> Saw an interesting youtube doc that discussed why the US is having logistics issues in the Iran War

It takes an aircraft carrier 33 hours and 20 minutes to travel 1000 miles at 30 knots

wrote:

Nice link you dumbfuq

Watched on my TV so no link for your lazy ass

wrote:

Which means what?

It means :

It takes an aircraft carrier 33 hours and 20 minutes to travel 1000 miles at 30 knots

Which part do you not understand?

Rather than have a ship be out of positions for two days or more, DOD is trying to bring the supplies to the ship in the field.  This is proving to be harder.  I assume the priorities are bombs, fuel and aircraft parts, followed by ships supplies,, then food, then personal mail.  Food is probably the trickiest - it's not like you're shipping it via (refrigerated) truck from the nearest WalMart distribution center which is generally less than 100 miles.

Here is the reason the USA is having problems in Iran:
tardtrump1.png

Every other previous president knew it was best to ignore Israel, but not that guy.

US weighing whether to abandon its Middle East bases: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/us … r-AA2apBV5

The US Defense Department is considering pulling back troops from the Persian Gulf following damage to its presence there during the ongoing war with Iran, the Washington Post reported Tuesday, citing eight sources.

The war has prompted a “once-in-a-generation chance” for the US to consider whether to maintain its bases in the Gulf, the report said, adding that the Pentagon is even considering not rebuilding its damaged bases as they were before the fighting broke out in late February.

Normally, about 40,000 US troops are stationed across the Middle East, according to the Post, at some 20 bases scattered throughout the region. Many of these bases, as well as other US military sites, have come under heavy Iranian missile and drone fire since the US and Israel launched the war in late February, killing 18 US service members and injuring hundreds more.

“The war really did highlight the vulnerability” of American forces in the region, former US diplomat Michael Ratney told the Post.

And, as always, the US media ignores the elephant in the room. The implicit claim being made by the US was "if you allow us to put troops in your territory we will protect you". Except it's clear the US can't even protect its own forces, much less anything else. At which point the gulf states have to ask "what exactly are we getting from this arrangement apart from making ourselves a target"?