Chavez shows he's toy

[Guest Vlamik]

(blablabla) the US, who does not have a history of imperialism at all (blablabla)

 

Tell me that you were being ironic on this one...

[Silverbolt 104]

Wouldn't that make a scenario for a SF/WoV/WoE/WoI campaign???

[Silverbolt 104]

More.....

unfortunately this monster will not participate in out South america + France exercice :(

[t-stoff 0]

Then, how can anyone say with total sure that the venezuelan incident wasn't the exact same thing?

 

The KittyHawk interception

 

The Real Story of the USS Kitty Hawk Incident

Source: Military E-Mail

Published: 9 December 2000 Author: U.S. Navy F/A-18 Pilot

Posted on 12/13/2000 17:32:15 PST by Spook86

Note: The following is an eyewitness account of the recent Russian "buzzing" of the USS Kitty Hawk in the Sea of Japan. It was written by a U.S. Navy F/A-18 pilot who was on the carrier at the time of the incident. I received this via e-mail from a military colleague who, in turn, verified that it came from the Kitty Hawk. It makes for interesting reading, and provides a remarkable account of the absolute buffoonery that took place during the incident. Comments in brackets were added to clarify or explain military jargon

 

Flying **** : -Cruise was pretty easy and interesting: 54 days at sea, 40

traps [carrier landings], and 45 [flying] hours in the month of October

alone! Yes, we flew our asses off! Since I'm one of three department heads with all my quals I fly a lot. Here's an interesting story (this is a no

sh---er). I was on the bridge in line to drive the ship as there are a bunch

of O-5s and a few O-4s earning our "coming alongside" qual. It's a gay shoe boy ***** where you give commands to the helm and lee helm (that's the throttle, dude) and you're actually flying formation on the replenishment ship during UNREPS [underway replenishment ops]. You do this under the close supervision of the Captain of the ship and the CDO (command duty officer--an O-5, usually the navigator or assistant navigator).

 

Anyways, I'm sitting there bullsh-----g with my XO [executive officer] who is also getting his qual and we hear on the CO's squawk box a call from CIC (Combat Info Center). They said "sir, we're getting indications of Russian fighter activity." His response was "launch the alert fighters." Combat told him the highest alerts were Alert 30s [launch within 30 minutes of notification]. The Captain got p---ed and said "launch everything we've got ASAP." I ran to the navigator's phone and called the SDO [squadron duty officer]. Our squadron didn't have alert duty that day, bummer, so I told him to find out who did and get their ass moving up to the flight deck (only Alert 7s are actually sitting on the flight deck, ready to go; alert 30s means you are in the ready room).

 

Anyways, 40 minutes after the CO called away the alerts, a Russian SU-27 Flanker [air superiority fighter--similar to a U.S. F-15] and SU-24 [strike fighter, akin to an F-111] Fencer made a 500 knot, 200 foot pass directly over the tower of the Kitty Hawk...it was just like in Top Gun, shoes on the bridge spilled coffee and everyone said "H--y S---!. I looked at the Captain at this point and his face was red. He looked like he just walked in on his wife getting boned by a Marine. The Russian fighters made two more high speed, low altitude passes before we finally launched the first aircraft off the deck...a EA-6B Prowler [electronic warfare aircraft]. That's right...we launched a f-----g Prower and he ended up in a 1 versus 1 with the Flanker just in front of the ship. The Flanker was all over his ass (kind of like a bear batting around a little bunny right before he eats it). He was screaming for help when finally an [F/A-18] Hornet from our sister squadron (I use this term in the literal sense because they looked like a bunch of f-----g girls playing with the Russians) got off the deck and made the intercept. It was too late. The entire crew watched overhead as the Russians made a mockery of our feeble attempt to intercept them. The funny part of the story was the

Admiral and the CAG [Carrier Air Group Commander] were in their morning meeting in the war room and they were interrupted by the thundering roar of Russians buzzing the tower. A CAG staff dude told me they looked at each other and our airplan, noticed we didn't have any flights scheduled until a few hours later, and said "what was that?"

 

Four days later, the Russian intelligence agency e-mailed the CO of the Kitty Hawk and enclosed pictures they had taken of our dudes scrambling around the flight deck, frantically trying to get airborne. I'm quite sure the f-----g loser shoe boy [black shoe=ship driver/surface warfare officer] in charge of our battle group's air defense was fired. It's also ironic that the Admiral's change-of-command occurred just a few weeks prior to this incident. Anyways, the Russians tried to come out a few other times, and we were more than ready. I personally intercepted an IL-38 May [anti-submarine wargfare aircraft] and shoved my wingtip in front of his windscreen to prevent him from turning towards the ship (yeah, yeah we're friends now, blow me). In typical Navy Senior officer knee jerk fashion our entire airwing stood alerts around the clock as if WWIII was going to break out anytime. This story was plasteredall over Russian and Japanese newspapers yesterday. The Russians even awarded their aircrew medals for their achievement. What f-----g shame! I felt like I was on the Bad News Bears and we got our asses kicked, and I didn't even get off the bench to help the team.

 

Source: USNI Proceedings, January 2003 issue, page 66

[+76.IAP-Blackbird 3,545]

The commander should ask Scotty!!! Scotty we need a alarm start.. how long does it take??? Eh Captain, 30 mins... I gave you 20 mins ... Ok I will do it in 10!!!

[MigBuster 2,861]

The KittyHawk interception

 

Source: USNI Proceedings, January 2003 issue, page 66

 

Good story if true - be interesting to know why a Prowler was launched first though!

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

... that the US, who does not have a history of imperialism at all...

 

Not meaning to sound anti or anything, but I'm willing to bet good money that if you asked that question in Pueto Rico, The Virgin Islands, Columbia, Nicaragua, etc, they'd have something different to say about that. And that's not mentioning Native Americans or Hawaiians (remember, Hawaii was annexed in 1893). Not saying the US is imperialist now, its just that every nation has awkward or embarrassing periods in their history.

 

You know, I wonder if Hugo (as in Chavez, el presidente for life in Venezuela) has thought about the fact that the US, who does not have a history of imperialism at all, when backed into a corner where things are really hurting, will decide to resolve its oil shortage problem by just overrunning some oil-rich country. 21 days to Baghdad, couple of weeks to Caracas! We got the military power and whenever the US feels that survival is at stake, we will use it. Those who kid themselves by thinking the US would never do that are doing just that, kidding themselves. We can and we would. It would be a good idea not to be on the side pushing us into that corner. Right now gas is just more expensive, but if our economy starts to really fail and the US really starts to flounder.....Look out, Hugo!

 

If you're being serious (I mean, in a RL context), for one thing, The US or any hostile US government would never get away with it. Skipping the constitutional safeguards for the moment, the Media would be on the government's back is a massive way. More people would resist against your government - there would be some serious social anarchy as you would effectively be taking the same action against a nation that, historically speaking, your nation has traditionally strived fought against. You would become conquerors, taking what you want, when you want, by hostile force, to hell with the consequences. Not by political pressure (force?) or negotiating/dealing with other parties. I mean, look at the heat the US has taken over Iraq. If similar circumstances were to occur again, the resistance would be much more intense.

 

OK, you have the might and there would be some who'd have the political will, but undertaking that kind of behaviour would see the EU taking action unprecedented action (possibly even force) against the US, burning it's bridges in the process. South American nations, despite their differences and their distaste for Hugo, would be polarised against any action taken against a South American state (although what exactly they could do against a hostile US is debatable) as it would be rightfully seen as a grab for resources. This would produce a ripple effect around the world as resource rich nations would suddenly fear themselves as potential targets, particularly if they've had anything but the best relations with the US. Imagine what effect this would have on the oil producing nations of the Middle East and then what effect that would have on global tensions and markets! This would then see nations Russia and especially China become more inclined to guard there interests more actively, in China's case, I don't think it would be impossible to see them strike first if they felt threatened, especially if they felt that they could get away with it (ie, with little or not recourse).

 

And the worst thing to come out of this would be that every single faction who has a real or perceived grievance against the US would come out of the woodwork trying to establish themselves as political players, some filling power vacuums in politically weaker nations (think what would happen in Pakistan). Then there's the devastation fighting intensely on multiple fronts would reek on the US economy. Again, look at the effect the Iraq invasion had on global oil prices

 

Now, I'm not anti US, I don't agree with everything that the US does, but I much prefer having a US that leads the world believing in seeking peaceful solutions and (relative) equity for all (except for gingers, you just know they're up to no good! ) than some fundamentalist bastard running my nation by theocratic decree! ...well, technically, I'd prefer a resilient, strong, unbureaucratic UN that wasn't susceptible to being undermined by it's member nations, but yeah... that's gonna happen!

 

 

That said... the above scenario would make an awesome game!! :yes:

[+Jarhead1 27]

OK OK OK, back the truck up here a minute, Saywhat, are u implying that by doing what we did we were conquering it???? I DONT THINK SO, all we did was come to the aid of a foreign country and give them the help they needed and take out a bad regime that shouldnt have been in power anyway. AND DONT GET ME STARTED ON WMDs, if u saw wha i saw and had access too and a few others on this site, u wouldnt think we were so wrong in what we have done and that we are too harsh against Iraq.**Rant Mode Off**

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

OK OK OK, back the truck up here a minute, Saywhat, are u implying that by doing what we did we were conquering it????

 

Awwww... crap. I jumped the gun. I misread what Jug had said, thinking he was implying the US could do that, but it's better not to. Sheeeeet! When he said:

 

"Those who kid themselves by thinking the US would never do that (taking Chavez out) are doing just that, kidding themselves."

 

 

I thought it sounded too Tom Clancy meets 1984. I honestly don't think the US would just start taking on resource rich countries in the future because it was desperate for energy resources; and I wasn't trying to link Iraq with that statement. I was only talking about the Jug's context of the US taking out Chavez if the US was desperate for oil/resources/whatever, Chavez in particular because he makes a big deal about the US being the "great evil".

[+Jarhead1 27]

Awwww... crap. I jumped the gun. I misread what Jug had said, thinking he was implying the US could do that, but it's better not to. Sheeeeet! When he said:

 

"Those who kid themselves by thinking the US would never do that (taking Chavez out) are doing just that, kidding themselves."

 

 

I thought it sounded too Tom Clancy meets 1984. I honestly don't think the US would just start taking on resource rich countries in the future because it was desperate for energy resources; and I wasn't trying to link Iraq with that statement. I was only talking about the Jug's context of the US taking out Chavez if the US was desperate for oil/resources/whatever, Chavez in particular because he makes a big deal about the US being the "great evil".

 

 

My bad dude, I got pissed too easy and didnt think before I spoke, I am sorry.

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

My bad dude, I got pissed too easy and didnt think before I spoke, I am sorry.

 

S'all good baby!

[serverandenforcer 33]

Chavez in particular because he makes a big deal about the US being the "great evil".

 

So does Amawamamama from Iran, but we haven't taken him out.... yet. Now, if Chavez starts to develop/deploy MRBM/LRBM or even ICBMs in Venezuela, guranteed we will be doing something over there... and to his supplier... *ahem*Russia*ahem*. Is it just me, or are we begining to see a repeat of the mid-late '60s political climate?

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

If given a chance, and if he think's he's got support, I reckon he'll go for it. But right now, he's just sabre rattling. Iran's tricky though. They'll make it coslty for anyone taking action against them. Real costly...

[MigBuster 2,861]

So does Amawamamama from Iran, but we haven't taken him out.... yet. Now, if Chavez starts to develop/deploy MRBM/LRBM or even ICBMs in Venezuela, guranteed we will be doing something over there... and to his supplier... *ahem*Russia*ahem*. Is it just me, or are we begining to see a repeat of the mid-late '60s political climate?

 

As a reaction to the US Missile shield in Europe, Russia decides to base ICBMs in Chavez land

 

Nah wont happen....maybe

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

As a reaction to the US Missile shield in Europe, Russia decides to base ICBMs in Chavez land

 

Nah wont happen....maybe

 

Still... you gotta admit... it'd be a great scenario for WOI.