• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    What they need to be doing is hooking up shore connections in Palestine.

    The Ike won’t be able to, but an LHD or two would be able to supply potable water and electricity while essentially just idling in port.

    Plus it would likely set up an actual “safe zone” around the port where Hamas isn’t going to do shit, and Israel won’t blow it up.

    • pensa@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You don’t risk the queen in the first move. An aircraft carrier will never port near an active war zone.

      There are now two carrier strike groups in the Mediterranean. That is a big fucking deal. They are staging for a serious war. When we retaliated after 911 there was only 1 carrier strike group used.

        • pensa@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I don’t know. All I know is having two carrier strike groups in the same place at the same time is a big deal. They also have an carrier strike group near north korea. Something big is happening and we are not privy to the details.

            • Joker
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not a chance. Those guys are out in the street with slings and rocks. Then you’ve got some terrorists with a little bit of equipment that are no match for Israel. The CSGs are for Iran.

        • BOMBS@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          another article said that it was to deter Iran and Hezbollah, but even if we were going to war directly with both, 2 carrier strike grips seem like overkill anyway. maybe there’s some intel that we aren’t privy to 🤷‍♂️

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago
        1. There likely isn’t a port deep enough for a carrier, I said that…

        2. Having two carriers in the Med isn’t that rare

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The aircraft carrier deployed from Norfolk, Virginia, on Saturday morning and will join the USS Ford as the war between Israel and Hamas deepens, the Department of Defense told The Independent.

    “The Eisenhower CSG will join the USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group, which arrived earlier this week,” he continued.

    The American military show of force is intended to act as a deterrent to the likes of Iran, Hezbollah and Syria becoming involved in the conflict.

    “The USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN 69) departed today on a scheduled deployment to the U.S. European Command area of responsibility, where it will engage with allies and partners in support of maritime statecraft,” stated US Fleet Forces on Twitter.

    The Pentagon said earlier his week that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin would “continue to review both the Eisenhower and Ford’s deployment plans as he considers the appropriate balance of maritime capability across theatres in support of national security priorities.”

    And on Saturday Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu told troops in southern Israel that “The next stage is coming” and that the country is set to invade the territory by land, sea and air.


    The original article contains 411 words, the summary contains 190 words. Saved 54%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!