3 ms·

The objective I am using, is the objective they were given. They were told to bomb a bunch of targets. And they did and without casualties. That means they perf

The objective I am using, is the objective they were given. They were told to bomb a bunch of targets. And they did and without casualties. That means they performed their jobs well. Clearly the strategy behind the "bomb a bunch of stuff" objective is muddled at best, but that does not reflect badly against the navy. But to the people that set their objectives.

losvedir 7mo ago
I think the point is it's like the parable of the drunk looking for his keys under the streetlight, because that's where the light is. The Navy is performing well at the things it's being tasked with because it's only being tasked with things it can do well! But I think the point of this thread is that it still reflects poorly on the Navy if those things aren't actually useful in this war. They say generals are always preparing for the previous war and perhaps that's happening here.
jacquesm 7mo ago
You are conflating execution capability and force protection with achievement. Meanwhile, lots of innocent lives have been lost, the regime is still where it was before even if some of the faces have changed, there is an E2 that is missing a little piece of its tail, the price of oil has gone up considerably (that may have been an actual objective) and we've been distracted for a while from the Epstein files. If you think there was an item in the above list that qualifies as an objective then that's fine by me but for me these do not cross that threshold.
- usefulcat 7mo ago
  > the price of oil has gone up considerably (that may have been an actual objective) Even Trump isn't that dumb. There's a reason he dialed the tariffs back so much; price hikes lose elections. If there's one highly visible product of whose price all Americans are keenly aware, it's gasoline. And on top of that, it affects the price of pretty much everything else too. I thought the tariffs would be his undoing but jacking up the price of gas is even worse for him.
  - jacquesm 7mo ago
    Why would he care? He's not going to be up for re-election anyway and besides he's not paying for his own gas. But the price of oil going up helps russia in a considerable way and that could well have been one of the drivers (and apparently carrying water for Netanyahu).
    - usefulcat 7mo ago
      > He's not going to be up for re-election anyway I would not assume that he won't try to run again, nor would I assume that his party would not support it if he did. Though I do agree with the rest of what you wrote.
      - jacquesm 7mo ago
        (1) he has to stay alive until then (2) he has to overcome an absolutely massive approval deficit (3) he has to be able to run a credible campaign (4) he has to get around the term limits (5) I would expect there to be a fairly large number of people to be very upset if he did All in all I don't think his chances for re-election are > 0. But I agree with you that he might try, by hook - or by crook - to hold on to that chair.

losvedir 7mo ago

I think the point is it's like the parable of the drunk looking for his keys under the streetlight, because that's where the light is. The Navy is performing well at the things it's being tasked with because it's only being tasked with things it can do well! But I think the point of this thread is that it still reflects poorly on the Navy if those things aren't actually useful in this war. They say generals are always preparing for the previous war and perhaps that's happening here.

jacquesm 7mo ago

You are conflating execution capability and force protection with achievement. Meanwhile, lots of innocent lives have been lost, the regime is still where it was before even if some of the faces have changed, there is an E2 that is missing a little piece of its tail, the price of oil has gone up considerably (that may have been an actual objective) and we've been distracted for a while from the Epstein files. If you think there was an item in the above list that qualifies as an objective then that's fine by me but for me these do not cross that threshold.

usefulcat 7mo ago
> the price of oil has gone up considerably (that may have been an actual objective) Even Trump isn't that dumb. There's a reason he dialed the tariffs back so much; price hikes lose elections. If there's one highly visible product of whose price all Americans are keenly aware, it's gasoline. And on top of that, it affects the price of pretty much everything else too. I thought the tariffs would be his undoing but jacking up the price of gas is even worse for him.
- jacquesm 7mo ago
  Why would he care? He's not going to be up for re-election anyway and besides he's not paying for his own gas. But the price of oil going up helps russia in a considerable way and that could well have been one of the drivers (and apparently carrying water for Netanyahu).
  - usefulcat 7mo ago
    > He's not going to be up for re-election anyway I would not assume that he won't try to run again, nor would I assume that his party would not support it if he did. Though I do agree with the rest of what you wrote.
    - jacquesm 7mo ago
      (1) he has to stay alive until then (2) he has to overcome an absolutely massive approval deficit (3) he has to be able to run a credible campaign (4) he has to get around the term limits (5) I would expect there to be a fairly large number of people to be very upset if he did All in all I don't think his chances for re-election are > 0. But I agree with you that he might try, by hook - or by crook - to hold on to that chair.