If the Navy is not allowed to use sonar, then we have blinded ourselfs to a possible attack. See news story at the below link. Am I way off on this??? PS YES I'm in the Navy..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070806/sc_afp/usmilitaryenvironment_070806223724
2007-08-07 21:04:22 · 9 answers · asked by CHARLES W 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
Wow. That's a very interesting issue! What the article gives are the best arguments of either side; we really don't know the substance.
My guess is that some protections for whales are possible with minimal impact on the training, but that the Navy did not want to compromise and is presenting this as an either/or situation. The Navy's position may be that anything related to training is a matter of national security. Really, what they're worried about is environmentalists on their back for every possible impact such killing tiny endangered fish somewhere. And they are correct, there is a possible slippery slope here.
At the same time, the environmentalists have picked a big, and symbolic mammal to litigate about. They are likely very concerned about large marine life, but there is a certain calculation here that this would be a good case to bring because of the dramatic impact on large creatures that the public loves.(save the whales!)
Is our country at risk? Not really, IMHO. The appeals court will lift the order so the training can continue, or the Navy will conduct the exercises elsewhere, or it will follow the order and use lower levels of sonar and simulations. The training will not be as imperiled as they paint it; it's VERY likely the Navy is taking a strong position for litigation and exaggerating the problem..
Anyway, this is an interesting and important case, and it's something the press should thoroughly cover. They won't though, and so people will take sides based on their preexisting biases, and not on the facts. That means one side will sound like tree huggers, and the other will sound like war mongers and everyone will flame over a problem that is solvable.
2007-08-07 21:50:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
There's no one saying that. The problem is that aggressive
use of active sonar is extremely distracting and harmful to
whales. They can die instantly or get distracted in a way that
they end up on the beach.
This is not a suggestion for military operations of any kind
other than training. And there're not that many whales around
that you can't postpone your active sonar training for a bit.
You don't train "jumping" with ships around either. Because
it's unnecessary and can be done later when no one's around.
2007-08-08 02:30:28 · answer #2 · answered by Alex S 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nothing says "they are not allowed to use any kind of sonar anywhere". The ruling only said they cannot use that particular kind of sonar in that particular area.
And if you want to get Congress to change the laws that prohibit ANYONE from inflicting that kind of harm -- or change the laws to make an exception for the military -- go ahead.
The judge just ruled based on the existing laws. Get Congress to change the laws, and you change the outcome.
2007-08-07 21:09:29 · answer #3 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It's those blasted "tree huggers" always interfering with National Defense.
Did you hear about the idiots in Greenpeace who decided to attempt to ram a Danish destroyer with their old converted freighter? What kind of a moron attempts to take on a warship with a freighter? See the mentality here?
Fire up the sonar, boys! We appreciate the job you're doing. And if the tree-huggers get in the way, put a shot across their bow!
2007-08-07 21:13:31 · answer #4 · answered by C J 6 · 3⤊ 4⤋
Whales have a right to live. They were on this planet before us, and they diserve some respect considering at one point 90 percent of them were killed off for lamp oil.
You have a gun, dont cry much, but whats a poor whale going to do when it goes insane from the sounds.
If you are in the Navy, you should know that the page said off the coast of California. I would say go somewhere with no whales and test your Navy stuff. goodnight :)
2007-08-07 21:13:27 · answer #5 · answered by Historydoesntteachusanything!!!! 1 · 3⤊ 7⤋
The Navy could use a different frequency of sound. Sound comes in a whole spectrum of frequencies, choose a different one.
2007-08-07 21:09:27 · answer #6 · answered by suigeneris-impetus 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
hmm whales ...deep ocean water..thats why i joined the Army for the most part the ground really doesnt move to often.
2007-08-07 21:30:32 · answer #7 · answered by Commodevil 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
from a submariner, me!
well...when the "nice" very very very quiet diesel electric, russian made, Iranian submarine with its nuke warheads pops up in NY harbor nuking the place don't cry then....don't cry...just feel good that at least the whales are ok...!....LOL...!
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/meast/03/13/iran.russia.arms/
2007-08-07 21:09:38 · answer #8 · answered by Krytox1a 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Too bad whales don't fly. We could fry them with RADAR.
2007-08-07 21:24:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋