You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
-Land of the Free
Pentagon says it can ‘walk and chew gum at same time' when asked about absence of carrier in the Pacific
2024-08-28
[FoxNews] The USS Ronald Reagan left its home port of Japan after nine years in May and will be replaced by the USS George Washington later this year.

The Pentagon claimed it can "walk and chew gum at the same time" when asked how long the U.S. will go without an aircraft carrier group in the Indo-Pacific region.
Walking while chewing gum is easy compared to driving a ship surrounded by other ships. Or so I’ve heard.
Pentagon Press Secretary Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder was asked by Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin Tuesday how long he expected there would not be an aircraft carrier strike group in the Indo-Pacific. She also asked if not having a carrier in the region was risky.

"Well, look, you know, as we look at global force management and as we look at requirements around the world in support of our national security interests, we're always taking great care to make sure that we can cover those commitments to include, in our priority theater, which is the Indo-Pacific region," Ryder said. "And, so, we have a significant amount of capability there to include a large naval presence."

Two carrier strike groups — the USS Theodore Roosevelt and USS Abraham Lincoln — are in the Middle East as part of America’s commitment "to support Israel’s defense against threats from Iran and its regional partners and proxies," according to the Pentagon.

Both carriers are in the Gulf of Oman.

Ryder told reporters the two carrier groups would remain in the region to provide additional capability and capacity to protect U.S. forces, support Israel’s defense and be ready for a variety of contingencies.

In May, the USS Ronald Reagan departed from its Japanese home port, wrapping up nearly nine years of deployment in the Indo-Pacific, where it played a key role in the U.S. effort to bolster defense ties with Japan and regional partners.
Posted by:Skidmark

#16  Active war versus potential war, my dear Thor McCoy5884. Do keep up in the midst of polemicizing.
Posted by: trailing wife   2024-08-28 22:06  

#15  The CIA is more interested in running the US.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2024-08-28 21:04  

#14  How soon can we get this war on Iran kicked off? It's long past time. Why can't the CIA engage in the conflict initiation phases we know they're capable of? No more Iran, no more Hamas, no more Hezbollah.
Posted by: Thor McCoy5884   2024-08-28 19:33  

#13  Defending Israel is more important. We need the carriers where they're needed most.
Posted by: Thor McCoy5884   2024-08-28 19:31  

#12  Biden Crime Familyâ„¢ post-presidential income
Posted by: Frank G   2024-08-28 18:34  

#11  It's basically looking like we are offering up Taiwan or something.
Posted by: ruprecht   2024-08-28 17:28  

#10  The basic objective of our military is to win wars. Endless wars, woke policies, and leaving wars before they are finished, and baling out of Afghanistan and leaving people and billions of dollars in equipment behind weaken our ability to achieve our main objective. We should not piss away our strengh.
Posted by: JohnQC   2024-08-28 17:05  

#9  /\ Mothballing Merchant Marine ships should assist with the upcoming mission impossible. There's really nothing we can do for them, the Taiwanese that is.

The transfer of soverienty began rather slowly then accellerated just before the Orange Man's 2025 enauguration. Timing really is everything.
Posted by: Besoeker   2024-08-28 15:43  

#8  Get a move on. China needs to clear out anything that interfere with their attack on Taiwan
Posted by: Regular+joe   2024-08-28 13:50  

#7  Mentioned one of mine scored well and was considering, she said don't do it, and went into a well thought out rant about the current organization.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2024-08-28 12:53  

#6   ^ She might have been right about today's kids not entering the military although not for the reasons she had in mind.
Posted by: Abu Uluque   2024-08-28 11:45  

#5  So.
When was George Washington originally supposed to set out?

I love it when our Top Men talk like snotty 2nd graders when asked a proper question. Reminds me of my conversation with a local solid Democrat when she said today's kids shouldn't enter the military.
Posted by: swksvolFF   2024-08-28 11:25  

#4  Not a Good Look: The Army Fires Three Top Sergeants in a Month
Posted by: Procopius2k   2024-08-28 10:25  

#3  Maybe if you quit game of 'proportional response' and actually conduct war you wouldn't need to have ships lingering around places.

How about Germany V.2, take out all the Yemenis POL ability and then take out bridges and rail yards. Suddenly, stuff stops moving. You can get back to other issues while they use camels to drag stuff.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2024-08-28 10:04  

#2  Twenty pages into it. Appears to be 'spot on' so far.
Posted by: Besoeker   2024-08-28 05:46  

#1  It was fifty-fifty so we went with the sand lovers for causing the most trouble.

Don't worry, if we need one there it can be there in a few days.

Meanwhile Guam says "hi"
Posted by: DarthVader   2024-08-28 00:15  

00:00