Keeping the blogosphere posted on the goings on of the world of submarines since late 2004... and mocking and belittling general foolishness wherever it may be found. Idaho's first and foremost submarine blog. (If you don't like something on this blog, please E-mail me; don't call me at home.)

Tuesday, June 07, 2005

King's Bay Fights Back

In the fight to save Subase New London, I've thought that both the "environmental cleanup extortionists" and the "denigrate Georgia" crowd were on the wrong track. Now we see King's Bay starting to fight back with this article in the Florida Times-Union (Intel Source: Rontini). Excerpt:

"...After remaining silent for weeks, people in Camden County are defending their ability to handle the growth that will come if the Connecticut base closes.
"This isn't the backwoods place we're being portrayed as," said Sheila McNeill, a St. Marys businesswoman and national Navy League president. "They have the infrastructure and they have what they need to handle the growth."

"...Retired Capt. Walt Yourstone, former commanding officer at Kings Bay, said "it's a sad thing for the people in Groton, Conn." to learn their base has been recommended for closure, but he disagrees with the tactics used to save New London Naval Submarine Base.
"Their perception is there are a bunch of hicks down here," he said. "What boggles me is they're going negative against Camden County. I think they're grasping at straws."


My take is that the "negative" campaign is unlikely to sway many votes on the BRAC commission; I think that Groton's best chance continues to be to focus on the DOD report that calls for maintaining five or more submarines in the long-term than the Navy report on which the base-closing recommendations were apparently based.

Staying at PD...

1 Comments:

Blogger PigBoatSailor said...

I could not agree more. Frankly, I got tired of reading what was coming out of CT. The focus has to be on what will most influence the BRAC, which is military value. The Pentagon report, which seems to be based on strategic needs, disagrees with the Navy recommendations, which, it can be argued, are based on a monetary bottomline. -This- is what New London ought to be arguing about. Not fussing about the economy, or trying to claim that "they are worse than we are!" I believe that is the tactic used in previous BRACs, and it worked out then. CT needs to wise up, and quick.

6/07/2005 3:43 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home