"Naval Power" in Afghanistan?

[Sailboat]

I recently ran across this comment on a (US) political candidate:

"...advocates increasing use of naval power to stabilize the situation in Afghanistan rather than increasing ground troop levels."

For the record, here's Afghanistan:

Afghanistan is landlocked

I'm putting this in IMHO because we can only guess at what this person might mean.

At first glance, seeing as Afghanistan is landlocked, one might think he's referring to using carrier airpower. Leaving aside the question of whether bombing will "stabilize the situation" at all, carrier planes would still have to overfly one of the bordering countries. Land-based planes in the region could do the same thing, so there's no particular advantage to using naval aviation, and if you're just talking about planes, why not just say airpower?

Perhaps he just feels -- with some justification -- that the US will be able to beat Afghanistan in naval power, seeing as they're landlocked, so we should stick to our strengths?

[Sicks Ate]

He's a retired Navy Captain.

It seems to me that he's so ingrained in Navy-think that he can't break free. Indicates a rigidity of thought that would probably dissuade me from voting for him.

[Loach]

Your snippet of a supposed quote does not give context.

[Loach]

Nevermind I did your research for you.

On the Middle East, Sullivan favors using a naval strategy as the fight shifts to Afghanistan, using sea-launched cruise missiles to hit terrorist targets. Courtney favors inserting up to three more divisions of troops.

Its from a debate in 2008. Talk is about a draw down now. Not increasing troop levels. Not too relevant now. Things have changed in 4 years.


http://www.norwichbulletin.com/x1272...#axzz1tFNxZetl

[Sailboat]

Originally Posted by Loach

Your snippet of a supposed quote does not give context.

Well, I was trying to be nonpartisan, but since I've already been outed above, here's the entire range of political opinions his Wikipedia page contains:

Stances on issues

Sullivan is a proponent of spending control in Washington and places the blame for increased spending on Congress rather than on President Bush. He believes health care should be administered by the states even if funding comes from the Federal Government. He advocates increasing use of naval power to stabilize the situation in Afghanistan rather than increasing ground troop levels.[9]

He is a strong advocate for nuclear power and supports removing political obstacles to building new plants.

You'll note that the ONLY word I've cut from the entire "Stance on Issues" section in regards to both naval power AND Afghanistan is "he."

So, now that you know he's male, how does that inform your opinion?

[Sicks Ate]

On the Middle East, Sullivan favors using a naval strategy as the fight shifts to Afghanistan, using sea-launched cruise missiles to hit terrorist targets. Courtney favors inserting up to three more divisions of troops.

http://www.norwichbulletin.com/x1272...#axzz1tFOjrlzh

[Loach]

So was I the only one who noticed the date on that article? Think anyone is advocating three more divisions in Afghanistan now?

[Loach]

Its just some guy who badly lost an election 4 years ago.

[Sicks Ate]

Originally Posted by Loach

So was I the only one who noticed the date on that article? Think anyone is advocating three more divisions in Afghanistan now?

I didn't, but it wasn't really relevant to my angle. The guy is one of those who will put forth the solution promotes their service, regardless of whether it would be the best course of action.

Cruise missiles and ground troops are two completely different tools; they're not interchangeable.

[Sailboat]

Originally Posted by Loach

So was I the only one who noticed the date on that article?

Good point. Did Afghanistan have a seacoast or a navy 4 years ago?

[Loach]

That was not what he was proposing.

[Loach]

Originally Posted by Sailboat

Good point. Did Afghanistan have a seacoast or a navy 4 years ago?

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

I didn't, but it wasn't really relevant to my angle. The guy is one of those who will put forth the solution promotes their service, regardless of whether it would be the best course of action.

Cruise missiles and ground troops are two completely different tools; they're not interchangeable.

Totally agree with you.

[DMark]

I think the US once invited the Swiss Navy to join in some conference/military games...the Swiss found this to be quite amusing.

[Darryl Lict]

Originally Posted by DMark

I think the US once invited the Swiss Navy to join in some conference/military games...the Swiss found this to be quite amusing.

Well, Switzerland has managed to win an America's Cup, despite not being on an ocean!

[septimus]

A recent proposal by Wyoming's legislature to equip their own navy with an aricraft carrier was defeated, despite 27 votes in favor.

[CalMeacham]

Maybe Afghanistan can hire retired naval Captain von Trapp, of the Austrian Navy.

[Loach]

Originally Posted by septimus

A recent proposal by Wyoming's legislature to equip their own navy with an aricraft carrier was defeated, despite 27 votes in favor.

They voted for it on the grounds that "It would be really cool." I concur.

[flyboy]

You do realize there are Navy sailors, Navy Reserve sailors, Naval SPECOPs, expeditionary units, security forces, Naval aircraft, etc that have been there since the beginning of the war, right? That's in addition to carrier air power. Having said that, I agree that leveraging the Navy is not substitutable with leveraging the Marine Corps and/or Army. The Navy is not suited for counter-insurgency operations, taking land, or occupying it.

[drachillix]

Originally Posted by flyboy

The Navy is not suited for counter-insurgency operations, taking land, or occupying it.

But if you need a beach free of enemy resistance, they can do that for you.

[flyboy]

The Navy can help soften the target, but the Marines will actually take the beach.

[dropzone]

Originally Posted by CalMeacham

Maybe Afghanistan can hire retired naval Captain von Trapp, of the Austrian Navy.

Austro-Hungarian navy, back when the empire had a seacoast. And he was their top scoring U-boat commander.

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by Sailboat

Leaving aside the question of whether bombing will "stabilize the situation" at all, carrier planes would still have to overfly one of the bordering countries. Land-based planes in the region could do the same thing, so there's no particular advantage to using naval aviation, and if you're just talking about planes, why not just say airpower?

He's probably say the reason was that land-based aircraft would require an American presence in some local country with the related political difficulties that would entail while carrier-based aircraft would be flying from international waters. Which isn't really true because American bombers have such a long-range they can be based back in the United States and still fly missions in Afghanistan.

[CalMeacham]

Originally Posted by dropzone

Austro-Hungarian navy, back when the empire had a seacoast. And he was their top scoring U-boat commander.

We must introduce you to the concept of "jokes".


In any event, Austria lost any connection to the sea after WWI, and by the time of the events (sorta) depicted in The Sound of usic, hadn't had a seacoast in twenty years.

[dropzone]

As a joke, MAD did it when the movie came out nearly 50 years ago. And it being MAD, they were unlikely the first. We must introduce you to the concept of "original."

[CalMeacham]

Originally Posted by dropzone

As a joke, MAD did it when the movie came out nearly 50 years ago. And it being MAD, they were unlikely the first. We must introduce you to the concept of "original."

1.) If we only allowed "original" things in the SDMB we'd have mostly blank entries.

2.) I do indeed recall that issue and parosy "The Sound of More Music". Steal from the best, I say. And if you're taking me to task for invoking a parody from 1970, I have to ask what you Statute of Limitations on jokes is.

[ralph124c]

Contact the Bolivian Navy-they are still waiting for a seacoast.

[dropzone]

Originally Posted by ralph124c

Contact the Bolivian Navy-they are still waiting for a seacoast.

And asks Chile for it nicely once a year, but Peru will be in trouble if they try anything on Lake Titicaca.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bolivian_Naval_Force