aircraft that could be used on their own, or to escort the heavy bombers from Guam.

Hell, the amount of forces we used to keep in the region is impressive, and even more so when you consider that most of it is no longer there. The BUFFs are largely gone, as are a great many things we used to operate out there. Victim of the end of the Cold War, and decreased military funding to maintain them.

You see, then we come once again to where you contradict yourself. You have been talking about all these facilities you seem to think are still there, facilities for thousands of people who are no longer there. Then you turn right around and claim it had nothing to do with the Cold War. Well bubba, you can not have it both ways.

And even more amazingly, I provide references to 2 specific bases that are no longer there, and you claim they are. Bases closed for over 20 years, that you insist are still open.

And you are right, they never really projected their power into the Pacific (well, other than all those Soviet bombers and submarines). The way the Soviets projected power back then was through submarines and bombers. That is why we had the SR-71 flying out of Kadena almost all the time, mostly watching Vladivostok. The home for their Battlecruisers, Heavy Missile Cruisers, as well as their SSN and SSBN subs.

I can only assume that you know absolutely nothing about the Cold War.

I spent quite a bit of time in the Pacific during the Cold War. And as always, you simply make everything up as you go along, most of it wrong.

I have finally realized, having any conversation with you is absolutely pointless. You will reference nothing, ignore any reference, and still insist you are correct no matter what overwhelming evidence is presented. Even still trying to still claim that we never closed any bases in Guam.

Goodbye.

 

[Rigby5]

Nor did the Pacific ever have anything to do with the Cold War.
The Russians and Chinese never had a navy capable of projecting power in the Pacific.
The Pacific was always about oil, minerals, tropical produce, lumber, labor, markets, etc.

Oh wow, you are so absolutely wrong there. The Pacific was a major part of the Cold War.

Did you think it was by accident? Almost all of the bombers that were used in Korea and Vietnam came from Guam. It was the home of 3 entire B-52 bomber wings, and they were either in the air or ready to go at all times. Okinawa was the major "holding pen" for Marines in that region, hosting an entire Division and Air Wing full of forces at all time. It also housed recon elements, refueling and support elements, and fighter aircraft that could be used on their own, or to escort the heavy bombers from Guam.

Hell, the amount of forces we used to keep in the region is impressive, and even more so when you consider that most of it is no longer there. The BUFFs are largely gone, as are a great many things we used to operate out there. Victim of the end of the Cold War, and decreased military funding to maintain them.

You see, then we come once again to where you contradict yourself. You have been talking about all these facilities you seem to think are still there, facilities for thousands of people who are no longer there. Then you turn right around and claim it had nothing to do with the Cold War. Well bubba, you can not have it both ways.

And even more amazingly, I provide references to 2 specific bases that are no longer there, and you claim they are. Bases closed for over 20 years, that you insist are still open.

And you are right, they never really projected their power into the Pacific (well, other than all those Soviet bombers and submarines). The way the Soviets projected power back then was through submarines and bombers. That is why we had the SR-71 flying out of Kadena almost all the time, mostly watching Vladivostok. The home for their Battlecruisers, Heavy Missile Cruisers, as well as their SSN and SSBN subs.

I can only assume that you know absolutely nothing about the Cold War.

I spent quite a bit of time in the Pacific during the Cold War. And as always, you simply make everything up as you go along, most of it wrong.

I have finally realized, having any conversation with you is absolutely pointless. You will reference nothing, ignore any reference, and still insist you are correct no matter what overwhelming evidence is presented. Even still trying to still claim that we never closed any bases in Guam.

Goodbye.

Wrong.
We started those Pacific bases like Guam, after the Spanish American war, so had nothing at all to do with the Cold War that we did not start until the 1950s.
We did not need bases in Guam during the Korean war or War in Vietnam because we could then use bases in Korea or Vietnam.

{...
There are said to be about 7,000 US troops on Guam with almost a third of the land controlled by the US military.
Most of the troops are sailors and air force personnel.
The Joint Region Marianas is a US military command combining the Anderson Air Force Base and the Naval Base Guam.
Anderson Air Force Base hosts B52 bombers and fighter jets.
Naval Base Guam is the home port for four nuclear-powered fast attack submarines and two submarine tenders.
In 2013, the army sent a missile defence system to Guam called Terminal High Altitude Area Defence or THAAD.
American military commanders have referred to the island as their "permanent aircraft carrier".
...}

Where is Guam and how many US troops are there?

Guam is a territory of the United States located in the western Pacific Ocean with American fighter jets and B52 bombers stationed there.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Overtime Paycheck]

You can only hope there's no politics involved. If there are, then nothing we've seen on this show matters at all.