Archive for the ‘1997’ Category

Refits of RN ships in USA

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Thu Jun 05 04:41:45 1997
>Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 06:21:16 -0500
>From: Brooks A Rowlett
>Reply-To: brooksar@indy.net
>Organization: Apparently Not.
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (Macintosh; I; PPC)
>To: Mahan Naval History Mailing List
>Subject: Re: Refits of RN ships in USA
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>In addition to the RN ships, a question on the WW2 list has led to me
>positng there a list of major French warhisp of WWII. It should be
>noted that the following major French warships had refits in the US in
>1943-44:
>
>Battleship RICHILIEU
>Carrier BEARN (to aircraft transport)
>heavy cruisers DUQUESNE and TOURVILLE
>CL’s EMILE BERTIN, GLOIRE, MONTCALM, and GEORGES LEYGUES
>Training CL JEANNE D”ARC
>LE FANTASQUE class destroyers (nameship), LE TERRIBLE, and LE MALIN.
>
>Most of these were ships at Martinique or Dakar after the fall of
>France.
>
>-Brooks

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

North Korean patrol boat fires at South Korean ship

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Thu Jun 05 11:57:55 1997
>Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 10:52:09 -0700
>From: Mike Potter
>Reply-To: mike.potter@artecon.com
>Organization: Artecon, Inc.
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I)
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: North Korean patrol boat fires at South Korean ship
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>North Korean patrol boat fires at South Korean ship
>___________________________________________________
>Copyright (c) 1997 Nando.net
>Copyright (c) 1997 The Associated Press
>
>SEOUL, South Korea (June 5, 1997 10:43 a.m. EDT) — A North Korean
>patrol boat violated the nautical border Thursday and fired at a South
>Korean navy ship before retreating to the North, South Korea said.
>
>No casualties were reported in the intrusion, the most serious since a
>North Korean submarine carrying 26 armed spies and crewmen ran aground
>off South Korea’s east coast in September. That incident raised tensions
>between the two Koreas, which are still technically at war.
>
>The Defense Ministry said the North Korean ship crossed into South
>Korea’s territorial waters on the west coast at about 1:30 p.m. local
>time, or 12:30 a.m. EDT, Thursday and fired three rounds from a naval
>gun at a South Korean patrol boat.
>
>The South Korean high-speed gunboat responded with two shots of its own,
>the ministry said. Two other South Korean gunboats had joined it just
>after the North Korean ship crossed over.
>
>The confrontation continued for an hour before the North Korean ship
>sailed back into its own waters, the ministry said.
>
>The ministry initially said there were three North Korean boats.
>
>Because the North Korean ship was escorting fishing boats, the intrusion
>appeared to be unintentional, but the ministry said it would
>investigate.
>
>The Defense Ministry said it was not increasing the South Korean armed
>forces’ level of alertness because of the incident.
>
>But South Korea considered it serious enough to convene an emergency
>meeting of security-related Cabinet ministers, the national news agency
>Yonhap reported. Kwon’s office would not confirm the report.
>
>The government said it will protest the North’s intrusion to the U.N.
>Armistice Commission that monitors the shaky Korean truce that ended the
>1950-53 Korean War.
>
>In last fall’s manhunt by South Korean soldiers, 24 North Koreans were
>killed or found dead. Eleven South Korean soldiers and civilians were
>also killed. One sailor was captured, and another intruder was listed as
>missing.
>
>North Korean patrol ships have violated South Korean waters several
>times in the past year but Thursday’s incident was the first time
>northern ships had fired at their South Korean enemies.
>
>The border between the Koreas is the world’s most heavily armed, with
>nearly 2 million troops standing guard on both sides.
>
>–

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Re[2]: Refits of RN ships in USA

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Thu Jun 05 12:58:33 1997
>To: mahan@microwrks.com, riddleb@fhu.disa.mil (“Bill Riddle”)
>Subject: Re: Re[2]: Refits of RN ships in USA
>Date: Thu, 05 Jun 97 19:52:31 GMT
>From: salvin@ocslink.com
>X-Mailer: Quarterdeck Message Center [1.1]
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>
> > Let me then ask the obvious. What service/action did these French
> > ships see?
> >
> > Were any of these ships in North Africa when the Torch landings took
> > place? In other words, were they Vichy up to that point?
> >
> > Bill Riddle
> >
> >
>
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > In addition to the RN ships, a question on the WW2 list has led to me
> > positng there a list of major French warhisp of WWII. It should be
> > noted that the following major French warships had refits in the US in
> > 1943-44:
> >
> > Battleship RICHILIEU
> Transfered incomplete to Dakar on 18 June 40. Attacked there by > FAA aircraft
>on 8 July and damaged by a torpedo hit. 25 September 40 engaged in >a gunbattle
>while still in the harbor with the _Resolution_ during the aborted >British/Free
>French invasion of Dakar. After the invasion of North Africa she >went over to
>the Free French and was finally completed in New York Naval Yard from Feb to
>August, 1943. Afterwhich she operated for a short time in the North Atlantic
>escorting British carrier strikes against Norway. In March, 1944 she was
>tranfered to the British Eastern Fleet and spent the rest of the war >operating
>agianst the Japanese. Casablanca during the invasion of North Africa and exchanged gunfire with the
>_Massachusetts_.>
> > Carrier BEARN (to aircraft transport)
>De-militarized in Martinique until July, 1943. Then transfered to >New Orleans
>for conversion to a aircraft transport
> >
> > heavy cruisers DUQUESNE and TOURVILLE
>
>Both heavy cruisers were transfered to Force X based at Alexandria in early
>1940. After the fall of France they were interned until June 1943.
>Remobilized as Free French forces, they sailed around the Cape for >Dakar in and
>were engaged in anti-blockade running duty. In June of 1944 the _Tourville_
>was taken out of service for refitting and saw no more operational service
>during the war. The _Duquesne_ was attached to Group Lorraine of the French
>Naval Task Force in Dec. 1944 and took part in bombardment of >isoltated German
>fortresses on the French coast.
> > CL’s EMILE BERTIN, GLOIRE, MONTCALM, and GEORGES LEYGUES
>The _Emile Bertin_ was in Halifax when France fell and left that port for
>Martinique. She was de-militarized in 1942 and was not operational >again until
>August 1943 when she was transfered to Philadelphia for refit. She supported
>the landings in Southern France in August, 1944.
>
>The other three cruisers were at Dakar and all except the _Gloire_ helped to
>defend the port when it was attacked in September 1940. The _Gloire_ was
>undergoing repairs in Casablanca, and wouldn’t return until after >the attack.
>After coming under Free French Control in 1943 and being refitted in the US,
>the _Gloire_ operated in the Med, supporting the Anzio invasion and later the
>Invasion of Southern France. Her sisters, after their refits, >operated out of
>Dakar for a time and then transfered to Western U. S. Task Force and supplied
>gunfire support during the Normandy landings.
> >
> > Training CL JEANNE D”ARC
>
>Like the _Emile Bertin_ she was in Halifax when France fell and she was
>transfered to the Caribbean. She `showed the flag’ until May, 1942 when she
>was de-militarized under U. S. pressure. In September, 1943 she sailed to
>North Africa, was re-militarized and served as a transport until >October, 1944
>when she took part in bombardment missions in the Med. (Note: according to
>Whitley’s _Cruisers of World War II_, she was to be re-fitted in 1943 in
>Philadelphia, but this was canceled and she went to Casablanca instead)
> > LE FANTASQUE class destroyers (nameship), LE TERRIBLE, and LE MALIN.
>
>_Le Fantasque_ & _Le Malin_ were at Dakar and participated in defending the
>port in Sept, 1940. _Le Terrible_ was at Toulon. After joining the Free
>French, all served in the Atlantic or Med, usually escorting convoys >or as part
>of an escort carrier hunter group.
> >
> > Most of these were ships at Martinique or Dakar after the fall of
> > France.
> >
> > -Brooks
> >
> >
> >
>
>—-
>
>Steve Alvin
>Department of Social Sciences
>Illinois Central College
>
>salvin@ocslink.com

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Missouri homeport dispute

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Fri Jun 06 09:26:29 1997
>Date: Fri, 6 Jun 97 12:23:51 EDT
>From: JOHN SZALAY
>X-To: “mahan@microwrks.com
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Missouri homeport dispute
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>
>In a copyrighted story in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, There is a dispute
>being waged over the the future homeport of the Battleship Missouri.
>The ship is scheduled to be towed to Pearl Harbor, arriving in time
>for May 1998.
> The office of U.S. Rep Norm Dicks D-Wash has asked the Navy to review
>the selection for the homeport saying Bremerton should have won
>the right to have the Battleship over Hawaii. In a letter to Navy Sec
>John Dalton, the Rep asked the Sec to re-open the selection process,
>this time using an independent panel to make the choice.
>Sen Inouye of Hawaii sez the BB is going to Hawaii. Period.
>
>The Missouri will be displayed on Battleship row on Ford island
>along with the Arizona Memorial, the Bowfin submarine museum.
>
>
> http://starbulletin.com/today/news/index.html
>
> June 5 1997 issue.
>————————————————————————-
>
> John Szalay
> jpszalay@tacl.dnet.ge.com

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Refits of RN ships in USA

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Fri Jun 06 22:01:43 1997
>From: John Snyder
>Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 21:44:18 -0700
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Re: Refits of RN ships in USA
>Organization: MacNexus, the Sacramento Macintosh User Group
>X-Mailer: TeleFinder BBS v5.5
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Brooks Rowlett wrote:
>
>positng there a list of major French warhisp of WWII. It should be
>noted that the following major French warships had refits in the US in
>1943-44:
>
>Battleship RICHILIEU
>Carrier BEARN (to aircraft transport)
>heavy cruisers DUQUESNE and TOURVILLE
>CL’s EMILE BERTIN, GLOIRE, MONTCALM, and GEORGES LEYGUES
>Training CL JEANNE D”ARC
>LE FANTASQUE class destroyers (nameship), LE TERRIBLE, and LE MALIN.>>
>
>SNIP
>
>GLOIRE emerged from her refit painted in the USN’s zebra-stripe “Adaptor”
>camouflage, a scheme normally associated with USN PTs.
>
>John Snyder
>John_Snyder@bbs.macnexus.org

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Refits of RN Ships in USA/Drydocks

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Mon Jun 09 09:51:11 1997
>Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 09:50:52 -0700
>From: Mike Potter
>Reply-To: mike.potter@artecon.com
>Organization: Artecon, Inc.
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I)
>To: mahan@microwrks.com
>Subject: Re: Refits of RN Ships in USA/Drydocks
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Does anyone know of a source for a photograph of HMS =Valiant= in this
>drydock:
>
>Late in the war at Trincomalee, Ceylon, the CO of the French battleship
>=Richelieu= declined to have his ship raised on one of the new Indian
>drydocks. He suspected it was weak. Instead HMS =Valiant= became the
>drydock’s first battleship customer. Upon lifting her the drydock broke
>up, badly damaging =Valiant= and terminating her operational career.
>
> > By this time the RN had lost Singapore, so AFD 5 was the only drydock
> > able to take a British BB between Gibraltar and Esquimalt, going
> > eastabout. A programme of dock building was started with new graving
> > docks at Cape Town and Sydney, and two floating docks being built in
> > India, all BB size.
>
>–
>Michael C. Potter, Mgr, TelCo/Govt Programs mike.potter@artecon.com
>Artecon, Inc. | | Mail: PO Box 9000
>6305 El Camino Real -|- _|_ Carlsbad CA
>Carlsbad CA 92009 >_|_( |/_>ph: 760/431-4465 >_III_ V|/ _III_ |/|_o fx: 760/931-5527
> =-| L/_| _|____L_/_|==
> ___ ________|____-===L|_LL| -==| .___ |
> ___. __I____|_[_]_______|____I___||____[_]_|__|_=====_|\__–+====–/
>\_____/|_|__| == 963 /
>|

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

USS Liberty: draft article

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Mon Jun 09 13:04:09 1997
>X-Sender: jim@mail.halcyon.com
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
>Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 12:33:11 -0700
>To: mike.potter@artecon.com, mahan@microwrks.com
>From: Jim Ennes
>Subject: Re: USS Liberty: draft article
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>At 10:02 AM 5/30/97 -0700, you wrote:
> >Last year I contacted a pro-Israeli partisan who supposedly could
> >discuss USS =Liberty= (AGTR 5). He provided no information and assailed
> >me personally as anti-Semitic for raising the issue. (I have,
> >incidentally, a Jewish relative by marriage who perished in the
> >Holocaust, probably at Auschwitz-Birkenau; his daughter is my aunt.) Try
> >it: e-mail your questions to Prof Alan Stein at the University of
> >Connecticut, stein@math.uconn.edu. His apparently publicly-funded web
> >site, http://www.math.uconn.edu/~stein, also calls (or did last year)
> >Jim Ennes an anti-Semite. I thought scholars were supposed to be
> >open-minded. Anyway, this situation could explain why list masters might
> >discourage discussion of the =Liberty= incident.
>
>I have not found Professor Stein to be open minded. On the contrary.
>In this case, I was advised by an attorney to file suit against Professor
>Stein for his outrageous public libel against me. Instead, I asked the
>University authorities to have the remark removed. They referred my
>letter to the Connecticut Attorney General who advised me that the
>web site was an inappropriate use of university property and that he
>had been ordered to remove it. Instead, he made a slight but
>inadequate change of wording. Last time I looked the site was
>still there.
>
>
>
>—-
>Join The USS Liberty Email Discussion Conference
>Email LISTSERV@MAELSTROM.STJOHNS.EDU
>With SUBSCRIBE USS_LIBERTY As The Text
>http://www.ussliberty.org/jim/ussliberty/

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Fraud & Libel (Was: USS Liberty)

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Mon Jun 09 14:22:43 1997
>From: Tracy Johnson
>To: “‘Mahan-L'”
>Subject: RE: Fraud & Libel (Was: USS Liberty)
>Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 14:17:54 -0700
>Encoding: 17 TEXT
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>Speaking of such matters I had an incident which happened to me last March
>in which someone impersonated my e-mail address on a list-server and
>started sending things in my name. The things he sent were of a sexual
>nature.
>
>The list moderator helped me fish out who the perpetrator was and was able
>to stop it at the user’s ISP and Administrative levels.
>
>However I also reported this to the FBI and I was told that there is
>nothing they can do unless it involves a threat to National Security or it
>is Kiddie Porn. In other words anything else said on Internet e-mail is
>”unprosecutable.”
>
>Seeing how your problem isn’t e-mail oriented, but rather a WEB site might
>make it different, but not much. Taking it to the university seems to be
>the same approach I took, which cut it off administratively, but justice
>isn’t really resolved, is it?

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

USS Liberty: draft article

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Mon Jun 09 13:50:56 1997
>X-Sender: jim@mail.halcyon.com
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32)
>Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 13:50:13 -0700
>To: mike.potter@artecon.com, mahan@microwrks.com
>From: Jim Ennes
>Subject: Re: USS Liberty: draft article
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>At 10:02 AM 5/30/97 -0700, you wrote:
>
> >In =Assault on the Liberty= Jim Ennes hypothesized that Israel attempted
> >to “dispatch” her so that she could not discover the plan to take the
> >Golan Heights.
>
>Actually, that theory is not mine. It comes from intelligence agencies,
>has been mentioned often by JCS Chairman Admiral Thomas Moorer,
>and I believe by others.
>
> >Since communications interception is passive, Israel
> >could be sure that =Liberty= was deaf only after her antennas were
> >submerged.
>
>Or disabled. It was obvious to us that they targeted out antennas
>from the beginning. Examination of damage photos shows that the
>antennas received concentrated fire. I was the ship’s EMO and
>almost immediately started getting reports from my people that
>ALL of the antennas had been destroyed by missile fire from the
>aircraft. One of my ETs ran a cable from an antenna across the
>deck to the transmitter room allowing us to send our call for
>help. Without that, we would not have gotten any messages
>off at all.
>
> >But Israeli forces ended their attack before that point.
> >Either (a) after initial misjudgment, Dayan changed his mind in
> >mid-stream about the need to dispatch =Liberty=; or (b) someone of great
> >personal or political authority, perhaps his boss, prime minister Levi
> >Eshkol, interceded to stop him.
>
>We believe they stopped the attack after our call for help was
>answered by USS Saratoga reporting that “Help is on the Way”.
>
> >In either case, why cover it up today? Israel no longer asserts (if it
> >ever did) that it seized the Golan Heights as an immediate defensive
> >operation in 1967. And why is the U.S. Government still reluctant to
> >investigate the attack?
>
>Members of Congress fear the wrath of the Israeli Lobby.
>Defying Israel is a sure ticket out of Congressional office.
>
> >Israel must be protecting something extremely vital to it today. I
> >suggest it is Israels nuclear strategy. In 1967 Israel was already
> >building nuclear weapons, partially for deterrence and partially as
> >weapons to punish the world should Israel face imminent destruction.
> >This is what Seymour Hersch in his book of the title calls “the Sampson
> >option:” punish the world by nuclear terror. Since it remains Israels
> >current strategy, Israel has a vital interest in concealing its
> >strategic decision process – especially since the strategy is deluded
> >and operationally severely flawed. The fact that it is a long-standing
> >strategy does not make it wise, tenable, or realistic.
>
>I think it is just knee jerk defense. They have been lying about this
>for so long that they don’t know how to tell the truth.
> >
> >Why the US role in the cover-up of the =Liberty= incident?
>
>Perhaps any inquiry would also probe the failure of the US to
>defend the ship.
> >
> >Today: For many politicians, exploring the =Liberty= incident would
> >jeopardize contributions from bipartisan pro-Israel lobbyists.
>
>Exactly.
>
>Jim

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Fraud & Libel (Was: USS Liberty)

Friday, January 2nd, 2009

From Mon Jun 09 14:33:34 1997
>X-Sender: msmall@roanoke.infi.net
>X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32)
>Date: Mon, 09 Jun 1997 17:33:35 -0400
>To: Tracy Johnson
>From: Marc James Small
>Subject: RE: Fraud & Libel (Was: USS Liberty)
>Cc: mahan@microwrks.com
>Precendence: bulk
>Sender: mahan-owner@microworks.net
>
>I would hope that those wishing to open the Net to regulation by criminal
>or civil regulators think twice about this. The price of our freedom is
>that occasionally foolish and inaccurate matters get posted or, worse, that
>someone jerks us around. So be it: such is a minor price to pay for the
>benefits of liberty.
>
>Marc
>
>
>msmall@roanoke.infi.net FAX: +540/343-7315
>Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!

Posted via email from mahan’s posterous

Purpose
The Mahan Naval Discussion List hosted here at NavalStrategy.org is to foster discussion and debate on the relevance of Admiral Alfred Thayer Mahan's ideas on the importance of sea power influenced navies around the world.
Links