USS JIMMY CARTER Commissioned

[SuperJerk 0]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/02/19/submarine...d.ap/index.html

 

USS Jimmy Carter commissioned

 

 

GROTON, Connecticut (AP) -- The USS Jimmy Carter entered the Navy's fleet Saturday as the most heavily armed submarine ever built, and as the last of the Seawolf class of attack subs that the Pentagon ordered during the Cold War's final years.

 

The $3.2 billion Jimmy Carter was commissioned Saturday, the first submarine named after a living ex-president.

 

Carter, himself a submariner during his time in the Navy, was on hand for the ceremony signaling the end of an era in submarining.

 

"The most deeply appreciated and emotional honor I've ever had is to have this great ship bear my name," Carter said in remarks prepared for the ceremony at the Naval Submarine Base New London.

 

Carter was joined by his wife, Rosalynn, former Vice President Walter Mondale and his wife, Joan, and Stansfield Turner, CIA director in the Carter administration.

 

The 453-foot, 12,000-ton submarine has a 50-torpedo payload and eight torpedo tubes. And, according to intelligence experts, it can tap undersea cables and eavesdrop on the communications passing through them.

 

It can reach speeds of more than 45 knots and carry Tomahawk cruise missiles and anti-submarine torpedoes, and it is engineered to be quieter than the other two Seawolves, making it better for surveillance.

 

John Pike, a military analyst with globalsecurity.org, said the ceremony closes the book on the big-submarine era.

 

"It was part of our strategy on how we were going to win World War III. It was a significant component in our response to the evil empire," he said.

 

In eastern Connecticut, a region steeped in submarine history and the home to the Electric Boat shipyard, which built and launched the Seawolves, some fear the Pentagon will close the New London base as it looks to shrink the submarine fleet and buy smaller, cheaper subs.

 

"It's hard to find a civilian that doesn't have some connection to the sub force," said Bud Fay, who owns a diner, car wash and laundry not far from the base gates in Groton.

 

To ensure that the last Seawolf was not obsolete before it hit the water, the Pentagon delayed production to install a 100-foot hull extension that military analysts say equips the Jimmy Carter to replace the USS Parche, one of the fleet's premier spy subs.

 

The Parche was decommissioned in October.

 

The Jimmy Carter will be based at Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor in Washington's Kitsap County, the Parche's former home.

 

For those of you who don't know, Carter was a WWII-era Navy vet who helped Admiral Hyman Rickover develop the Navy's nuclear program after the war was over. Therefore, I find this commisioning fitting.

 

 

The Seawolf-class attack submarines (SSN) was the intended successor to the Los Angeles class, ordered at the end of the Cold War in 1989. At one time, an intended fleet of 29 submarines was to be built over a ten-year period, later reduced to twelve. The end of the Cold War and budget constraints led to the fleet being cancelled at three boats in 1995, and led to the design of the smaller and cheaper Virginia class submarine.

 

credit: wikipedia

[Guest MikeSC]

It also, if memory serves, has the capability to intercept communications.

-=Mike

...Not a joke. I do actually think it's one of the abilities of the sub. The jokes will follow soon, though

[Styles 0]

I'll start us off. Ironic that the most heavily armed submarine ever built is named after one of the weakest armed presidents...

[Guest MikeSC]

I'll start us off. Ironic that the most heavily armed submarine ever built is named after one of the weakest armed presidents...

I was going to ask if we'd just give it to N. Korea, like Carter would like.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

I won't suggest that Carter was a great president, but its not as if he didn't make enough positive contributions to our nation before, during, and after his term in office to warrant this honor.

[Guest MikeSC]

I won't suggest that Carter was a great president, but its not as if he didn't make enough positive contributions to our nation before, during, and after his term in office to warrant this honor.

I have difficulty naming one. He nearly blew the Israel/Eypt peace deal. He signed the deal with N. Korea when Clinton did not want him to do so. He's legitimized dictators.

 

I could ask if the sub is fueled...with MALAISE!!!

-=Mike

[Styles 0]

I won't suggest that Carter was a great president, but its not as if he didn't make enough positive contributions to our nation before, during, and after his term in office to warrant this honor.

Come on, it's the USS JIMMY CARTER! You almost expect it to be taken hostage after running out of fuel...

[Guest MikeSC]

I won't suggest that Carter was a great president, but its not as if he didn't make enough positive contributions to our nation before, during, and after his term in office to warrant this honor.

Come on, it's the USS JIMMY CARTER! You almost to expect it to be taken hostage after running out of fuel...

I expect the commanders to allow a mutiny to occur, causing the sub to become an Islamist regime.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

He also got a lot of shit dumped on him that wasn't his fault, without the benefit of Karl Rove doing his spin control.

[Guest MikeSC]

He also got a lot of shit dumped on him that wasn't his fault, without the benefit of Karl Rove doing his spin control.

Such as? Again, I don't deny that overthrowing Mossadegh in the 50's was bad --- but allowing the Shah to be overthrown in 1979 was significantly worse. He managed to alienate his own party members (Democratic congressmen didn't like the guy) and, in my opinion, has a definite history of siding with Palestine over Israel regularly. He has legitimized thugs like Chavez in Venezuela, claiming an election with real questions behind it was legit while trying to cast doubt on the American system.

 

I don't blame Carter for the economy. It was shitty before he got there. It was shitty when he left. He didn't do anything to help it, but he didn't tank it.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

He also got a lot of shit dumped on him that wasn't his fault, without the benefit of Karl Rove doing his spin control.

Such as?

 

I don't blame Carter for the economy. It was shitty before he got there. It was shitty when he left. He didn't do anything to help it, but he didn't tank it.

You just answered your own question.

[Guest MikeSC]

He also got a lot of shit dumped on him that wasn't his fault, without the benefit of Karl Rove doing his spin control.

Such as?

 

I don't blame Carter for the economy. It was shitty before he got there. It was shitty when he left. He didn't do anything to help it, but he didn't tank it.

You just answered your own question.

There were infinitely bigger problems with Carter than the economy.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

He also got a lot of shit dumped on him that wasn't his fault, without the benefit of Karl Rove doing his spin control.

Such as?

 

I don't blame Carter for the economy. It was shitty before he got there. It was shitty when he left. He didn't do anything to help it, but he didn't tank it.

You just answered your own question.

There were infinitely bigger problems with Carter than the economy.

But certainly enough economic problems to qualify as "a lot of shit".

[Guest MikeSC]

He also got a lot of shit dumped on him that wasn't his fault, without the benefit of Karl Rove doing his spin control.

Such as?

 

I don't blame Carter for the economy. It was shitty before he got there. It was shitty when he left. He didn't do anything to help it, but he didn't tank it.

You just answered your own question.

There were infinitely bigger problems with Carter than the economy.

But certainly enough economic problems to qualify as "a lot of shit".

He didn't do anything to HELP the economy, so he's not totally off the hook. But his foreign policy was one of the worst in recorded history.

-=Mike

[SuperJerk 0]

He didn't do anything to HELP the economy, so he's not totally off the hook. But his foreign policy was one of the worst in recorded history.

Perhaps I should re-emphasize his accomplisments before and after his term in office.

[2GOLD 0]

He builds good houses....

There, that's all the good I have to say about Jimmy Carter.

 

Other than I hear he picked some damn fine peanuts.

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

He helped get Reagan elected by being a shitty opponent. Does that count?

[Jorge Gorgeous 0]

Speaking of legitimizing dictators...

 

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

I'll start us off...

I'll continue: I'm sure the sub is run on peanut oil and the uniforms are made of flannel...

[Guest Cerebus]

As far as the Navy goes, people love Carter especially submariners. He has a long history in the Navy, he served on several boats if I recall, and he was the pioneer of nuclear submarines during his time in office. Carter for all his faults during and after his presidency, and God knows there are a lot of them, was always a friend to the Navy and we've always honored him as such.

 

His foreign policy ideas may have been shit, and worse today, but I still honor Carter as a former member, and great friend, to the US Navy (too bad I can't say the same about Kerry).

[kkktookmybabyaway 0]

Commie...

[SuperJerk 0]

His foreign policy ideas may have been shit, and worse today, but I still honor Carter as a former member, and great friend, to the US Navy (too bad I can't say the same about Kerry).

How was Kerry not a friend to the Navy?

 

edit: Unless you mean speaking out against the Vietnam War and the actions of some people within the armed forces.

 

Nevermind.

Edited February 21, 2005 by RobotJerk

[Guest Cerebus]

Kerry served honorably in the military and recieved well earned decorations. His actions afterwards, including his amazingly mediocre career in the Senate, was shit.

[SuperJerk 0]

I disagree.

 

Kerry's protesting of the Vietnam War was his right as an American citizen, but I can see how someone could say it wasn't friendly towards the military.

 

His record as a senator regarding the military has improved greatly since he first took office.

[Vyce 0]

I disagree.

 

Kerry's protesting of the Vietnam War was his right as an American citizen, but I can see how someone could say it wasn't friendly towards the military.

 

His record as a senator regarding the military has improved greatly since he first took office.

He lied and grossly exaggerated about what was going on in Vietnam and his own words / testimony were used as propaganda by the VietCong.

 

I'd call that "shit" as well.

[SuperJerk 0]

He lied and grossly exaggerated about what was going on in Vietnam and his own words / testimony were used as propaganda by the VietCong.

He didn't lie.

 

http://factcheck.org/article244.html

 

And since Kerry testified, ample evidence of other atrocities has come to light:

 

Son Thang: In 1998, for example, Marine Corps veteran Gary D. Solis published the book Son Thang: An American War Crime describing the court-martial of four US Marines for the apparently unprovoked killing 16 women and children on the night of February 19, 1970 in a hamlet about 20 miles south of Danang. The four Marines testified that they were under orders by their patrol leader to shoot the villagers. A young Oliver North appeared as a character witness and helped acquit the leader of all charges, but three were convicted.

Tiger Force:  The Toledo Blade won a Pulitzer Prize this year for a series published in October, 2003 reporting that atrocities were committed by an elite US Army "Tiger Force" unit that the Blade said killed unarmed civilians and children during a seven-month rampage in 1967. "Elderly farmers were shot as they toiled in the fields. Prisoners were tortured and executed - their ears and scalps severed for souvenirs. One soldier kicked out the teeth of executed civilians for their gold fillings," the Blade reported. "Investigators concluded that 18 soldiers committed war crimes ranging from murder and assault to dereliction of duty. But no one was charged."

"Hundreds" of others: In December 2003 The New York Times quoted  Nicholas Turse, a doctoral candidate at Columbia University who has been studying government archives, as saying the records are filled with accounts of atrocities similar to those described by the Toledo Blade series. "I stumbled across the incidents The Blade reported," Turse was quoted as saying. "I read through that case a year, year and a half ago, and it really didn't stand out. There was nothing that made it stand out from anything else. That's the scary thing. It was just one of hundreds."

"Exact Same Stories": Keith Nolan, author of 10 published books on Vietnam, says he's heard many veterans describe atrocities just like those Kerry recounted from the Winter Soldier event. Nolan told FactCheck.org that since 1978 he's interviewed roughly 1,000 veterans in depth for his books, and spoken to thousands of others. "I have heard the exact same stories dozens if not hundreds of times over," he said. "Wars produce atrocities.  Frustrating guerrilla wars produce a particularly horrific number of atrocities.  That some individual soldiers and certain units responded with excessive brutality in Vietnam shouldn't really surprise anyone."

 

The fact that his words were used as Viet Cong propaganda wasn't his fault.

[Guest Vitamin X]

Erm, not to interrupt the sure to come Kerry-bashing, but I have a fondness for Carter since he gave the Cuban refugees asylum during the Mariel in 1979-1981. In a way, I practically owe my being born here rather than in Cuba to Carter, so I like him as far as that goes.

[SuperJerk 0]

Erm, not to interrupt the sure to come Kerry-bashing, but I have a fondness for Carter since he gave the Cuban refugees asylum during the Mariel in 1979-1980.

I guess that also means the movie "Scarface" wouldn't have been made if it wasn't for Jimmy Carter.

 

 

[Guest Smues]

The sub will be sunk by a mean bunny rabbit.

[SuperJerk 0]

The sub will be sunk by a mean bunny rabbit.