Do you think it's right to 'moon' the U.S.? Thu, July 30, 2009 A Sarnia man is planning a �moon the balloon� demonstration to protest the surveillance camera a private security company has aimed at Sarnia from a dirigible hovering 1,000 feet over Port Huron, Michigan.
After MacDonald Dettwiler repatriated the CanadaArm from the American company Orbital Sciences Corp we should be able to use it to give Port Huron a "stugatzo" salute from one of the Space Shuttles.
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-08-21 12:00:06
I think we`ll call the Canadian Navy.lol
Despite the Navy’s censorship of the Ocean Venture ’81 article, and the fact that the uncensored version was never published, the story became public knowledge in Canada. An anonymous Canadian submariner leaked the story to a Halifax newspaper, and indicated that this successful Canadian attack on an American carrier was by no means an isolated incident. It was a simple ambush in the North Atlantic, and it worked perfectly. Indeed, the article concluded that the Americans never knew what hit them, that they were embarrassed by this failure, and that they wanted to bury the matter then and there. The Canadian submarine did not fire the customary green flare to indicate a hit, for reasons unknown to anyone except for the skipper of the submarine, but instead simply took periscope photos of the carrier to prove its point. In doing so, the diesel submarine ambushed a surface ship in the same way that Germany’s U-boats had done it decades before. This news and Knuth’s original uncensored report, which ended up in the hands of Senator Gary Hart, caused quite a stir in Congress, and the US Navy had a lot of explaining to do. Why had not one but two American carriers been sunk, and why were the submarines responsible not detected? Why indeed had a small, 1960s-vintage diesel submarine of the under-funded and multi-dimensionally “bantam” Canadian Navy been able to defeat one of America’s most powerful and expensive warships, and with such apparent ease?
Conjointly, why were the Canadians able to do essentially the same thing to the US Navy in subsequent exercises in the spring of 1983? The Winnipeg Free Press reported that the submarine HMCS Okanagan “snuck to within a kilometer of the USS John F Kennedy, went through preparations to fire a salvo of torpedoes and slipped away unnoticed by the carrier or the destroyers…” The submarine got close enough “to score a lethal hit, Defence Minister Jean Jacques Blais said…” Blais went on to say, “This is a matter of some pride for submariners and shows the strength of our underwater boats at a time when satellite detection can identify surface ships more readily.”
There are several possible explanations. Firstly, the Canadian submariners have a long-standing reputation for being well trained and professional. Supporting this argument is Compton-Hall, one of the world’s leading authorities on submarines, who evaluated the Canadian submariners as “first class, aggressive and innovative.” Secondly, the Oberon-class submarines used by the Canadian, Australian, British, and other navies, built in the UK, but based on a German design from World War II, were probably the quietest in the world at that time. Of course, adverse acoustical conditions produced by temperature variations (thermal layers) may temporarily cloak even the noisiest nuclear submarines, but the nearly silent Oberon-class diesel boats running on batteries were still harder to find in such conditions than even the best nuclear boats. And in any case, Knuth described the acoustical conditions as being “excellent” for detecting submarines, so the answer probably lies elsewhere. A third possible reason is perhaps that the powerhouse US Navy just is not very good at hunting submarines, especially the ultra-quiet diesel boats available today. It is the last explanation that intrigues me, and it is the one on which I shall focus much of this article.
While Canadian submarines have routinely taken on American carriers, other small navies have enjoyed similar victories. The Royal Netherlands Navy, with its small force of extremely quiet diesel submarines, has made the US Navy eat the proverbial slice of humble pie on more than one occasion. In 1989, naval analyst Norman Polmar wrote in Naval Forces that during NATO’s exercise Northern Star, “…the Dutch submarine “Zwaardvis” was the only orange (enemy) submarine to successfully stalk and sink a blue (allied) aircraft carrier…” The carrier in question might have been the USS America, as it was a participant in this exercise. Ten years later there
were reports that the Dutch submarine Walrus had been even more successful in the exercise JTFEX/TMDI99. “During this exercise the Walrus penetrates the US screen and ‘sinks’ many
ships, including the U.S. aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt CVN-71. The submarine launches two attacks and manages to sneak away. To celebrate the sinking the crew designed a special T-shirt.” Fittingly, the T-shirt depicted the USS Theodore Roosevelt impaled on the tusks of a walrus. It was also reported that the Walrus sank many of the Roosevelt’s escorts, including the nuclear submarine USS Boise, a cruiser, several destroyers and frigates, plus the command ship USS Mount Whitney. The Walrus herself survived the exercise with no damage. Talented and wily enemies, of course, usually do not play by the rules, and they do not stick to a script.
john, 2009-08-18 05:29:05
Ah the hell with it,here`s the link the us overrated navy.Some very surprising stuff in there.
A 37-year-old teacher, community center founder, and anti-mining activist is found tortured and assassinated in Northern El Salvador. Authorities, despite all evidence to the contrary, attribute the death to common gang violence. In the following weeks, other critics of mining are victims of death threats, attempted kidnappings and shootings. Communities plunged into fear not seen since the Civil War of the 1980s place the blame on the presence of Pacific Rim, a Canadian gold mining company.
williamq, 2009-08-17 12:43:12
I think it's funny. But, if we Americans did the same, Canada would shiver. PS- the Russians subs are cruising on your eastern coast. Who ya gonna call, Ghost Busters?
Oneida, 2009-08-16 11:17:13
It seems the USA navy can`t it`s ass with both hands. Google " is the US navy overrated " looks like your mob should stay on land.
Tiny PEI, 2009-08-17 12:41:17
YOU MUST BE FROM TEXASS
We Americans have been told over and over how much greater Canada is and we just want to see for ourselves. So far, looks like it's filled with a lot of asses.
Amincan, 2009-08-10 14:49:46
Tiny PEI, 2009-08-17 07:14:40
I think it's funny. But, if we Americans did the same, Canada would shiver. PS- the Russians subs are cruising on your eastern coast. Who ya gonna call, Ghost Busters?
Oneida, 2009-08-16 11:17:13
Well, the balloon wasn't launched the day of the great "moon-in". IT WAS SLASHED and unable to launch. Some smart American obviously heard the rumour that Twitless' butt might be among the mooners and wisely sabotaged the ballon rather than have some poor sod exposed to the HORROR of a picture of Twitless' bare derrier.
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-08-16 01:36:07
"We Americans have been told over and over how much greater Canada is and we just want to see for ourselves. So far, looks like it's filled with a lot of asses."
Amincan, 2009-08-10 14:49:46
At least they are not the astondingly, grotesquely ultra-fat asses common in the Huston-Fort Worth area (home of more all-you-can-eat buffets than anywhere on the planet).
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-08-15 10:27:37
Let them look at us with their spy camera's.Maybe they will see afew seniors that we didnt kill so we wouldnt have to pay for their health care. Man, some those people are morons
bruce, 2009-08-15 05:50:40
Do you think it's right to 'moon' the U.S.?
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-08-21 12:00:06
Despite the Navy’s censorship of the Ocean Venture ’81 article, and the fact that the uncensored version was never published, the story became public knowledge in Canada. An anonymous Canadian submariner leaked the story to a Halifax newspaper, and indicated that this successful Canadian attack on an American carrier was by no means an isolated incident. It was a simple ambush in the North Atlantic, and it worked perfectly. Indeed, the article concluded that the Americans never knew what hit them, that they were embarrassed by this failure, and that they wanted to bury the matter then and there. The Canadian submarine did not fire the customary green flare to indicate a hit, for reasons unknown to anyone except for the skipper of the submarine, but instead simply took periscope photos of the carrier to prove its point. In doing so, the diesel submarine ambushed a surface ship in the same way that Germany’s U-boats had done it decades before. This news and Knuth’s original uncensored report, which ended up in the hands of Senator Gary Hart, caused quite a stir in Congress, and the US Navy had a lot of explaining to do. Why had not one but two American carriers been sunk, and why were the submarines responsible not detected? Why indeed had a small, 1960s-vintage diesel submarine of the under-funded and multi-dimensionally “bantam” Canadian Navy been able to defeat one of America’s most powerful and expensive warships, and with such apparent ease?
Conjointly, why were the Canadians able to do essentially the same thing to the US Navy in subsequent exercises in the spring of 1983? The Winnipeg Free Press reported that the submarine HMCS Okanagan “snuck to within a kilometer of the USS John F Kennedy, went through preparations to fire a salvo of torpedoes and slipped away unnoticed by the carrier or the destroyers…” The submarine got close enough “to score a lethal hit, Defence Minister Jean Jacques Blais said…” Blais went on to say, “This is a matter of some pride for submariners and shows the strength of our underwater boats at a time when satellite detection can identify surface ships more readily.”
There are several possible explanations. Firstly, the Canadian submariners have a long-standing reputation for being well trained and professional. Supporting this argument is Compton-Hall, one of the world’s leading authorities on submarines, who evaluated the Canadian submariners as “first class, aggressive and innovative.” Secondly, the Oberon-class submarines used by the Canadian, Australian, British, and other navies, built in the UK, but based on a German design from World War II, were probably the quietest in the world at that time. Of course, adverse acoustical conditions produced by temperature variations (thermal layers) may temporarily cloak even the noisiest nuclear submarines, but the nearly silent Oberon-class diesel boats running on batteries were still harder to find in such conditions than even the best nuclear boats. And in any case, Knuth described the acoustical conditions as being “excellent” for detecting submarines, so the answer probably lies elsewhere. A third possible reason is perhaps that the powerhouse US Navy just is not very good at hunting submarines, especially the ultra-quiet diesel boats available today. It is the last explanation that intrigues me, and it is the one on which I shall focus much of this article.
While Canadian submarines have routinely taken on American carriers, other small navies have enjoyed similar victories. The Royal Netherlands Navy, with its small force of extremely quiet diesel submarines, has made the US Navy eat the proverbial slice of humble pie on more than one occasion. In 1989, naval analyst Norman Polmar wrote in Naval Forces that during NATO’s exercise Northern Star, “…the Dutch submarine “Zwaardvis” was the only orange (enemy) submarine to successfully stalk and sink a blue (allied) aircraft carrier…” The carrier in question might have been the USS America, as it was a participant in this exercise. Ten years later there
were reports that the Dutch submarine Walrus had been even more successful in the exercise JTFEX/TMDI99. “During this exercise the Walrus penetrates the US screen and ‘sinks’ many
ships, including the U.S. aircraft carrier Theodore Roosevelt CVN-71. The submarine launches two attacks and manages to sneak away. To celebrate the sinking the crew designed a special T-shirt.” Fittingly, the T-shirt depicted the USS Theodore Roosevelt impaled on the tusks of a walrus. It was also reported that the Walrus sank many of the Roosevelt’s escorts, including the nuclear submarine USS Boise, a cruiser, several destroyers and frigates, plus the command ship USS Mount Whitney. The Walrus herself survived the exercise with no damage. Talented and wily enemies, of course, usually do not play by the rules, and they do not stick to a script.
john, 2009-08-18 05:29:05
http://www.transasianaxis.com/vb/showthread.php?t=304
tiny pei, 2009-08-17 12:45:05
williamq, 2009-08-17 12:43:12
Oneida, 2009-08-16 11:17:13
It seems the USA navy can`t it`s ass with both hands. Google " is the US navy overrated " looks like your mob should stay on land.
Tiny PEI, 2009-08-17 12:41:17
We Americans have been told over and over how much greater Canada is and we just want to see for ourselves. So far, looks like it's filled with a lot of asses.
Amincan, 2009-08-10 14:49:46
Tiny PEI, 2009-08-17 07:14:40
Oneida, 2009-08-16 11:17:13
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-08-16 01:36:07
Amincan, 2009-08-10 14:49:46
At least they are not the astondingly, grotesquely ultra-fat asses common in the Huston-Fort Worth area (home of more all-you-can-eat buffets than anywhere on the planet).
Not_the_Daddy, 2009-08-15 10:27:37
bruce, 2009-08-15 05:50:40