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.)

Sunday, February 04, 2007

Joe Buff Speaks The Truth

Go read what he has to say about the usefulness of nuclear submarines in the 21st century. Excerpt:
Yet some pundits continue to label the latest U.S. nuclear subs as nothing more than extravagant Cold War relics, as obsolescent and hyper-expensive solutions in search of a problem they can't really solve. Occasionally these domestic anti-submarine word warriors go so far as to insinuate that Silent Service leadership is inventing major contributions to the War on Terror that never took place, using a cloak of secrecy as a lame excuse to hide their budget-seeking deceit. Since nothing could be further from the truth, one has to wonder if those making these statements have been asleep for the past fifteen years, or if the only undersea warfare publication they've ever read is the classic but now historical novel, The Hunt For Red October -- which was first published in 1984. As a group they appear to fail to appreciate that events in Iraq and Afghanistan are heavily influenced by Syria, Iran, and Pakistan, all of which have long coastlines where nuclear subs with assistance from SEALs can conduct persistent electronic espionage, peering hundreds of miles into those nations' interiors and deep into their rulers' and rank-and-file Islamo-fascist minds. These same pundits also don't seem to grasp how much of the wider War on Terror is an information and cyber war, and a line-of-communications surveillance and interdiction battle, in which coastal zones and maritime routes will probably be decisive to who wins and who loses.
He also makes an excellent point regarding the Russian and Iranian "supertorpedo".

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"... all of which have long coastlines where nuclear subs with assistance from SEALs can conduct persistent electronic espionage ..."

it's really unfortunate that the writer could only list the above as an example of the nuc subs necessity

FYI - there are cheaper and less risky methods of getting ELINT and inserting Spec Ops

but, i am not dismissing the nuc subs

we will need them once the former USSR, China and India improve their blue water capabilities

~ theDdoubleSstandard

2/04/2007 1:39 PM

 
Anonymous Chief_Torpedoman said...

Dbl Std
"..FYI - there are cheaper and less risky methods of getting ELINT and inserting Spec Ops.."

I was just wondering if you read the whole article by Joe Buff. Joel posted the link. By "cheaper" methods of ELINT I hope you are not refering to a surface ship such as the Pueblo. With a sub on station, there would be no risk of capture such as with Pueblo. The sub would remain undiscovered or even if discovered, she would not be captured.

Anyway Joe Buff lists several examples of the necessity for subs. Joel only quoted one of them.

How would you critic Joe Buffs article on your onwn blog? Oh, that's right you don't have a blog.

2/05/2007 4:50 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home