John Kerry: We could have shot the jet down.

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The Captain of this ship should be arrested immediately.

So we should start a war with Russia over a jet flying by?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

No way can they fire on anything without going through the chain of command.

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

 

[kaz]

No way can they fire on anything without going through the chain of command.

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

Yep, and this ship was in a flash zone. You know they were very specific whatever the rules were because they knew this sort of thing was likely

 

[kaz]

No way can they fire on anything without going through the chain of command.

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

What is it you think I said that you're arguing against? You don't even know, do you?

 

[westwall]

No way can they fire on anything without going through the chain of command.

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

I can safely guarantee you I read far more than you. Your so called naval experience isn't very obvious based on your posts. What were you, a cook at NAS Alameda?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Well, Kerry is a war criminal, so the Russians should listen

 

[Iceweasel]

No way can they fire on anything without going through the chain of command.

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

That was a big giant wet fart from a guy full of shit. I was in the Coast Guard and doubt the Navy is different. It would be a huge international incident, wars have started like that. No captain is stupid enough to take that on his own. They knew they were close to Russia and it's why they were getting buzzed, like we do to them.

I believe the Coast Guard's normal duties and priorities are a bit removed from those of the US Navy. Maybe you Coasties needed permission to take action when you were in, but Navy CO's are permitted a tad more discretion, especially when conducting independent ops.

Now I WAS in the Navy, four years active then seven fleet reserve, active. I DID spend three years on a Fletcher Class destroyer (DD681) with all of it in Ops Dept. I picked up a few bits of information during that time and learned a bit of the SOP! Hell, I've even slept at a Holiday Inn!

Now when we were deployed to SEA and working with the Coast Guard along the coast of Nam down in III Corps in '66 their boats weren't shy about opening fire when needed doing their Market Time duties and not waiting for permission and doing an OUTSTANDING JOB OF IT! OH, but that was different, right?

You really need to know what the fuck you're talking about before you start comparing apples to oranges or the SOP's of the US Coast Guard to those of the US Navy. The scope of the respective responsibilities of the USCG are rather dwarfed by those of the USN and differences in situational responses are necessarily going to be different owing to time and distance and responsibilities. If that is beyond your comprehension then perhaps you can ask others for some assistance to help you understand!

Instead of spewing you diarrhea all across the board you could have spent a moment to back up your statements. More shit doesn't cover it up.

Maybe you need assistance getting off the toilet and learning how to use an internet search function? We used to give pukes like you a blanket party. Brought em in line pretty quick.

 

[kaz]

No way can they fire on anything without going through the chain of command.

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

You're not engaging in any actual discussion, you're just yelling and stomping your feet. Maybe you could make a well formed statement of your opinion

 

[kaz]

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

I can safely guarantee you I read far more than you. Your so called naval experience isn't very obvious based on your posts. What were you, a cook at NAS Alameda?

A very angry cook ...

 

[Iceweasel]

No way can they fire on anything without going through the chain of command.

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

Anyone that knows ANYTHING about the military knows that the chain of command is how it functions. Captains of ships are acting under orders and departing from that and firing because they feel threatened ain't gonna cut it. That street thinking, not military.

IF you were in the Navy you weren't much more than a deck ape.

 

[Muhammed]

Don't you love the arm chair admirals and generals and all around tough keyboard guys, thankfully we don't have that magical underwear guy as president

Don't you love all around tough guys who got butt hurt by a Christian parent?

 

[kaz]

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

Anyone that knows ANYTHING about the military knows that the chain of command is how it functions. Captains of ships are acting under orders and departing from that and firing because they feel threatened ain't gonna cut it. That street thinking, not military.

IF you were in the Navy you weren't much more than a deck ape.

I mostly agree, maybe entirely. Just want to be sure you realize that ship captains are told what their discretion is. The chain tells them say warn at 10 miles, lock on at 5 miles, shoot at 2 miles or it can be to not fire unless they fire first or whatever the command wants them to do. Obama's a wuss, the rules are very restrictive. He follows the Russian central control model, which is why they always lost to US methods in the past. Like Israel v. Syria where Israel shot down like 80 planes to zero for Syria. Obama wants to be Syria

 

[kaz]

I say hell yeah, this was pure Russian aggression. Putin is just laughing at us and our spineless wuss of a President. This isn't the endless games our militaries play, he crossed the line. And he did it on purpose to embarrass us. And it worked, our spineless President again showed what he is. No wonder the world doesn't take us seriously

 

[TheOldSchool]

Stop your hysterics people

Here's why the Navy didn't shoot down the Russian fighter jets that buzzed by a US destroyer

"You don’t get to kill people just because they’re being annoying," retired frigate and cruiser commanding officer Capt. Rick Hoffman told the Navy Timesabout the incident.

"We’re not at war with Russia," Capt. Rick Hoffman said.

"It would be one thing to be operating and have a threatening attack profile from someone who might not recognize me — that’s not the case here."

As a former commander of a cruiser that protected aircraft carriers and amphibious-assault vehicles from airborne attacks, Hoffman knows how to deal with threatening aircraft.

The Russian planes, Su-24s, had no visible weapons during the passes, and at no point did the USS Cook detect that the Russians were trying to lock onto them with a missile.

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

What is it you think I said that you're arguing against? You don't even know, do you?

Your post #32 here;

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

You're the one with the issues. You were Army or Air Force or none of the above?

 

[ThoughtCrimes]

You are so very wrong and ignorant of a US Navy ship Captain's duty and obligation, as well as the crew's, to protect his ship. If that CO felt his ship was in eminent danger, he didn't need anyone's permission to take aggressive action to defend his ship from attack. Notification to higher authority in the chain of command AFTER THE FACT is required in situations that would not admit delay, you opinion notwithstanding!

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

I can safely guarantee you I read far more than you. Your so called naval experience isn't very obvious based on your posts. What were you, a cook at NAS Alameda?

I'm reading a lot of false bravado from you, plus you are lacking any form of cogent argument for your either camouflaged or non-existent "position".

 

[kaz]

Stop your hysterics people

Here's why the Navy didn't shoot down the Russian fighter jets that buzzed by a US destroyer

"You don’t get to kill people just because they’re being annoying," retired frigate and cruiser commanding officer Capt. Rick Hoffman told the Navy Timesabout the incident.

"We’re not at war with Russia," Capt. Rick Hoffman said.

"It would be one thing to be operating and have a threatening attack profile from someone who might not recognize me — that’s not the case here."

As a former commander of a cruiser that protected aircraft carriers and amphibious-assault vehicles from airborne attacks, Hoffman knows how to deal with threatening aircraft.

The Russian planes, Su-24s, had no visible weapons during the passes, and at no point did the USS Cook detect that the Russians were trying to lock onto them with a missile.

They weren't being "annoying," they were threatening. Riddle me this, Batman. Why didn't we just turn around and do the same thing to a Russian ship?

Because .. Putin would have shot it down ...

 

[gipper]

Hell no!

 

[kaz]

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

It's Obama and Kerry that set the policy. Take the criticism where it is due

I note that you have supplied MORE than ample proof of your assertions above... YOUR UNSUBSTANTIATED OPINION! Laughable!!!

Got Milk, too?

It's not an opinion. There is a whole raft of ROE's that any ships Captain receives upon assuming command. This is well known to those who actually read.

No shit Sherlock! Speaking of reading, you should do some more of that reading thingy of what I wrote before sticking both feet in your mouth and appearing, well, less than your potential.

What is it you think I said that you're arguing against? You don't even know, do you?

Your post #32 here;

The rules of engagement are set by the military, he can't ignore them.

Your criticism should be of the White House. In the past, a huge advantage of the Military is that we set rules and allow our commanders to act in the field. This white house as all authoritarian leftists through history are control freaks.

You're the one with the issues. You were Army or Air Force or none of the above?

So you think the because I think the rules of engagement in a contentious area with the Russians came from the top? That means I'm clueless? Wow, you just proved how clueless you are

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

LOL Hilarious.

John Kerry: we could have shot down Russian jets 'buzzing' US warship

Wow, Kerry makes a breach of etiquette and skips the sinister triple dog dare ya, and goes right for the throat

What's wrong with what he said? Yes we could have...I'm sure our weapons systems were locked on....and the Russian pilot's threat warning system was lit up.....so?

Then why haven't they said this? Or if they had said it, why isn't it being widely disseminated?

The Captain of this ship should be arrested immediately.

If he was under orders to be passive, then the responsibility is with the command chain.

If the Captain got orders not to respond to a Russian Mig flying at 30 feet over his ship from a commander, then the commander and the Captain should both be arrested immediately. The only way we know that this happened, is because a loyal sailor filmed it with his phone cam. Dude I can not get that close to a Navy ship with my 18 foot fishing boat, without encountering guns, but a Russian Mig gets this allowance. This boat would be in better hands if the sailor with the phone was captain.

Commanders are below Captains in rank.