Tidal Fish Forum banner

1 - 15 of 15 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I figured I'd share this with those of you who don't get out much.

The USS Reagan.



When the Bridge pipes 'Man the Rail' there is a lot of rail to man on this monster: shoulder to shoulder, around 4.5 acres. Her displacement is about 100,000 tons.

Capability
Top speed exceeds 30 knots, powered by two nuclear reactors that can operate for more than 20 years without refueling

1. Expected to operate in the fleet for about 50 years

2. Carries over 80 combat aircraft

3. Three arresting cables can stop a 28-ton aircraft going 150 miles per hour in less than 400 feet

Size

1. Towers 20 stories above the waterline

2. 1092 feet long; nearly as long as the Empire State Building is tall

3. Flight deck covers 4.5 acres

4. 4 bronze propellers, each 21 feet across, weighing 66,200 pounds

5. 2 rudders, each 29 by 22 feet and weighing 50 tons

6. 4 high speed aircraft elevators, each over 4,000 square feet

Capacity

1. Home to about 6,000 Navy personnel

2. Carries enough food and supplies to operate for 90 days

3. 18,150 meals served daily;

4. Distillation plants provide 400,000 gallons of fresh water from sea water daily, enough for 2,000 homes

5. Nearly 30,000 light fixtures and 1,325 miles of cable and wiring 1,400 telephones

6. 14,000 pillowcases and 28,000 sheets

7. Costs the Navy approximately $250,000 per day for pier side operation

8. Costs the Navy approximately $25 million per day for underway operations (Sailor's salaries included).

The USS Bill Clinton



The ship is the first of its kind in the Navy and is a standing legacy to President Bill Clinton 'for his foresight in military budget cuts' and his conduct while holding the (formerly dignified) office of President.

The ship is constructed nearly entirely from recycled aluminum and is completely solar powered with a top speed of 5 knots.
It boasts an arsenal comprised of one (unarmed) F14 Tomcat or one (unarmed) F18 Hornet aircraft which, although they cannot be launched on the 100 foot flight deck, form a very menacing presence.

As a standing order there are no firearms allowed on board.

This crew, like the crew aboard the USS Jimmy Carter, is specially trained to avoid conflicts and appease any and all enemies of the United States at all costs.

An onboard Type One DNC Universal Translator can send out messages of apology in any language to anyone who may find America offensive. The number of apologies are limitless and though some may seem hollow and disingenuous, the Navy advises all apologies will sound very sincere.

The ship's purpose is not defined so much as a unit of national defense, but instead in times of conflict, the USS Clinton
has orders to seek refuge in Canada
The ship may be positioned near the Democratic National Party Headquarters for photo-ops. The Clin-toonsShould be very proud.

The USS Barack Obama



No specs at this time...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,432 Posts
Cute, but did you know?

September 30, 1993
A plan to revitalize American shipbuilding was announced today by the Clinton Administration. It calls
for up to $3 billion in loan guarantees for ship construction, reviving an
existing program; seeking the elimination of foreign shipbuilding subsidies through negotiations;
regulatory reform to reduce burdens on shipyards and suppliers, and
helping American companies to get foreign orders through better marketing and promotion. In addition,
the Pentagon will award $220 million over five years f...

August 3, 1994
President Clinton announced nearly $1 billion in shipbuilding contracts today, holding them up as the
products of a Government effort to assist the struggling maritime
industry. The President said the efforts to revitalize the shipbuilding industry were part of a broader
campaign to help military-related industries that are facing cutbacks with
the end of the cold war.

September 30, 1994
Tenneco Inc. said that its shipbuilding unit's backlog would increase by $3 billion as a result of
Congressional approval of funds for an aircraft carrier. (USS REAGAN) The
$4.4 billion CVN-76 aircraft carrier was part of the $244 billion fiscal 1995 defense appropriations
budget approved by Congress yesterday. President Clinton is expected to
sign the bill today. The budget provided $2.3 billion for the Tenneco carrier, about $100 million less
than requested. The company said another $1.2 billion was author...

Feb 3, 1995.
In a tribute to two former Presidents, President Clinton today approved the naming of two nuclear-powered
aircraft carriers after Ronald Reagan and Harry S. Truman. "Once
again, the names Truman and Reagan will lend themselves in pursuit of our national security in an
effort to secure the peace they won during the cold war," Mr. Clinton said.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
139 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Very interesting. How bout this.

BILL CLINTON IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR 911.

"The results of a special investigation - examined how a nation and an administration, through a combination of inactivity and massive failure in the intelligence community, were asleep at the switch during the Clinton years. And how, without warning, those seeds of terror reaped a bitter harvest on America's second and even bloodier day of infamy, September 11."

---

"It's the economy, stupid," was the buzzword that many pundits acknowledge catapulted Bill Clinton into the White House in 1992. During the Clinton years, the deficit plunged and the stock market soared. It was a time of peace and prosperity in America with the Monica Lewinsky affair providing a comic sideshow along the fodder for late-night TV Hosts. But while the economy roared and the latest Monica jokes made the rounds, the seeds of terror were blossoming around the globe. In 1993, Americans were horrified to see the bloodied corpse of a U.S. serviceman dragged through the streets of Mogadishu by a mob of rabid Somalis.

Then came 1998 and the lethal bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa. Still, the administration did little but lob off a few cruise missiles now and again. And the seeds of terror kept growing. The results of a special investigation - examined how a nation and an administration, through a combination of inactivity and massive failure in the intelligence community, were asleep at the switch during the Clinton years. And how, without warning, those seeds of terror reaped a bitter harvest on America's second and even bloodier day of infamy, September 11.

The Clinton administration repeatedly mishandled major opportunities to kill or capture super-terrorist Osama bin Laden, the man who declared war on America. On at least two occasions, foreign governments actually offered to hand him over on a silver platter - but the Clinton White House refused to accept him.

At several other junctures, a 60-man unit of specially trained commandos had accurate information on bin Laden's where-abouts and were eager to attack him - but the President never gave them the final go-ahead.

These are among the stunning revelations of a special probe of secret files on the events leading up to the terrible tragedy of September 11th.

Kept by key operatives in the U.S. war on terror, the files produce a chilling picture of top government officials so blinded by arrogance, self-interest and indecision that bin Laden was free to carry out his murderous schemes despite being clearly marked as a dangerous international killer.

"Osama bin Laden declared war on the United States many years ago, but unfortunately he wasn't take seriously by U.S. officials," Yossef Bodansky, director of the U.S. House of Representatives Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, told the special investigators.

"It took a horrible tragedy, a horrible attack on American soil, for the nation and its leaders to see what has to be done," said Bodansky who is the author of the best-selling book "bin Laden: The Man who Declared War on America."

The shocking lapses of the Clinton administration's policy toward bin Laden can be most clearly seen in three separate incidents.

In 1996, when bin Laden was living in Sudan, the Sudanese government offered to extradite him to the U.S. or allow U.S. forces to seize him there. But the Clinton White House failed to accept the offer, believing there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute bin Laden.

In 2000, while bin Laden was hiding in Afghanistan, an Arab official made a back-channel offer to produce the wanted terrorist en exchange for the U.S. setting up an Afghanistan relief fund. Again, after a series of diplomatic gaffes, the Clinton administration declined.

Throughout the late 1990's, a secret Special Forces team was prepared to attack and kill bin Laden and often had accurate information on his whereabouts. Nevertheless, Clinton never gave the group a go-ahead, choosing instead to launch a botched attack with unmanned cruise missiles.

The 1996 incident took place while bin Laden was living in Sudan, having bought his way into the country with his personal millions. Meanwhile, the Sudanese government came under intense pressure from the U.S. "Sudan's President Omar alBashir was eager to end U.S, sanctions against his country for harboring terrorist and I persuaded him to offer to arrest and deport bin Laden," Mansoor Ijaz, chairman of a New York investment firm told the investigators in a exclusive interview.

It took me months to persuade al-Bashir to make the offer - but Clinton rejected it almost immediately because the administration didn't believe it had enough evidence to prosecute bin Laden effectively and would thus create an embarrassing international incident if he was released.

"I still believe that was one of the biggest mistakes Clinton ever made!"

Again in July 2000, Ijaz approached the Clinton White House with a plan to get bin Laden into U.S. custody.

"A friend who was the head of counter terrorism for an Arab state called me with a plan to get bin Laden out of Afghanistan and I passed it along to Clinton and his people," Ijaz told the investigators.

The scheme involved stetting up an Islamic relief fund to aid Afghanistan in return for the Taliban quietly handing over bin Laden to the Arab country, where U.S. forces could apprehend him.

But again Clinton balked and sent an envoy to ask the rulers of the nation involved, the United Arab Emirates, about the plan. This front-door approach embarrassed the rulers of the Emirate and scuttled the delicate operation.

"These guys in Washington were completely asleep at the switch," Ijaz told the investigators. "I feel that their policies actually helped fuel the rise of bin Laden from an ordinary man to a very powerful figure. When the horror of September 11 took place, I thought, "My God, this is the result!"

Clinton himself at a dinner in New York recently confessed his failure to respond to Sudan's initiative as "the biggest mistake of my presidency."

In the late 1990's, Clinton signed a secret order authorizing the use of deadly force against bin Laden and an elite Delta Force unit of more that 60 men was specially trained to attack him.

On several occasions in 1998, 1999, and 2000, the force had reliable eyewitness or satellite information about bin Laden's whereabouts and was ready to move into Afghanistan to go after him

However, unwilling to risk American lives, President Clinton never gave them the order.

"We were ready to move," said a former Army Special Forces officer who helped draw up plans in 1998. "We failed to receive an execute order from the President. The only way you can do something like this is to put people on the ground, and we were not allowed to do it because of this stubborn policy of risk avoidance."

"So out of concern for 60 Delta Force operators and SEALS who are ready and eager to perform the mission, we lose thousands of people in the World Trade Center. It is a disgrace!"

Eventually, President Clinton did try to take out bin Laden - but the result was an embarrassing failure that ended doing more good that harm to the terror master.

Instead of putting men on the ground to go after him, in 1998 Clinton responded to the U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania by ordering an attack of 66 Tomahawk cruise missiles on a bin Laden training camp in Afghanistan.

Unfortunately, bin Laden was not at the camp when the missiles hit, and the effort backfired.

"I think that raid really helped elevate bin Laden's reputation in a big way, building him up in the Muslim world," said Harlan Ullman, a Washington defense analyst.

"My sense is that because the attack was so limited and incompetent, we turned this guy into a folk hero."

Other experts believe Clinton's domestic political problems had much to do with these lapse in the war on terror.

"Clinton was pinned down by the whole impeachment and the Monica Lewinsky affair," Washington-based intelligence expert Jeffrey Steinberg told the special investigation. "Others in the administration were running the show. The Lewinsky issue took Clinton out of the equation from September 1998 when the scandal broke almost through to the end of 1999.

This is why Presidents shouldn't fool around while in the peoples White House. Any corporate official would be fired for such an activity. Why was not our president discharged forthwith?

Without understanding the full scope of the actual situation, the people of the world, and particularly this country, have no clue to what really caused this tragedy. Bill Clinton's blatant offensiveness, as a representative of the free world provoked the Muslims into attacking that which offends them so much... The decadence of the West. Do your homework, for with out it, your opinion means nothing.

Because of the above facts, I believe that Bill Clinton is fully responsible for the attacks on September 11th and the deaths of 3000+ people, including the cost to the taxpayers for the war on terrorism.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
184 Posts
Fascinating. I think it would be funny if you showed us your evidence for why Bill Clinton is responsible for all of the problems we face today. Why stop with terrorism? If you're gonna pass the buck do it right.
BILL CLINTON IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR 911.

"The results of a special investigation - examined how a nation and an administration, through a combination of inactivity and massive failure in the intelligence community, were asleep at the switch during the Clinton years. And how, without warning, those seeds of terror reaped a bitter harvest on America's second and even bloodier day of infamy, September 11."

---

"It's the economy, stupid," was the buzzword that many pundits acknowledge catapulted Bill Clinton into the White House in 1992. During the Clinton years, the deficit plunged and the stock market soared. It was a time of peace and prosperity in America with the Monica Lewinsky affair providing a comic sideshow along the fodder for late-night TV Hosts. But while the economy roared and the latest Monica jokes made the rounds, the seeds of terror were blossoming around the globe. In 1993, Americans were horrified to see the bloodied corpse of a U.S. serviceman dragged through the streets of Mogadishu by a mob of rabid Somalis.

Then came 1998 and the lethal bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa. Still, the administration did little but lob off a few cruise missiles now and again. And the seeds of terror kept growing. The results of a special investigation - examined how a nation and an administration, through a combination of inactivity and massive failure in the intelligence community, were asleep at the switch during the Clinton years. And how, without warning, those seeds of terror reaped a bitter harvest on America's second and even bloodier day of infamy, September 11.

The Clinton administration repeatedly mishandled major opportunities to kill or capture super-terrorist Osama bin Laden, the man who declared war on America. On at least two occasions, foreign governments actually offered to hand him over on a silver platter - but the Clinton White House refused to accept him.

At several other junctures, a 60-man unit of specially trained commandos had accurate information on bin Laden's where-abouts and were eager to attack him - but the President never gave them the final go-ahead.

These are among the stunning revelations of a special probe of secret files on the events leading up to the terrible tragedy of September 11th.

Kept by key operatives in the U.S. war on terror, the files produce a chilling picture of top government officials so blinded by arrogance, self-interest and indecision that bin Laden was free to carry out his murderous schemes despite being clearly marked as a dangerous international killer.

"Osama bin Laden declared war on the United States many years ago, but unfortunately he wasn't take seriously by U.S. officials," Yossef Bodansky, director of the U.S. House of Representatives Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, told the special investigators.

"It took a horrible tragedy, a horrible attack on American soil, for the nation and its leaders to see what has to be done," said Bodansky who is the author of the best-selling book "bin Laden: The Man who Declared War on America."

The shocking lapses of the Clinton administration's policy toward bin Laden can be most clearly seen in three separate incidents.

In 1996, when bin Laden was living in Sudan, the Sudanese government offered to extradite him to the U.S. or allow U.S. forces to seize him there. But the Clinton White House failed to accept the offer, believing there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute bin Laden.

In 2000, while bin Laden was hiding in Afghanistan, an Arab official made a back-channel offer to produce the wanted terrorist en exchange for the U.S. setting up an Afghanistan relief fund. Again, after a series of diplomatic gaffes, the Clinton administration declined.

Throughout the late 1990's, a secret Special Forces team was prepared to attack and kill bin Laden and often had accurate information on his whereabouts. Nevertheless, Clinton never gave the group a go-ahead, choosing instead to launch a botched attack with unmanned cruise missiles.

The 1996 incident took place while bin Laden was living in Sudan, having bought his way into the country with his personal millions. Meanwhile, the Sudanese government came under intense pressure from the U.S. "Sudan's President Omar alBashir was eager to end U.S, sanctions against his country for harboring terrorist and I persuaded him to offer to arrest and deport bin Laden," Mansoor Ijaz, chairman of a New York investment firm told the investigators in a exclusive interview.

It took me months to persuade al-Bashir to make the offer - but Clinton rejected it almost immediately because the administration didn't believe it had enough evidence to prosecute bin Laden effectively and would thus create an embarrassing international incident if he was released.

"I still believe that was one of the biggest mistakes Clinton ever made!"

Again in July 2000, Ijaz approached the Clinton White House with a plan to get bin Laden into U.S. custody.

"A friend who was the head of counter terrorism for an Arab state called me with a plan to get bin Laden out of Afghanistan and I passed it along to Clinton and his people," Ijaz told the investigators.

The scheme involved stetting up an Islamic relief fund to aid Afghanistan in return for the Taliban quietly handing over bin Laden to the Arab country, where U.S. forces could apprehend him.

But again Clinton balked and sent an envoy to ask the rulers of the nation involved, the United Arab Emirates, about the plan. This front-door approach embarrassed the rulers of the Emirate and scuttled the delicate operation.

"These guys in Washington were completely asleep at the switch," Ijaz told the investigators. "I feel that their policies actually helped fuel the rise of bin Laden from an ordinary man to a very powerful figure. When the horror of September 11 took place, I thought, "My God, this is the result!"

Clinton himself at a dinner in New York recently confessed his failure to respond to Sudan's initiative as "the biggest mistake of my presidency."

In the late 1990's, Clinton signed a secret order authorizing the use of deadly force against bin Laden and an elite Delta Force unit of more that 60 men was specially trained to attack him.

On several occasions in 1998, 1999, and 2000, the force had reliable eyewitness or satellite information about bin Laden's whereabouts and was ready to move into Afghanistan to go after him

However, unwilling to risk American lives, President Clinton never gave them the order.

"We were ready to move," said a former Army Special Forces officer who helped draw up plans in 1998. "We failed to receive an execute order from the President. The only way you can do something like this is to put people on the ground, and we were not allowed to do it because of this stubborn policy of risk avoidance."

"So out of concern for 60 Delta Force operators and SEALS who are ready and eager to perform the mission, we lose thousands of people in the World Trade Center. It is a disgrace!"

Eventually, President Clinton did try to take out bin Laden - but the result was an embarrassing failure that ended doing more good that harm to the terror master.

Instead of putting men on the ground to go after him, in 1998 Clinton responded to the U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania by ordering an attack of 66 Tomahawk cruise missiles on a bin Laden training camp in Afghanistan.

Unfortunately, bin Laden was not at the camp when the missiles hit, and the effort backfired.

"I think that raid really helped elevate bin Laden's reputation in a big way, building him up in the Muslim world," said Harlan Ullman, a Washington defense analyst.

"My sense is that because the attack was so limited and incompetent, we turned this guy into a folk hero."

Other experts believe Clinton's domestic political problems had much to do with these lapse in the war on terror.

"Clinton was pinned down by the whole impeachment and the Monica Lewinsky affair," Washington-based intelligence expert Jeffrey Steinberg told the special investigation. "Others in the administration were running the show. The Lewinsky issue took Clinton out of the equation from September 1998 when the scandal broke almost through to the end of 1999.

This is why Presidents shouldn't fool around while in the peoples White House. Any corporate official would be fired for such an activity. Why was not our president discharged forthwith?

Without understanding the full scope of the actual situation, the people of the world, and particularly this country, have no clue to what really caused this tragedy. Bill Clinton's blatant offensiveness, as a representative of the free world provoked the Muslims into attacking that which offends them so much... The decadence of the West. Do your homework, for with out it, your opinion means nothing.

Because of the above facts, I believe that Bill Clinton is fully responsible for the attacks on September 11th and the deaths of 3000+ people, including the cost to the taxpayers for the war on terrorism.
Who was it that made the Lewensky affair the spectacle it became? Who appointed a special investigator? Who was more interested in persuing a smear campaign over a presidential blow job than they were in doing legitimate government business? The Republicans are just as culpable.

I don't recall any republicans demanding a war on terrorism, invasion of Afghanistan, or even mentioning Osama by name before 9-11. Furthermore, George W. Bush was elected on the premise that he would not engage in interventionist policies. You can hold the Clinton administration accountable for as much as you like but if you don't hold the Republicans in power at the time and after equally accountable then you are showing how very ignorant you are. George W. Bush had an opportunity to pick up Clinton's slack when he took office so tell me what he did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,877 Posts
Fascinating. I think it would be funny if you showed us your evidence for why Bill Clinton is responsible for all of the problems we face today. Why stop with terrorism? If you're gonna pass the buck do it right.

Who was it that made the Lewensky affair the spectacle it became? Who appointed a special investigator? Who was more interested in persuing a smear campaign over a presidential blow job than they were in doing legitimate government business? The Republicans are just as culpable.

I don't recall any republicans demanding a war on terrorism, invasion of Afghanistan, or even mentioning Osama by name before 9-11. Furthermore, George W. Bush was elected on the premise that he would not engage in interventionist policies. You can hold the Clinton administration accountable for as much as you like but if you don't hold the Republicans in power at the time and after equally accountable then you are showing how very ignorant you are. George W. Bush had an opportunity to pick up Clinton's slack when he took office so tell me what he did.
Who was it that screwed their intern and lied about it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
633 Posts
It was Regan and George HW Bush that had plans for a 600 ship Navy and Bill Clinton killed that as soon as he got in office saying the cold war is over no need for 600 ships......

McCain Palin '08
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,541 Posts
It was Regan and George HW Bush that had plans for a 600 ship Navy and Bill Clinton killed that as soon as he got in office saying the cold war is over no need for 600 ships......

McCain Palin '08
Until you post some evidence, I call bull**** on your George H.W. Bush reference. He began the process of shrinking the military, with Cheney as the guiding hand.

Also, regarding the Nimitz-class ships like the Reagan, thank Jim Webb, who is soon to be the new Sec. Defense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,432 Posts
It was Regan and George HW Bush that had plans for a 600 ship Navy and Bill Clinton killed that as soon as he got in office saying the cold war is over no need for 600 ships......

McCain Palin '08
Not that you're the slightest bit interested in the truth, but plans for Reagan's 600 ship Navy started evaporating while he was still in office and were gone completely under George H. W. Bush.

"Eventually political pressure to reduce the national budget deficit resulted in Congress reversing itself and passing a series of declining defense budgets beginning in 1986. Weinberger clashed with Congress over the cuts, resigning in late 1987, and was succeeded by the more pragmatic Frank Carlucci.[2] Lehman's successor as Navy Secretary, James H. Webb, remained a fierce proponent of the expanded fleet, and disagreed with Carlucci over how to cut the Navy budget in line with other services. Webb resigned rather than endorse Carlucci's cut of 16 frigates".
WIKI
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
184 Posts
WTF do we need 600 ships for in the first place? Jesus H. Christ, you republicans are all too eager to fatten up defense contractors with pork. I suggest spending the rediculous amount of money on something useful or perhaps constructive like infrastructure, alternative energy, or education.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,995 Posts
WTF do we need 600 ships for in the first place? Jesus H. Christ, you republicans are all too eager to fatten up defense contractors with pork. I suggest spending the rediculous amount of money on something useful or perhaps constructive like infrastructure, alternative energy, or education.
They are all for spending your tax money on infrastructure, energy and education but in countries other then ours.:D
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top