Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/31

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Jeffery is OK/ answering JB
From: douglas.sharp at gmx.de (Douglas Sharp)
Date: Wed Aug 31 18:19:41 2005
References: <1c5.2f48c65e.30476784@aol.com> <43161928.6010909@gmx.de> <004601c5ae70$94243c20$2501a8c0@chartertn.net> <43163A8E.7070207@gmx.de> <4cfa589b050831174049ac7244@mail.gmail.com>

Adam,
you may well be right, even though the modern armies seem to talk of 
nothing else but Rapid Deployment Strategies
I was, however, wondering what kind of gear the 4th Marine  Division, 
incorporating both an amphibious assault battalion and a combat engineer 
battalion, might have.
I'm not sure what the readiness status of a US Marine Reserve Division 
is, but I would have thought they must have some ARVs and AAVs
and heavy plant on their base in NOLA..
Those offshore oilfields  are pretty valuable strategic targets, and 
deserve a lot of  protection.
Douglas

Adam Bridge wrote:

>Getting the ROV to the Russian submariners was a non-trivial evolution
>that had been PLANNED for in detail buy the combined
>submarine-operating services. They were lucky that only the minimal
>response had been required. Getting a DSRV onto the site would have
>taken a lot longer and would be much more difficult. And all of that
>is because the scenerio is one which can be planned for and which
>experts from the various nations meet together and talk about these
>things. Yes, even the Russians, finally. And the Chinese too.
>
>There was a lot of Navy response to the tsunami because there were
>vessels in the area due to the war on terrorism operations so there
>was an aircraft carrier that could operate off-shore.
>
>But the military doesn't routinely PLAN for these kinds of rescue
>evolution. It's not their primary mission.
>
>No one plans for things like this - the submergance of a city is not
>common. Could the EU do better if, say, Venice sank? I don't think so.
>
>It's frustrating to watch this and we all have movie-bred expectations
>of how quickly resources can be put on task. I don't know where those
>amphibious vehicles are kept, or if they are loaded onto ships, and
>how ready to steam the ships are - it just takes TIME. The Marine
>Corps vehicles might be on the Atlantic or down in Texas - or even on
>the west coast. it's not like they are staged, ready to roll. And the
>ships to carry them may have maintenance operations going on that need
>to be finished before they can set to sea.
>
>It's just a difficult problem and it's NOT that the military doesn't
>want to respond.
>
>Adam bridge
>
>
>On 8/31/05, Douglas Sharp <douglas.sharp@gmx.de> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I always find it absolutely sickening that the military forces around
>>the world , which have the most advanced rescue and recovery equipment,
>>are always the last to get to a disaster area.
>>If my country (the UK) can get an ROV to rescue a few Russian
>>submariners within 12 hours then how come other equipment can't be
>>deployed in a disaster area just as fast.
>>The Coast Guard / Lifeboat service / Helicopter Medics are always there
>>days before - This is not a US problem this is global,
>>    
>>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>  
>

In reply to: Message from SonC at aol.com (SonC@aol.com) ([Leica] Jeffery is OK)
Message from douglas.sharp at gmx.de (Douglas Sharp) ([Leica] Jeffery is OK)
Message from jblack at ambio.net (John Black) ([Leica] Jeffery is OK)
Message from douglas.sharp at gmx.de (Douglas Sharp) ([Leica] Jeffery is OK/ answering JB)
Message from abridge at gmail.com (Adam Bridge) ([Leica] Jeffery is OK/ answering JB)