Biazon: US carrier not for rescue, recovery operations (??!!??)

**Monseratto** · June 27th, 2008 11:15 PM

Originally Posted by Isuzoom

Fu*k you Biazon!, Fu*k you Pimentel! dala na pati mga gagong politiko na walang ginagawa....1 week na! Go to real problem di sa mga nuclear bullsh*t issue!!!...

Sir, puso niyo. Huwag kayo magalit, matatanda mga senador na iyon. Malapit na rin kukunin ni Lord..

**Jun aka Pekto** · June 28th, 2008 06:13 AM

Originally Posted by redorange

They don't go on missions all the time but they do go on missions with the military under so called "training". Remember when the Burnham's were held hostage the US were supposedly training at the time, yet the training area happened to be around the same location of the hostage. IIRC something that was never mentioned was the involvement of US Special Ops during their rescue.

As far as the nuke issue with the USS Reagan just take the help being offered, because in reality the families of the victims could careless of who helps them at this point. At the very least the US is offering to help which is better than what the President of the Republic is doing enjoying her vacation in the US while the people who placed her in power suffer. I guess it's not important now since she can't get re-elected.

The hostage situation was unique. American lives were involved. The US will risk American lives to save/rescue other Americans. But, actual operations just for the sake of operations? Are the returns worth risking US lives? I'm inclined to think no. I mean it's possible. But, I'll believe it when I see it.

I'm pretty sure the US Navy brass were already aware of the nuclear clause. So, they probably already had drawn up alternative solutions. Besides, a carrier battlegroup is very flexible. It's Seabees can create (quite nice) camps in the middle of nowhere within a few hours. It's choppers and small craft have long range and can work from shore if needed be.

The Philippines should exercise its sovereignity. There's nothing wrong with asking the US to comply with the nuclear clause. Most other countries have a lot stricter policies than what the Philippines has shown thus far. That's why I'm not losing any sleep over it.

As for Biazon..... I'm the kind to try and get some good out of something apparently bad. Instead of telling him to shut up or go to h*ll, I'd tell him if he can apply the rules to visitors who's trying to help, then maybe he can also do the same to the local folks who are flaunting the rules from the same book.

Add: As for GMA....... I suppose it's pretty symbolic if she cut her trip short and she went home. But like you said before, many things go on in the background we're not aware of. How do we know she's not working late at night on the problems back home? This is the internet age after all. So many things can be done remotely. A good leader also does not need to micro-manage every aspect. I can't really criticize much because I'm not privvy to what these people are doing.

A question for the folks here.... Would you change your view of GMA for the better if she cut her trip short and went home to lend moral support?

**CVT** · June 28th, 2008 06:57 AM

Good question bro.. As for me, it will not make any difference for GMA to go home...

The more than 50 government people plus their sabits should go home... They're spending tax money on their trip to the US while the rest of our country suffer....

6303:fetch: