Missed Funerals and Blocked Toilets: Iran Deployment Takes a Toll on U.S. Sailors - WSJ

[Brian Kegerreis]

Missed Funerals and Blocked Toilets: Iran Deployment Takes a Toll on U.S. Sailors - WSJ https://share.google/rGG558MEzn9J71cyg 

You asked why we need more carriers when we have so many, as if we could deploy them all at once. 

[GMoney]

We're about to attack a sovereign nation for no discernible reason.....and THIS is what we're worried about?????

um...ok *shrug*

On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 6:55 AM Brian Kegerreis <bkege...@gmail.com> wrote:

Missed Funerals and Blocked Toilets: Iran Deployment Takes a Toll on U.S. Sailors - WSJ https://share.google/rGG558MEzn9J71cyg 

You asked why we need more carriers when we have so many, as if we could deploy them all at once. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Kansas City Diversity Coalition" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kansas-city-diversity...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kansas-city-diversity-coalition/CAJfMWEy9kbtYVpMDoSYwZNomvJV_XJx0zj4_%3Dj62cstauTmTTA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Brian Kegerreis]

So we've been attacking covering nations for years. Thats why we built a Navy to go beat someone's ass. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kansas-city-diversity-coalition/CACazdfJ%2BrM0kzJZiuMUNMF0TuMr%2BrHNNnXQRk%2BpTDGwCS5%2BuAQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[GMoney]

On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 9:35 AM Brian Kegerreis <bkege...@gmail.com> wrote:

So we've been attacking covering nations for years. Thats why we built a Navy to go beat someone's ass. 

Good analysis

Got any kids on any of those naval ships?

Me neither

*shrug* should make for good TV.

[Brian Kegerreis]

Family yes. 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Kansas City Diversity Coalition" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kansas-city-diversity...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kansas-city-diversity-coalition/CACazdf%2Beq4SKM8av6wnoROON8FVR9fxWRwODCHboqwLgTZZ8dQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[kan...@aol.com]

So we need to build another dozen carriers so that snowflake sailors can have more time off? 

HEY, they signed up for military duty. They knew what the commitment entailed. Quitcher bitchin. 

The solution is universal service  When people in Congress have children in the service, and when they have to listen to their constituents more often, maybe this whole "kick the entire world's ass" mentality will be modulated. 

As for the current foray into Iran's neighborhood, I'd call it "Operation Epstein Distraction". There's nothing going on in Iran today that hasn't been going on for years that suddenly calls for our enhanced presence. There is significant dollar cost. The cost in human inconvenience is relatively trivial. 

Tell this tale of woe to an Iwo Jima survivor. 

As an aside, one of my patients is a military vet. His father was in WWII and apparently was involved in THIRTEEN assaults on Japanese held Pacific islands. That's just crazy. I'm sure he and his companions were truly inconvenienced, or dead/wounded. 

[Brian Kegerreis]

Its not just about time off for the sailors to attend funerals or meet their chikdren. 

They need rest and refit and training. The ships need maintenance that can only be done in ports the air crews need rest refit training and maintenance. 

To have a Carrier on station you need to have at lest 2 carriers on rotation and that is the bare minimum. That doesnt allow for accidents battle damage mechanical problems or increased need for forward deployment. Idealy you'd want 3 carriers 1 in port one training/active in home waters, and one on station for every hot spot you want to keep a carrier near like the Persian Gulf, the Straits of Taiwan and the Eastern Mediterranean.

Carriers are expensive, but powerful symbols and powerful force projectors. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kansas-city-diversity-coalition/67965b18-94c1-4418-80e6-1d35b07edebbn%40googlegroups.com.

[kan...@aol.com]

Blah, blah, blah. 

That said, assuming that it take 3 ships to cover one deployment, our 12 ships would cover 4 separate missions on a 24/7 basis. That sounds like more than enough; unless of course we really have hegemony in mind. 

BTW, Russia has ONE ancient carrier. The Chinese have three, two are older style, one more modern. All three are conventionally powered. They are planning to increase their numbers over the next decade. 

How much better could things be if we could negotiate so that they don't increase their force and we don't fell obliged to reciprocate? 

But if we continue with our current level of paranoia, it suggests that if they build three more carriers that we'd have to build like a dozen more. That would maintain the current ratio. Maybe China plans to bankrupt us like we did Russia in the Cold War. 

[Brian Kegerreis]

Blah blah blah the reality of forward deployment is what it is.

Having Carriers isn't about countering carriers.  Its about the ability to project air power to any part of the 7 seas and any region that borders the ocean. An aircraft carriers is a floating city thst can provide fresh water power medical and logistical support to a coastal disaster area one day and a week later can impose a no fly zone over some hot spot 5000 miles away. 

A special Ops team needs air cover to rescue hostages in Syria one day and 3 days later that same carrier is providing relief to a disaster area in Mozambique.

Now hegemony isnt really a bad thing.  Consider this. There hasn't been a major naval engagement since 1945. Our Naval hegemony allowed the US to send enough troops to the Pusan perimeter to stop the Communists, perform an amphibious invasion behind their lines and later conduct one of the largest naval evacuations in history when the Chinese intervened and pushed UN forces back to roughly the DMZ.

I dont know where the cost benefit line is between extended peace without a major war through superior firepower and the cost a a major war in blood and treasure but I suppose we could find out real fast if we we want. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kansas-city-diversity-coalition/8eb067ea-708e-4fa2-965f-82f3e4d7290bn%40googlegroups.com.

[kan...@aol.com]

You didn't answer; but maybe the question needs to be clearer. Okay, we don't build carriers based on what China builds. 

That said, how many "hot spots' do we need to be able to cover at the same time?  As YOU  point out, a carrier can do X,Y,Z in one place and then a week later do A,B,C 5000 miles away. Actually, that math is about right. Nuke carriers can travel at about 30 knots or over  750 miles/day. So in a week they CAN be 5000 miles away. 

So, now it boils down to how many places do you think we should be able to park carriers at the same time. Multiply by three and that's what we need. As it stands, by YOUR math, we can cover four places at once. Now THAT'S gotta be enough. If not, then we're either at war or we're really paranoid. 

And stop lecturing us as to what a carrier is and what it can do. Jeez, carrier dominance was established in WWII at Midway. It was the  end of the battleship. In the space of a few hours, the US had established virtual maritime dominance in the Pacific. 

But, to the issue at hand, we have a carrier near Iran and one near Venezuela. So  we're well equipped to handle that obligation. And that includes maintenance, shore leave, etc, etc. So the USS G. Ford has been at it for about 8 months. Why can't we swap it out for any one of the other 11 ships? This doesn't seem like a problem with adequate materiel; but one one of logistics. And it sounds like a few of the 5000 crew members ought to learn  plumbing. And missing the funeral of a great-grandfather, sad as it sounds, just seems like snowflake whining. Write a letter to "Warrior Hegseth" and see what he has to say. 

I have great respect for the military. They do a job that's necessary and one that I wouldn't do. But service members know what they signed up for. Hardships are  part of the deal. When I was an ER doc, I worked 12 hour shifts and plenty of weekends. I missed this/that/the other family events. But it was part of the deal. I could have opted for a second career earlier (perhaps). When wound care presented itself as an opportunity, I pretty much leapt at the chance. Glad I did.