Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ninga

(8,266 posts)
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:26 PM Apr 2013

Korea...just learned that a 3rd destroyer has been deployed...and

because this is the first time in history 3 such ships have been sent to an area....this feels so serious.

Each destroyer is accompanied by 30 smaller ships, which means 90 ships plus the big ones will soon be standing watch in the waters near Korea.

I learned this from a business conference call I was auditing today, as one of the members of the call was the wife of a sailor who was assigned to the 3rd destroyer now sailing for Korea, and not returning until Oct. 11th....in telling us, she became upset.

None of the folks on the conference call knew what to say or how to respond, because her remarks were out-of-the-blue and somewhat anti-Obama as she was asserting that he was mis-handling Korea.

Most of us on the call are associates that share the same politics. I was very grateful that the response was mostly silence, and thankfully, no one tried to "set her straight".... or paper over her concern. I quickly emailed one of the participants suggesting that a softly delivered comment about how we hope that "diplomatic work is being done around the clock and that sending 3 destroyers may be a part of the strategy we don't have the privilege of knowing"...might be reassuring to her....the remarks were made...but she was too far gone in her weeping to hear.


Oh man. I am now more nervous about Korea than before.......what a world.

77 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Korea...just learned that a 3rd destroyer has been deployed...and (Original Post) Ninga Apr 2013 OP
Destroyer are the "smaller ships" in a navy strike group hack89 Apr 2013 #1
I was starting to wonder. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #4
thanks for the info, very helpful. I learned a lot from your short post. KittyWampus Apr 2013 #11
The question is always, "Where Are The Carriers?" Sherman A1 Apr 2013 #18
The answer to that question is always, "just over the horizon". MindPilot Apr 2013 #63
From that link, it seems that three carriers are in the Western Pacific. stevenleser Apr 2013 #69
how is Obama mishandling Korea? nt maryellen99 Apr 2013 #2
I only know what she said....and think that she would be upset know matter who. I have no opinion Ninga Apr 2013 #10
I understand nt maryellen99 Apr 2013 #12
Does this Navy wife not know why her husband enlisted? Aristus Apr 2013 #16
I wouldn't be surprised if she was anti Obama to begin with nt maryellen99 Apr 2013 #21
I can tell you I was upset about my husband nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #28
I agree. Until "COUNTDOWN TO CONFRONTATION!" runs on every 24-hour cable news show Aristus Apr 2013 #32
Exactly. Flora Apr 2013 #36
i'm so sorry for your loss nt maryellen99 Apr 2013 #39
My sympathies nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #40
Thank you both Flora Apr 2013 #49
Thank you for sharing your experience. And just plain ole Thank You.. Ninga Apr 2013 #75
OK now. Do you really think she doesn't know? And do you really think the folks on Ninga Apr 2013 #34
More information... YvonneCa Apr 2013 #73
It doesn't make it any less scary Marrah_G Apr 2013 #43
Or telling Kim Jong Un, "Bring it on". nt Ilsa Apr 2013 #52
appropriate dburner1 Apr 2013 #68
Each destroyer has 30 ships with it? PearliePoo2 Apr 2013 #3
I'm not buying that "fact". backscatter712 Apr 2013 #7
that's what I was thinking. PearliePoo2 Apr 2013 #15
No, Destroyers don't have escorts, premium Apr 2013 #17
Per Janes Defense Weekly go west young man Apr 2013 #71
Better info sorry. go west young man Apr 2013 #72
Watch last night's Daily Show Duer 157099 Apr 2013 #5
Sorry, but you lost me at "Each destroyer is accompanied by 30 smaller ships". nt. OldDem2012 Apr 2013 #6
30 Canoes. octothorpe Apr 2013 #33
just for a second there... i flashed on the Gulf of Tonkin oldhippydude Apr 2013 #8
We don't have 90 ships smaller than destroyers... bluedigger Apr 2013 #9
Good grief, maybe I did not hear correctly...I thought she said destroyer....but she sure did say 30 Ninga Apr 2013 #19
That would be a Carrier Task Force. premium Apr 2013 #27
Even a carrier strike group only has around 10 major vessels. bluedigger Apr 2013 #30
excellent information, thank you. nt. PearliePoo2 Apr 2013 #66
possibly her husband is on a destroyer accompanying an aircraft carrier? magical thyme Apr 2013 #70
13 mine countermeasure ships sgsmith Apr 2013 #76
Good call. bluedigger Apr 2013 #77
Drop food on the NK army at lunch and they'll defect South by dinner time NightWatcher Apr 2013 #13
Sadly they would probably die before eating it Marrah_G Apr 2013 #44
As ex Navy.. Admiral's Staff 2nd fleet my tense response is ...zzzzz Let me know when we have a Katashi_itto Apr 2013 #14
Does this mean you are not worried? Ninga Apr 2013 #22
Give it a moment. Breathe deep. Wariness yes. But outright worried? No. Katashi_itto Apr 2013 #47
This is exactly the way I see it too. premium Apr 2013 #53
A very good estimation, yes I agree. Economics is far more important. Katashi_itto Apr 2013 #59
Well, the Mexican Media showed an image, which apparently was not file, nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #20
Gulp, battlegroup....re war; what we want and want we get.........horses of different colors....nt Ninga Apr 2013 #23
If they were not there I would be really shocked nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #25
Thanks, I am starting to understand a bit. Really out of my league with this stuff. Ninga Apr 2013 #35
America has a carrier battle group permanently stationed in Japan hack89 Apr 2013 #37
battlegroup, not file, so up to date image? PearliePoo2 Apr 2013 #26
Current, according to my brother in law who served his navy carrier nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #31
Thanks for the info...I just sent an e-mail to my nephew. PearliePoo2 Apr 2013 #48
We have been thinking the same nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #57
Is the Seventh Fleet usually Pacific? Is there any way to find out where they are now? PearliePoo2 Apr 2013 #64
Yup, the seventh fleet is PAC FLEET nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #65
Please define what a battle group is. longship Apr 2013 #38
A carrier, yes, and all the ships that go with it nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #42
But this is an unconfirmed report, I take it. longship Apr 2013 #50
Well one thing I have learned is that the US Media nadinbrzezinski Apr 2013 #51
Yup. Thx. longship Apr 2013 #54
If I remember right, one of our carriers is based in Japan. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #55
A battle group usually includes a Carrier. premium Apr 2013 #45
The pissing, blustering, and strutting contest continues. Give everybody medals and close the show. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2013 #24
Destroyers make perfect sense. Rex Apr 2013 #29
Shit. Aircraft carriers only carry a compliment of ten or so ships. talkingmime Apr 2013 #41
Along with a very potent Air Force. nt. premium Apr 2013 #46
Very true. The carrier strike force is equipped with a huge amount of whoop-ass. backscatter712 Apr 2013 #56
Um, yeah, there is that. talkingmime Apr 2013 #58
More Here: WillyT Apr 2013 #60
Nothing Like 4Q2u2 Apr 2013 #61
I have a poster in my cube of a carrier with the bow pointed right at you. MindPilot Apr 2013 #62
Nice 4Q2u2 Apr 2013 #67
It could be worse, her husband could be ashling Apr 2013 #74

hack89

(39,171 posts)
1. Destroyer are the "smaller ships" in a navy strike group
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:30 PM
Apr 2013

You are thinking aircraft carriers - which now days just have 5 or 6 escorts.

These destroyers are capable of shooting down ballistic missiles - which is why they are being deployed. They are based in Japan so it is not that big a deal.

When they start sending carriers is the time to worry.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
4. I was starting to wonder.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:33 PM
Apr 2013

Normally it's the carriers that have the full fleets around them - several destroyers, a couple cruisers, a few frigates, an attack submarine, and several oilers and supply ships.

Destroyers normally are the escorts, rather than being escorted.

maryellen99

(3,781 posts)
2. how is Obama mishandling Korea? nt
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:31 PM
Apr 2013

Do you think the military wife would be as upset if it would been Romney sending her husband?

Ninga

(8,266 posts)
10. I only know what she said....and think that she would be upset know matter who. I have no opinion
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:40 PM
Apr 2013

because I do not understand.

I am glad no one commented, it was the right thing to do as she was so upset.....I think sometimes silence says more than words....

Aristus

(66,080 posts)
16. Does this Navy wife not know why her husband enlisted?
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:47 PM
Apr 2013

Does she think he was going to pick up litter and help old ladies across the street?

He enlisted to serve. And sometimes that means going into dangerous places.

When I landed at King Fahd before the Gulf War, and the prospect of getting killed became very real, I remember thinking "Shit! I could die!" But I never said anything like "How did this happen?" Simple. I enlisted.

And President Obama is doing exactly what a President should be doing. No, not dressing up in military costumes, and railing about an "Axis Of Evil", but anticipating trouble, and taking appropriate measures, including diplomatic ones.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
28. I can tell you I was upset about my husband
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:59 PM
Apr 2013

during that wonderful adventure in 2003, but not because he enlisted, but because it was a BS war.

This is not really a BS one, and we are going out of our way to try to avoid it. My evidence... really, the US Media is NOT preparing the people for the inevitable. Once CNN and MSNBC go into scary music\graphics\breaking news I will say they are. But right now, war restarts, first question, where is NK?

Here in DU we are (some) paying close attention and watching twitter feeds and foreign media, but the MSM on the TV is on a Basketball Coach who got fired?

Aristus

(66,080 posts)
32. I agree. Until "COUNTDOWN TO CONFRONTATION!" runs on every 24-hour cable news show
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:03 PM
Apr 2013

all day, every day, with, as you said, scary music and graphics, and solemn narration by blow-dried newsmodels, we're probably okay.

President Obama is doing well, I think.

Flora

(126 posts)
36. Exactly.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:13 PM
Apr 2013

This is not a BS war, we have been directly threatened and our President is acting accordingly. As a military widow, I can tell you that I would much rather have my loved one deployed over a direct nuclear threat than a grab for oil..

Flora

(126 posts)
49. Thank you both
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:30 PM
Apr 2013

I've actually been a DUer for some years now, just very rarely post. Hence my ridiculously low post count. But I read here every day!

Ninga

(8,266 posts)
34. OK now. Do you really think she doesn't know? And do you really think the folks on
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:11 PM
Apr 2013

the conference call should have perhaps, said something that exactly mirrors what you just wrote?

Nah....I didn't think so.

So the next best thing in such an awkward situation is silence and being supportive...to chose to be human.

Marrah_G

(28,581 posts)
43. It doesn't make it any less scary
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:22 PM
Apr 2013

I'm going to cut her some slack.

My son is Air Guard with a very particular job that he just reached the level where he can be deployed. Korea was a topic of conversation at Easter and he was feeling like if they do attack there is a good chance he might have to go.

Logically I know that he is good at his job and that this is what he signed up for in exchange for a good education and career, but my gut still twists at thinking about my "child" being in harms way.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
7. I'm not buying that "fact".
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:34 PM
Apr 2013

Usually, it's aircraft carriers that have lots of escorts, not destroyers, which are a good bit smaller.

bluedigger

(17,077 posts)
9. We don't have 90 ships smaller than destroyers...
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:37 PM
Apr 2013

Unless you count life rafts...

Seriously, the next size down are frigates. We have 22 of those commissioned, in the entire Navy. We have 4 littoral combat ships, 13 coastal patrol ships, and 14 mine countermeasure ships. We probably have a bunch of Boston Whalers and odds and ends scattered around, but that's it.

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

Ninga

(8,266 posts)
19. Good grief, maybe I did not hear correctly...I thought she said destroyer....but she sure did say 30
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:50 PM
Apr 2013

ships accompany each-what-ever....

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
27. That would be a Carrier Task Force.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:58 PM
Apr 2013


This is a typical Carrier Task Force, not quite 30 ships, there is also a fast attack sub. guarding the front door.

bluedigger

(17,077 posts)
30. Even a carrier strike group only has around 10 major vessels.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:01 PM
Apr 2013
CSGs are not restricted to a specific composition and can be modified depending on expected threats, roles, or missions expected during a deployment, and one may be different from another. The Navy states that “there really is no real definition of a strike group. Strike groups are formed and disestablished on an as needed basis, and one may be different from another. However, they all are comprised of similar types of ships.”[6] A U.S. Navy carrier strike group typically includes:
A supercarrier, which is the centerpiece of the strike group and also serves as the flagship for the CSG Commander and his/her staff. The carrier is commanded by aviation community captain.
A carrier air wing (CVW) typically consisting of up to nine squadrons. Carrier air wings are commanded by an aviation community captain (or occasionally a Marine colonel).
One to two Aegis guided missile cruisers (CG), of the Ticonderoga class—a multi-mission surface combatant, equipped with BGM-109 Tomahawk missiles for long-range strike capability, each commanded by a surface community captain.
A destroyer squadron (DESRON) commanded by a surface community captain (O-6) who commands the escort destroyers, with two to three guided missile destroyers (DDG), of the Arleigh Burke class—a multi-mission surface combatant, used primarily for anti-aircraft (AAW) and anti-submarine (ASW) warfare, but which also carries Tomahawk missiles for long-range strike capability. A destroyer is commanded by a surface community commander.
Up to two attack submarines, usually of the Los Angeles-class used to screen the strike group against hostile surface ships and submarines, but which also carry Tomahawk missiles for long-range strike capability.
A combined ammunition, oiler and supply ship (AOE/AOR), usually Supply-class (T-AOE); provides logistic support.[6]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_strike_group#Typical_CSG_composition


They could have been including ROK naval assets, I suppose, but we are talking small coastal vessels at most, I think. Our entire Navy is only 288 ships, and they are spread out pretty much all over the world at any given time, with a good number always in the Gulf, or in home ports refurbishing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy
 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
70. possibly her husband is on a destroyer accompanying an aircraft carrier?
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 03:54 PM
Apr 2013

Since she was upset, it seems entirely possible she wasn't articulating clearly. Possibly she meant 3 aircraft carriers, each accompanied by 30 ships...

I guess we'll find out soon enough. Sorry some are being rude in their replies.

 

sgsmith

(398 posts)
76. 13 mine countermeasure ships
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 05:16 PM
Apr 2013

The USS Guardian was grounded on a coral reef in the Philippines and has been dismantled and struck from the register. Wiki has the information on the ship specific page, but not on your link.

bluedigger

(17,077 posts)
77. Good call.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 05:46 PM
Apr 2013

I suppose that means we have a 287 ship navy for the time being as well. I'm surprised nobody has updated the wiki, but close enough for the purposes of discussion, eh?

 

Katashi_itto

(10,175 posts)
14. As ex Navy.. Admiral's Staff 2nd fleet my tense response is ...zzzzz Let me know when we have a
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:43 PM
Apr 2013

Carrier group there. Even then, until weapons goes hot, everything is still just gunboat dipolamacy, sabre rattling.

 

Katashi_itto

(10,175 posts)
47. Give it a moment. Breathe deep. Wariness yes. But outright worried? No.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:29 PM
Apr 2013

China is not going to a shooting war on it's borders.
In fact its moving troops to the NK border as a signal likely to NK.

If war occurs Korean leadership would likely end up very dead.
War is to be avoided. Creates to many variables.
China does not want millions of starving NKs streaming across it's border.

If anything they might like to see SK saddled with that problem.

No I am not overly worried. Yet.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
53. This is exactly the way I see it too.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:36 PM
Apr 2013

Those Chinese troops aren't there for us, they're there as a warning to little Un.

The Chinese don't want to get into a shooting war with the US, it would be bad for business to be killing the troops of their largest trading partner, and China is all about business these days.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
20. Well, the Mexican Media showed an image, which apparently was not file,
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:51 PM
Apr 2013

of a battlegroup...

The US Media is playing this way too cool... which tells me we really do not want a war, or are seeking one.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
25. If they were not there I would be really shocked
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:56 PM
Apr 2013

really.

The fact that we have not told NK that we are moving assets into place is not that unusual, Unless the Chinese or the Russians are sharing Satellite info, the DPRK has no way to know... really.

So telling them particular assets is a calculated thing.

Yes I say this as a wife of a retired Navy Chief who found himself on every hot war, expect Bosnia, over his 21 year career. We joke that if Bosnia had a coast, he could have.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
37. America has a carrier battle group permanently stationed in Japan
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:16 PM
Apr 2013

it is an aircraft carrier and eight escorts. This is not a big deal.

PearliePoo2

(7,768 posts)
26. battlegroup, not file, so up to date image?
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 01:57 PM
Apr 2013

Was the battlegroup "underway"?
Are carriers part of a battlegroup and how many ships make up a battlegroup?

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
31. Current, according to my brother in law who served his navy carrier
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:01 PM
Apr 2013

on a target, err... carrier. It looked to him like a regular carrier battle-group, he told me about it last night. I was all but shocked. My husband and I have been speculating where the Seventh Fleet is at the moment.

Oh and just breaking, SecDef is now saying that "The US has no choice but to take the threat seriously."

PearliePoo2

(7,768 posts)
48. Thanks for the info...I just sent an e-mail to my nephew.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:29 PM
Apr 2013

He's just recently retired LCDR Navy at Whidbey NAS. He was on carriers all his career taking care of their Prowlers (except for 2 stints at Bagram)
He still works on base, though in a civilian capacity now. I'm wondering how "retired" he will remain if this hits the fan.
BTW, Whidbey has all kinds of birds in the air these last few days and they are making racket over me like never before. Where I live is not usually under their flight pattern so it's got my attention!

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
57. We have been thinking the same
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:40 PM
Apr 2013

though Hubby retired a few years back, and has had zero contact... if this hits the fan, seriously hits the fan...

PearliePoo2

(7,768 posts)
64. Is the Seventh Fleet usually Pacific? Is there any way to find out where they are now?
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 03:17 PM
Apr 2013

BTW...sorry you had to delete your other post. I agree that was some fine writing.
Man some people... you just have to wonder how they get through the day without attacking, mocking or arguing. WTF ???
Oh, and my nephew was based on Guam for years too, I forgot about that!

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
65. Yup, the seventh fleet is PAC FLEET
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 03:19 PM
Apr 2013

either fifth or seventh are based at Yokuska, I just don't remember which

From horse's mouth, they are based in Yokuska and Guam

http://www.c7f.navy.mil/forces.htm

As to some people, well if it is FOX it is automatically suspect.

longship

(40,416 posts)
50. But this is an unconfirmed report, I take it.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:31 PM
Apr 2013

But I wouldn't be surprised if the US does have a carrier there.

The only worry I would have is that it could push a delusional DPRK leadership (whoever that might be) into doing something foolish.

I imagine that the lights are burning bright all night at the Pentagon and White House throughout this. Langley, too, come to think about it.

They pretty much have to take this seriously in spite of NK's long history of saber rattling.

A carrier would mean that they truly take it seriously. But I guess that I would like to see that confirmed.

Thank you for your response.

 

nadinbrzezinski

(154,021 posts)
51. Well one thing I have learned is that the US Media
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:34 PM
Apr 2013

sucks, so have been following this fun and games though other media as well.

It could be a file picture and my BIL, who's spanish is all but good, could have misunderstood.

But really, our media is stuck on a basketball coach when we have a potential guns of august scenario.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
55. If I remember right, one of our carriers is based in Japan.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:36 PM
Apr 2013

I haven't heard real news saying that a carrier strike force was headed to the waters off of North Korea, but they're routinely not too far away.

 

premium

(3,731 posts)
45. A battle group usually includes a Carrier.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:25 PM
Apr 2013

Here is a typical Carrier Task Force, also known as a battle group.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
29. Destroyers make perfect sense.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:01 PM
Apr 2013

I will actually pay attention once we start sending aircraft carriers.

backscatter712

(26,355 posts)
56. Very true. The carrier strike force is equipped with a huge amount of whoop-ass.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:40 PM
Apr 2013

One Nimitz class carrier has more fighters than most other countries' entire air forces. They've got enough munitions to rain death and destruction on the country 24/7 for weeks. On top of that, the escorts have artillery, cruise missiles, various other weapons.

When a strike group is deployed to the waters by the Koreas, the tension level goes way up.

 

4Q2u2

(1,406 posts)
61. Nothing Like
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 02:56 PM
Apr 2013

4.4 Acres of America sitting on your door step when you wake up in the morning. Could wind up being a very bad day. I hope China can convince Little Lord Fauntleroy he is in way over his head. I really would not like to see hostilities. Cooler heads to the front please.

That said, if they are going to do something, let our people do what they need to do to end it quickly.

 

MindPilot

(12,693 posts)
62. I have a poster in my cube of a carrier with the bow pointed right at you.
Wed Apr 3, 2013, 03:15 PM
Apr 2013

the caption is "90,000 tons of diplomacy..."

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Korea...just learned that...