.jpg)
The US Navy is making a big deal of the fact that French Rafales and Navy Super Hornets operated from each others carriers recently.
Simple question. To what purpose? Can you imagine that a French carrier involved in combat operations are going to embark a US Navy Fighter Squadron? How about a US carrier embarking a French Squadron?
Its a freaking show.
But the Navy aren't the only ones involved in silly publicity stunts made to impress the uninformed.
Take the Army and Marine Corps doing "partnership" missions.
I cringe at the thought of how many future enemies are being taught US tactics by our people. Have you wondered how the bad guys in Iraq, Afghanistan (even Hezbollah against Israel) are able to pull off more and more complex attacks against our forces? I'd wager that it has to do with us teaching them how its done.
I'm not impressed.
How many US enemies have been taught by US to operate US drones, US thermal optics, US M1 Abramses, US carriers, US airplanes -- i am not impressed.
ReplyDeleteya know, i was really trying to be a bit more civil when replying to people this year but you killed that vibe.
Deleteready?
ARE YOU A FUCKING IDIOT YOU STUPID PIECE OF SHIT? KEEP UP WITH THE CLASS YOU SORRY SHIT FOR BRAINS. I'M TALKING ABOUT INFANTRY MOTHERFUCKING TACTICS YOU DICK SUCKING SON OF A BITCH.
JUST GO. DON'T RETURN TILL I SEND A MUTT AFTER YOUR PITIFUL, IDIOTIC ASS.
DISMISSED BITCH.
Iran ,Iraq ,Fatah,Egipt?,Pakistan? ,Vietnam,Afghanistan........these are just a couple i can think of on top of my head but list goes on and is quite long and you have to know if any of the middle east tyrants fall they are amerd and trained by US and will be next enemy.
DeleteIf you trace back the linage of Hezbollah, it was created by the IIRG, who came out of the ashes of the Shah’s Iranian Army that had some training from the USA SF that culled by the mullah’s for TTPs, then purged for religious and political loyalty.
ReplyDeletei'm just not understanding how the Pentagon and State Dept see every internal security problem as another training mission for the host nations armed forces.
Deletejust a few years ago Iraqi Special Ops was being lauded as looking like US Special Ops, acting and working like our Special Ops. now they have a rebellion going on in Fallujah and whats the answer?
not telling the govt that they might want or need to share power but instead the Iraqi's need more military training which we'll be doing in Jordan!
i just don't get it!!!
I have wondered about it too Sol especially infantry skills. Every from basic PA to ambush tactics. Some of that is common to all armed forces, but there is no reason to hand opfor (well potential) the play book. Look at how many recent deaths there have been in the Sandbox because friends are within our lines.
ReplyDeleteAs for cross decking aircraft yes and no. If F35b flies then cross-decking between RN and USMC would be advantage; it worked with USMC Harrier squadrons working off our Invincible class. In a big bunfight there would be some advantage to USMC moving F35b to our CVF to free LHx deck and hangar space for helicopters. Didn't really buy into the idea the UK not being able to cross deck with the French either. In an unlikely Europe only op with CVF and CdeG present it wouldn't be much of a problem. The important thing is there would be two carriers present.
One final thought. If a foreign pilot cocks up and takes your carrier out of action for 12 months who is going to pay the bill?
yeah i've been looking at some of the small unit actions involving raids being conducted by Special Ops and Marines.
Deletethey don't often run into trouble but when they do its a major league fight. i'm talking about (from my chair) what appears to be almost conventional tactics being used by the enemy against our forces with a few twists for lack of heavy organic fires. i don't know but in some of those engagements we saw more than just tribal fighters. we saw advanced infantry skills being used against our guys.
as far as cross decking is concerned, i'll agree to disagree. you know what we should be doing more and more among true allies? training our ground forces to work together. the navies and air forces put on their shows but deconflicting battle spaces is a perishable skill set and even if you're just doing table tops at the Battalion (USMC) or Brigade (US Army) level with counterparts in Europe, Australia, Japan etc...and then enhanced work with the guys that go to war with us constantly...the UK, Australia, Poland, Netherlands, etc (no offence to any i left off)...
ReplyDeletebut forget a crash on a carrier. how do they figure out who pays for the gas and the food when we see these multi-national replenishment exercises at sea?
Look at NATO standardization... How often do allies share 5.56mm or 9mm ammo?
ReplyDeleteYou mean 5.56×45 mm NATO round ?
DeleteYes. Just saying that there is standardization around ammunition, but how often do allies swap ammo? Ever?
DeleteThe single French carrier sometimes breaks down.
ReplyDeleteInternational training can be a good thing for emergencies. An American plane can land on the French aircraft carrier if its own carrier is not able (accident, weather, ..) to receive it.
ReplyDeleteOh shit I am out of gas! Is another good reason.... Either way French to the US or US to France.
DeleteI believe the Harriers in the falklands used the hele decks of destroyers in some cases when weather caused the carriers to suspend flight operations just to wait and refuel. Had the UK used conventional carriers, maybe they'd lost more aircraft. (No I'm not getting into a catobar vs. vtol carrier debate).
DeleteSo having somewhere to bolt to when your own carrier cannot receive you is a good option (at least to refuel). Unlikely to be needed for US unless you lose lot of carriers.
As someone else put it, the entire flight from the french carrier can fit into the spare slots on a US carrier, so maybe the french carrier can act as a mid point between land and US carriers to increase ferry range - sitting well to the rear of the action :)
I think the worse is done by CIA, like training of taliban...
ReplyDeleteCross decking is usefull, where the only ally of us owning catobar carrier is france. Plus we never build a sistership so we need to train with us when the carrier is in maintenance.
I think also that ours armies are the best training center for criminal and terrorist. That's, i think, a known and accepted statistic problem.
Given our recent logistical support of French actions in Africa, is it that far off a mental jump? Perhaps a carrier already in the neighborhood, and, the US not wanting direct involvement?
ReplyDeleteIf we are seirous about our NATO allaince having an integreated force is not a bad thing.
ReplyDeleteProblem is, what is the point of inegrating if the 'allies' are using the US security Umbrella as a free ride rather than building respectable forces worth integrating with?
ANd honestly, rather than integrating with the US europeans need to integrate into an EU defense force with proper defence spending quotas for contributing nations. A dream that will probably never come true it seems.
The French Naval Air will severely benefit from cross decking. The size of their carrier is small that all of their air assets can fit well in an American carrier.
ReplyDeleteThe American carrier will also benefit their presence because the French Naval Air can plug gaps in numbers caused introduction of F-35 into the fleet. :D
Sorry. I couldn't help it. I just want to see Sol rant about how the F-35 will leave empty hangers in an aircraft carrier due to the cost to own and operate one. Or maybe because the F-35 will spend most of it's time in maintenance people should start calling it the Leningrad. Like the Soviet carrier which spends most of it's "operational" life in drydock because it leaked like a sieve.
Solomon, I'd like to disagree with you about the "partnership" mission for the Army and USMC. That wasn't a Big Army/Marine idea, that was SOCOM recognizing two things. 1, that they had more missions than they could support and 2, that many of those missions do not specifically require Special Operations Forces.
ReplyDeleteFor example, when training with a Paraguayan Military Police Company, should SOCOM send a 12 man team of Green Berets, or a group of instructors from the MP schoolhouse at Fort Leanordwood (which trains both Army and USMC personnel)? Or perchance the mechanized forces of Estonia have requested training, and we all know that SOCOM doesn't have a single Heavy Mech Infantryman or Tanker assigned to it specifically to be either a treadhead or a tanker.
So the "partnership" or "training engagement" skillset which Soldiers and Marines proved they could do time and time again in Iraq and Afghanistan (and if you can train Iraqis and Afghans you can train anyone) while freeing up SOCOM personnel to focus on partnering with foreign nation SOF units, it makes sense.
One of the reasons we haven't deployed the Regular Army or USMC to South America is that SOCOM has been operating in that area for decades. This keeps the relationship lines open, and originally it was an anti-communist exercise, but even things like sending US Army Reserve medical units and the USNS Comfort to provide medical care (and get real world training on providing medical conditions in a deployed environment) are a huge return on investment for gaining international good will.
So, think of "partnership" as a tool for advancing national interests. That is the role of the military after all, to provide a range of options along with diplomacy to achieve national strategic objectives.
Dear Solomon
ReplyDeletein theory cross decking, allows for aircraft when operating in task forces to be able to utilise the other nation's carrier... so that if something happens to their own there is a back up, perhaps not so advantageous for the USN as the FN, because in all likelihood there will be multiple USN carriers deployed, to a maximum of one FN vessel.
yours sincerely
Alexander