Kamakazie Sith wrote:I'm not up on USN nuclear weapons policy, but it's not unreasonable to assume that US carriers have nuclear weapons onboard.
So... why would the Japanese let Kitty Hawk into their waters, then?
Old fasion fuel run ship. No nuclear engine aboard. Never any nuclear weapons, nothing nuke about it.
If they objected to that they might as well object to anything with an inteneral combustion engine. Then we'd have to station the Consitition there.
"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
Mr Bean wrote:
Old fasion fuel run ship. No nuclear engine aboard. Never any nuclear weapons, nothing nuke about it.
If they objected to that they might as well object to anything with an inteneral combustion engine. Then we'd have to station the Consitition there.
The tree huggers wouldn't like that one bit!
But anyway Kitty Hawk almost certainly did have nuclear weapons onboard for much of her career. The solution to ‘no nuclear weapons in Jap ports’ was to simply disassemble the bombs, leaving only ‘nuclear components’ and not nuclear weapons
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
Kamakazie Sith wrote:I'm not up on USN nuclear weapons policy, but it's not unreasonable to assume that US carriers have nuclear weapons onboard.
So... why would the Japanese let Kitty Hawk into their waters, then?
Old fasion fuel run ship. No nuclear engine aboard. Never any nuclear weapons, nothing nuke about it.
My point was that if he felt that it was reasonable to assume that US carriers would have nuclear weapons on board, why would that only apply to the carriers also powered by nuclear reactors?
Uraniun235 wrote:
My point was that if he felt that it was reasonable to assume that US carriers would have nuclear weapons on board, why would that only apply to the carriers also powered by nuclear reactors?
I said US carriers and not US nuclear carriers. Unless you were talking about Japans policy.
Of course the reason we got the nuke carrier there is because we're pulling some troops out of Okinawa and moving aircraft from Futenma to Schwab, which is not exactly a real crippling concession. Those goddamn aircraft were too damn loud anyway.
The End of Suburbia
"If more cars are inevitable, must there not be roads for them to run on?"
-Robert Moses
"The Wire" is the best show in the history of television. Watch it today.
Ender wrote:If the Truman goes there, I may re-enlist.
Do you think that would go over well?
Considering Truman was the president who okayed the nuking of Japan?
That was kinda the point. My version of "When pigs fly!"
Ah, I get it.
After some of what you've said about your command I was rather surprised that you would even consider reenlisting. I just assumed that maybe you really liked Japan.
By the pricking of my thumb,
Something wicked this way comes.
Open, locks,
Whoever knocks.
