• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow

bhkad

bhkad

DP Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
10,742
Reaction score
1,753
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow




07:42 AM EST on Friday, January 9, 2009

NORFOLK – The aircraft carrier George H.W. Bush will be commissioned Saturday. The carrier was built in Newport News, but it will be commissioned at Naval Station Norfolk.

But whether it stays in Norfolk remains to be seen.

The Bush will get its big party Saturday morning. There will be a long list of V.I.P.s in attendance including the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and both presidents Bush.

Today, members of the media get a chance to see the ship, talk with some of the crew, and get video of the carrier.

However, the celebration is somewhat clouded because the future of the carrier is still up in the air.

Norfolk will be home at least for awhile, but Mayport, Florida could become its permanent home.

The Navy has said that spreading out the east coast fleet would improve security, but Virginia legislators disagree.They say Norfolk is the most logical spot, and have promised to fight tooth and nail to keep it here.

"There is no justification economically or strategically for it, so I think these facts are going to carry the day, they certainly should," said Senator Jim Webb of Virginia.

Even though the commissioning is tomorrow, the carrier isn't quite ready for action. It still has to go through sea trials and have minor work done.
Click to expand...

Commissioning of carrier George H.W. Bush to be held tomorrow | TOP STORIES | WVEC.com | News for Hampton Roads, Virginia
 
The carrier in that picture is the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78). George H. W. Bush will be CVN-77:

Aircraft Carrier Photo Index: (CVN-77)

She will be the 10th and final Nimitz-class carrier. I wish her and her crew smooth sailing.
 
Only political morons think putting all our ships in one por tis a bright idea.
 
MrVicchio said:
Only political morons think putting all our ships in one por tis a bright idea.
Click to expand...

I agree. There are too many people in America these days who insist on making decisions about things they know nothing about.
 
I don't see how legislators think they have the right or the knowledge to override military command when it comes to placement of our forces.
 
jallman said:
I don't see how legislators think they have the right or the knowledge to override military command when it comes to placement of our forces.
Click to expand...

Conservative legislators didn't seem to have a problem criticizing Clinton and Kosovo, and I don't remember an over outcry from conservatives criticizing them.

Amazing that.
 
TheNextEra said:
Conservative legislators didn't seem to have a problem criticizing Clinton and Kosovo, and I don't remember an over outcry from conservatives criticizing them.

Amazing that.
Click to expand...

I don't recall anyone making this a partisan issue up until...well just now. Amazing that.
 
jallman said:
I don't recall anyone making this a partisan issue up until...well just now. Amazing that.
Click to expand...

Against this commissioning or against wars in general?

Either way I doubt conservatives would have a problem with the commissioning of a Richard Nixon Either. Both were just as bad.
 
TheNextEra said:
Against this commissioning or against wars in general?
Click to expand...

Against the idea of legislators trying to override military command when it comes to strategic placement of our military assets.
 
jallman said:
Against the idea of legislators trying to override military command when it comes to strategic placement of our military assets.
Click to expand...

Well then where was your outrage when conservatives were against Clinton and the Kosovo conflict.

Shall I provide quotes for you or will you just dismiss them?
 
TheNextEra said:
Well then where was your outrage when conservatives were against Clinton and the Kosovo conflict.

Shall I provide quotes for you or will you just dismiss them?
Click to expand...

Somewhat interesting subject, TNE. Maybe you would get some hits if you came up with a provocative thread title and started a new thread.

Otherwise...

:eek:t
 
TheNextEra said:
Well then where was your outrage when conservatives were against Clinton and the Kosovo conflict.

Shall I provide quotes for you or will you just dismiss them?
Click to expand...

Dissenting against our involvement in a conflict does not translate to overriding military command in the strategic placement of our military assets.
 
bhkad said:
Somewhat interesting subject, TNE. Maybe you would get some hits if you came up with a provocative thread title and started a new thread.

Otherwise...

:eek:t
Click to expand...

I see you deny nothing, and only prove what I say is true. Thank you for that.

You only object to those against Bush's war but not Clinton's. Thank you.
 
jallman said:
Dissenting against our involvement in a conflict does not translate to overriding military command in the strategic placement of our military assets.
Click to expand...

Funny those conservatives against Clinton's conflict in Kosovo did exactly that. Unlesss you can show us where Bush didn't get ANY of what he was asking for the war?

Imagine that.
 
TheNextEra said:
I see you deny nothing, and only prove what I say is true. Thank you for that.

You only object to those against Bush's war but not Clinton's. Thank you.
Click to expand...

No...you came in here blathering about something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
 
jallman said:
No...you came in here blathering about something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Click to expand...

Yeah Kosovo is irrelevant, but Iraq war was. Imagine that.

Only from a conservative folks.
 
TheNextEra said:
Yeah Kosovo is irrelevant, but Iraq war was. Imagine that.

Only from a conservative folks.
Click to expand...

You brought up both the Iraq war AND Kosovo...both of which were irrelevant to the actual topic.
 
jallman said:
You brought up both the Iraq war AND Kosovo...both of which were irrelevant to the actual topic.
Click to expand...

Yeah because the commissioning of a carrier for Bush is Bull****. That was the point, sorry you couldn't see it.

Conservatives supported Bush's war, but not Kosovo, and Bush gets a carrier commissioned for it.

Why don't you conservatives stand in line to suck the knob of Bush while you're at it.
 
TheNextEra said:
You brought up both the Iraq war AND Kosovo...both of which were irrelevant to the actual topic.[/QUOTE

Yeah because the commissioning of a carrier for Bush is Bull****. That was the point, sorry you couldn't see it.
Click to expand...

Yep, you were clear as mud. But still totally off topic.
 
TheNextEra said:
jallman said:
You brought up both the Iraq war AND Kosovo...both of which were irrelevant to the actual topic.[/QUOTE

Yeah because the commissioning of a carrier for Bush is Bull****. That was the point, sorry you couldn't see it.
Click to expand...

Oh, a crazed Bush hater post... our bad, we missed the frothing at the mouth and general over all rage. This is for Bush's Dad, not W. Maybe that will ease your pain.
Click to expand...
 
MrVicchio said:
Only political morons think putting all our ships in one port is a bright idea.
Click to expand...

Huh?

Having the same home port as many other ships isn't what you think it is. For the vast majority of the time, US naval assets are not in dock. Furthermore, many US ships go to a relatively few docks for major overhauls. We frankly don't have many ports that can handle carrier refits. So this problem exists whether or not a ship is home ported in a busy port.

So while the Navy is correct about security in some regards, their proposal would increase costs. Instead of providing security for a large number of centralized berths, we'd have to spend far more to secure a large number of berths spread out. Given how little time ships spend in port anyways relative to their operational lifetimes, it doesn't seem cost effective.

Mayport Florida can't even do an overhaul and that is primarily where a carrier sits in dock for a long period of time.
 
MrVicchio said:
Oh, a crazed Bush hater post... our bad, we missed the frothing at the mouth and general over all rage. This is for Bush's Dad, not W. Maybe that will ease your pain.
Click to expand...

Oh, it won't Trust me...we've seen this pathology before and it is almost incurable at this stage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom