Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1. There is nothing wrong with faith. But all too many christians cannot discern the difference between faith and fact (and that often includes you), and that becomes a problem.
2. Anything that is not a fact is not reliable. If it were, all faiths in the world would be one faith, not dozens of faiths.
3. Perceptions, insights, feelings, intuition, discernment are not ""self delusion" "brainwashing" "unreliable" "subterfuge"". But they are also not reliable. Again, if they were, the whole world we see things the same way.
4. "music, love, song lyrics, poetry, courage, art, integrity, compassion, benevolence" are not facts, therefore they are not "self delusion, brainwashing, unreliable, subterfuge".
All that is your flawed logic.
"Anything that is not a fact is not reliable. If it were, all faiths in the world would be one faith, not dozens of faiths."
that's like saying if food was reliable there would only be one flavor of food, not dozens of flavors of food.
if music was reliable there would only be one type of music not dozens of types of music.
if books were reliable there would only be one section in the library, not dozens.
and in that one section there would be only one book, not dozens of books.
if learning was reliable there would only be one degree offered at university.
I keep hoping you're going to say something of substance, but it never happens. I think my solution is to reduce my expectations of you. I look forward to your terse response and/or animated gif.
"Anything that is not a fact is not reliable. If it were, all faiths in the world would be one faith, not dozens of faiths."
that's like saying if food was reliable there would only be one flavor of food, not dozens of flavors of food.
if music was reliable there would only be one type of music not dozens of types of music.
if books were reliable there would only be one section in the library, not dozens.
and in that one section there would be only one book, not dozens of books.
if learning was reliable there would only be one degree offered at university.
No, it isn't as if saying anything.
My post stands on its own without you playing silly word games.
In another thread you were highly critical of people who referenced Wikipedia...as opposed to you who typically references nothing.
I'm referencing biblical texts. If you want to read the King Joke Vision, it's on-line. In fact, you can read any vision on-line. If you want older copies of texts written prior to revisions, might I suggest E-Bay.
That Semitic languages are connotial is a fact established by linguistic scholars more than 2 centuries ago.
That Pukipedia is not a valid source is established by the fact that most major universities bar its use, and even when universities don't expressly bar it, professors often do.
The people who pen Puki articles are not necessarily experts or even knowledgeable about the subject matter on which they are writing and one should never assume they are.
The Task force was to be headed by USS Enterprise, at the time and still the largest aircraft carrier in the world. In addition, it consisted of amphibious assault carrier USS Tripoli (LPH-10), carrying a 200 strong Marine battalion and twenty five assault helicopters; The three guided missile escorts USS King (DDG-41), USS Decatur (DDG-31), and USS Parsons (DDG-33); four gun destroyersUSS Bausell (DD-845), USS Orleck (DD-886), USS McKean (DD-784) and USS Anderson; one ammo ship USS Haleakala (AE-25);one auxiliary fleet supply ship from Subic Bay Naval Base in the Philippines USS White Plains (AFS-4), who loaded over 60 Tons of Mail and Christmas Packages for the Task Force before leaving Subic Bay to join Task Force 74 on 19 December and a nuclear attack submarine.[22] The Enterprise was assigned by the Central authority, while the other ships were assigned by local commanders.[23] Enterprise was at this time at the Tonkin Gulf area. Recovering her airborne aircraft and transferring personnel who were required to stay to the USS Constellation (CVA-64), she prepared to head off. The task force was delayed while the support ships refueled, it held off East of Singapore, and was ordered into the Indian ocean on 14 December.[23] crossed Malacca straits on the nights of 13–14 December and entered the Bay of Bengal on the morning of 15 December.[22] The group was required to proceed slowly, averaging a speed of 15 knots, both to conserve fuel as well as to allow advance information on its heading.
The writer of that article is not an expert, has no understanding of the subject matter, and is totally clueless, having no idea what s/he's talking about.
On the other hand, I am an expert on Southwest Asia and in particular on the 1971 Pakistani-Indian War.
Do you want to know which Indian units rolled which Pakistani units?
Or do you just want the names of the commanders for those units?
Because I know them.
I can also tell you the names of ~90% of the Soviet army officers who commanded the Group of Soviet Forces Germany, including the Northern, Central and Southern Fronts, plus the all the combined arms armies and tank armies down to battalion level in 1989.
While I did have access to classified documents which may or may not still be classified, there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for the author of that article to outright lie and spread propaganda, disinformation and misinformation.
In 1971, a Marine company was 197 men, while a Marine battalion was 940 men.
Irrefutable proof the author is totally clueless and did no research on the subject matter.
Task Force 74 consisted of:
USS Enterprise (CVA-65) USS Tripoli (LPH-10) USS Decatur (DDG-31) USS Parsons (DDG-33) USS McKean (DD-784) USS Richard B Anderson (DD-786) USS Orleck (DD-886) USS John King (DDG-3) USS Waddell (DDG-24) USS Wichita (AOR-1) USS Kilauea (AE-26)
USS Gurnard (SSN-662) USS Bluefish (SSN-675)
Contrary to the author's claim, there were 2, not 3 "guided missile escorts" (USS Decatur and USS Parsons). Both were Decatur-class and the so-called "guided missile" was the RIM-24 Tartar surface-to-air missile system, which had a range of 20 nautical miles (later replaced by the RIM-66 surface-to-air missile system).
They were effectively anti-aircraft platforms.
The author botched the USS Anderson (DD-441). It was scrap metal in 1971, so it couldn't be part of the task force. The ignorant author misidentified the ship, which was actually the USS Richard B Anderson, two totally different ships.
The USS McKean, USS Richard B Anderson,and USS Orleck were all Gearing-class destroyers. Their primary function is surface vessel screening.
The USS Bausell was not part of the task force, in spite of the author's claims.
The idiot author is confused between the USS King and the USS John King, which are two totally different ships.
The author is so ill-informed on the subject matter, that he omits the USS Waddell. The USS Waddell and USS John King were both Charles F Adams-class destroyers, and while they were designated as "guided missile" destroyers, the only guided missile they carried was the ASROC for anti-submarine warfare. Both ships were basically anti-sub platforms.
The author confuses the USS Haleakala with the USS Kilauea and completely omits the USS Wichita and the attack submarines USS Bluefish and USS Gurnard.
Again, contrary to the author's claims, cruising at 15 knots does not conserve fuel, and the task force knew exactly where they were headed, which was up the Indian west coast to the Pakistani port at Karachi.
The Task Force did initially cruise at very slow speeds, as slow as 5 knots, but that was due to the fact that the US Navy did not have accurate maps of the Straits of Malacca -- remember, this is 1971 -- and due to the fact that there is an extremely high volume of merchant vessel traffic in the Strait.
At the time, there were also a large number of recently built oil rig platforms that weren't marked on any maps.
The Task Force did not want to ground any ships, and it did not want to collide with any merchant vessels, and it did not want to run into an oil platform, and that was especially true during night-time operations when visibility is reduced and surface radar is cluttered.
The logs of the USS Enterprise have been published on the internet for more than a decade.
Rear Admiral Cooper states:
Further navigational hazards “flourishing in the waters surrounding and between†the six straits and passages–Singapore, Malacca, Sunda, Gaspar, San Bernadino and Palawan–transited during this WestPac deployment included oil rigs, many not noted on charts. In addition, navigation lights were often erroneously marked on charts or missing altogether, small unlighted vessels also becoming quite numerous. “Extreme vigilance at night in these waters,†Captain Tissot advised, “is mandatory.â€
That's why Task Force 74 proceeded slowly, and not to conserve fuel or because they didn't have a mission as the author falsely claims.
Task Force 74 was not a US Navy task force. It was created specifically for that situation by pulling the USS Enterprise away from her duties in the Gulf of Tonkin and combining her with DESRON 31 based in the Philippines (Destroyer Squadron 31), plus culling other ships from other units to throw it together.
The Indians were not the only ones to see it as a Show of Force.
Had the author been competent and knowledgeable in the subject matter, he would have included the fact that Canadian High Commissioner George and many other European leaders also saw it as a Show of Force (See Document 501 State Department Telegram dated December 7, 1971).
The US recognized East Pakistan and maintained diplomatic relations. It had no interest in the outcome of the conflict. Document 501 State Department Telegram dated December 7, 1971 and India-Pakistan Working Group documents make it crystal clear that the Task Force deployed in support of West Pakistan President Yahya, not East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).
The Task Force was never deployed to the Bay of Bengal, and the Task Force never entered the Bay of Bengal, because that was not the mission of the Task Force.
With intelligence reports indicating the Indian cabinet was discussing the scopes of offensive into West Pakistan, on 10 December, the decision was taken by US to assemble a task force at Malacca strait, spearheaded by USS Enterprise.
That is factually incorrect.
The US assembled Task Force 72 on December 2nd, not December 10th, and the US announced it on December 5th, five days before the idiot author claims.
Here’s an excerpt from a cable sent by the US Ambassador to India on December 8th:
Subject: deployment carrier task force in indian [sic] ocean
1. Up until last few days I have felt able to defend U.S. policy on the basis of our over-riding concern to bring a halt to hostilities. I am now troubled by fact that a number of my diplomatic colleagues view deployment of carrier task force as military escalation by U.S.
2. this [sic] was forcefully brought to my attention by Canadian High Commissioner George who believes that our decision to deploy carrier task force at this time has served as encouragement to president yahya [sic] to continue pak [sic] military effort. In this regard George believes Yahya’s disavowal of initial farman ali [sic] message and subsequent message from governer malik [sic] was directly related to word of carrier task force deployment.
Not only does it prove the author is wrong about when the Task Force was assigned, the cable contradicts the author's claims that the Task Force was sent in support of East Pakistan.
The author is also totally ignorant of Soviet involvement.
The author gets it wrong when he says Soviet ships came from Vladivostok.
INDRON 10 was already in the Bay of Bengal, led by the Varyag (Kynda-class), Dimitriy Pozharskiy (Sverdlov-class), Vladivostok (Kresta I-class), Admiral Isakov (Kara II-class), Odarenny and Sposobny (Kashin I-class), Neuderzhimy (Kildin-class), and the Veskiy, Vdokhnovenny and Burlivyy (Kotlin-class).
INDRON 12 was in the Indian Ocean off the coast of Mumbai (Bombay), led by the Admiral Fokin (Kynda-class), Alexandr Suvorov (Sverdlov-class), Sevastopl (Kresta I-class), Otvazhny and Strogiy (Kashin I-class), Svirepy (Krivak I-class) and the Vliyatelnyy, Blagorodnyy, Naporistiy and Vyderzhannnyy (all Kotlin-class).
Each surface group was accompanied by two Echo-class submarines each with 6 Shaddock surface-to-surface anti-ship missiles and at least one Victor- or November-class attack submarine.
The author is too damn stupid to know that.
Granted, I had access to classified information, so I know the exact composition of Soviet naval forces (but not submarine forces), but damn, newspapers around the world published the names of the Soviet Kynda- and Sverdlov-class ships.
That just goes to show you how poorly researched and written many Pukipedia articles are, and why you cannot rely on them.
I can show you thousands and thousands of false or flawed Puki articles.
Wrong. Who decided that inspirations received by ignorant and very fallible human beings would NOT have such variances, conflicts, contradictions, errors, omissions, amendations, orthographic errors, spelling errors, improper word usage, and improper word divisions? Inspiration is NOT dictation.
Inspiration is irrevelant and fails to address the claims christians make, which is that the authors/translators are filled with the Holy Flatulence and/or they are guided by the Yahweh-Jesus-Flatulence-Thing.
Those people are not in contact with any god-thing or filled with anything, except stupidity.
I will grant you they are inspired...by power, control, greed and lust.
That's why Jeremiah, Hilkiah and Sapshan wrote Deuteronomy.
They wanted total power and control over every facet of religion in the kingdom, and they forged Deuteronomy and got a sucker like King Josiah to buy into their nonsense.
All those texts are written by men, for men, about men and nothing else and almost exclusively to justify their power and control.
I'm referencing biblical texts. If you want to read the King Joke Vision, it's on-line. In fact, you can read any vision on-line. If you want older copies of texts written prior to revisions, might I suggest E-Bay.
That Semitic languages are connotial is a fact established by linguistic scholars more than 2 centuries ago.
That Pukipedia is not a valid source is established by the fact that most major universities bar its use, and even when universities don't expressly bar it, professors often do.
The people who pen Puki articles are not necessarily experts or even knowledgeable about the subject matter on which they are writing and one should never assume they are.
The Task force was to be headed by USS Enterprise, at the time and still the largest aircraft carrier in the world. In addition, it consisted of amphibious assault carrier USS Tripoli (LPH-10), carrying a 200 strong Marine battalion and twenty five assault helicopters; The three guided missile escorts USS King (DDG-41), USS Decatur (DDG-31), and USS Parsons (DDG-33); four gun destroyersUSS Bausell (DD-845), USS Orleck (DD-886), USS McKean (DD-784) and USS Anderson; one ammo ship USS Haleakala (AE-25);one auxiliary fleet supply ship from Subic Bay Naval Base in the Philippines USS White Plains (AFS-4), who loaded over 60 Tons of Mail and Christmas Packages for the Task Force before leaving Subic Bay to join Task Force 74 on 19 December and a nuclear attack submarine.[22] The Enterprise was assigned by the Central authority, while the other ships were assigned by local commanders.[23] Enterprise was at this time at the Tonkin Gulf area. Recovering her airborne aircraft and transferring personnel who were required to stay to the USS Constellation (CVA-64), she prepared to head off. The task force was delayed while the support ships refueled, it held off East of Singapore, and was ordered into the Indian ocean on 14 December.[23] crossed Malacca straits on the nights of 13–14 December and entered the Bay of Bengal on the morning of 15 December.[22] The group was required to proceed slowly, averaging a speed of 15 knots, both to conserve fuel as well as to allow advance information on its heading.
The writer of that article is not an expert, has no understanding of the subject matter, and is totally clueless, having no idea what s/he's talking about.
On the other hand, I am an expert on Southwest Asia and in particular on the 1971 Pakistani-Indian War.
Do you want to know which Indian units rolled which Pakistani units?
Or do you just want the names of the commanders for those units?
Because I know them.
I can also tell you the names of ~90% of the Soviet army officers who commanded the Group of Soviet Forces Germany, including the Northern, Central and Southern Fronts, plus the all the combined arms armies and tank armies down to battalion level in 1989.
While I did have access to classified documents which may or may not still be classified, there is absolutely no excuse whatsoever for the author of that article to outright lie and spread propaganda, disinformation and misinformation.
In 1971, a Marine company was 197 men, while a Marine battalion was 940 men.
Irrefutable proof the author is totally clueless and did no research on the subject matter.
Task Force 74 consisted of:
USS Enterprise (CVA-65) USS Tripoli (LPH-10) USS Decatur (DDG-31) USS Parsons (DDG-33) USS McKean (DD-784) USS Richard B Anderson (DD-786) USS Orleck (DD-886) USS John King (DDG-3) USS Waddell (DDG-24) USS Wichita (AOR-1) USS Kilauea (AE-26)
USS Gurnard (SSN-662) USS Bluefish (SSN-675)
Contrary to the author's claim, there were 2, not 3 "guided missile escorts" (USS Decatur and USS Parsons). Both were Decatur-class and the so-called "guided missile" was the RIM-24 Tartar surface-to-air missile system, which had a range of 20 nautical miles (later replaced by the RIM-66 surface-to-air missile system).
They were effectively anti-aircraft platforms.
The author botched the USS Anderson (DD-441). It was scrap metal in 1971, so it couldn't be part of the task force. The ignorant author misidentified the ship, which was actually the USS Richard B Anderson, two totally different ships.
The USS McKean, USS Richard B Anderson,and USS Orleck were all Gearing-class destroyers. Their primary function is surface vessel screening.
The USS Bausell was not part of the task force, in spite of the author's claims.
The idiot author is confused between the USS King and the USS John King, which are two totally different ships.
The author is so ill-informed on the subject matter, that he omits the USS Waddell. The USS Waddell and USS John King were both Charles F Adams-class destroyers, and while they were designated as "guided missile" destroyers, the only guided missile they carried was the ASROC for anti-submarine warfare. Both ships were basically anti-sub platforms.
The author confuses the USS Haleakala with the USS Kilauea and completely omits the USS Wichita and the attack submarines USS Bluefish and USS Gurnard.
Again, contrary to the author's claims, cruising at 15 knots does not conserve fuel, and the task force knew exactly where they were headed, which was up the Indian west coast to the Pakistani port at Karachi.
The Task Force did initially cruise at very slow speeds, as slow as 5 knots, but that was due to the fact that the US Navy did not have accurate maps of the Straits of Malacca -- remember, this is 1971 -- and due to the fact that there is an extremely high volume of merchant vessel traffic in the Strait.
At the time, there were also a large number of recently built oil rig platforms that weren't marked on any maps.
The Task Force did not want to ground any ships, and it did not want to collide with any merchant vessels, and it did not want to run into an oil platform, and that was especially true during night-time operations when visibility is reduced and surface radar is cluttered.
The logs of the USS Enterprise have been published on the internet for more than a decade.
Rear Admiral Cooper states:
Further navigational hazards “flourishing in the waters surrounding and between†the six straits and passages–Singapore, Malacca, Sunda, Gaspar, San Bernadino and Palawan–transited during this WestPac deployment included oil rigs, many not noted on charts. In addition, navigation lights were often erroneously marked on charts or missing altogether, small unlighted vessels also becoming quite numerous. “Extreme vigilance at night in these waters,†Captain Tissot advised, “is mandatory.â€
That's why Task Force 74 proceeded slowly, and not to conserve fuel or because they didn't have a mission as the author falsely claims.
Task Force 74 was not a US Navy task force. It was created specifically for that situation by pulling the USS Enterprise away from her duties in the Gulf of Tonkin and combining her with DESRON 31 based in the Philippines (Destroyer Squadron 31), plus culling other ships from other units to throw it together.
The Indians were not the only ones to see it as a Show of Force.
Had the author been competent and knowledgeable in the subject matter, he would have included the fact that Canadian High Commissioner George and many other European leaders also saw it as a Show of Force (See Document 501 State Department Telegram dated December 7, 1971).
The US recognized East Pakistan and maintained diplomatic relations. It had no interest in the outcome of the conflict. Document 501 State Department Telegram dated December 7, 1971 and India-Pakistan Working Group documents make it crystal clear that the Task Force deployed in support of West Pakistan President Yahya, not East Pakistan (now Bangladesh).
The Task Force was never deployed to the Bay of Bengal, and the Task Force never entered the Bay of Bengal, because that was not the mission of the Task Force.
With intelligence reports indicating the Indian cabinet was discussing the scopes of offensive into West Pakistan, on 10 December, the decision was taken by US to assemble a task force at Malacca strait, spearheaded by USS Enterprise.
That is factually incorrect.
The US assembled Task Force 72 on December 2nd, not December 10th, and the US announced it on December 5th, five days before the idiot author claims.
Here’s an excerpt from a cable sent by the US Ambassador to India on December 8th:
Subject: deployment carrier task force in indian [sic] ocean
1. Up until last few days I have felt able to defend U.S. policy on the basis of our over-riding concern to bring a halt to hostilities. I am now troubled by fact that a number of my diplomatic colleagues view deployment of carrier task force as military escalation by U.S.
2. this [sic] was forcefully brought to my attention by Canadian High Commissioner George who believes that our decision to deploy carrier task force at this time has served as encouragement to president yahya [sic] to continue pak [sic] military effort. In this regard George believes Yahya’s disavowal of initial farman ali [sic] message and subsequent message from governer malik [sic] was directly related to word of carrier task force deployment.
Not only does it prove the author is wrong about when the Task Force was assigned, the cable contradicts the author's claims that the Task Force was sent in support of East Pakistan.
The author is also totally ignorant of Soviet involvement.
The author gets it wrong when he says Soviet ships came from Vladivostok.
INDRON 10 was already in the Bay of Bengal, led by the Varyag (Kynda-class), Dimitriy Pozharskiy (Sverdlov-class), Vladivostok (Kresta I-class), Admiral Isakov (Kara II-class), Odarenny and Sposobny (Kashin I-class), Neuderzhimy (Kildin-class), and the Veskiy, Vdokhnovenny and Burlivyy (Kotlin-class).
INDRON 12 was in the Indian Ocean off the coast of Mumbai (Bombay), led by the Admiral Fokin (Kynda-class), Alexandr Suvorov (Sverdlov-class), Sevastopl (Kresta I-class), Otvazhny and Strogiy (Kashin I-class), Svirepy (Krivak I-class) and the Vliyatelnyy, Blagorodnyy, Naporistiy and Vyderzhannnyy (all Kotlin-class).
Each surface group was accompanied by two Echo-class submarines each with 6 Shaddock surface-to-surface anti-ship missiles and at least one Victor- or November-class attack submarine.
The author is too damn stupid to know that.
Granted, I had access to classified information, so I know the exact composition of Soviet naval forces (but not submarine forces), but damn, newspapers around the world published the names of the Soviet Kynda- and Sverdlov-class ships.
That just goes to show you how poorly researched and written many Pukipedia articles are, and why you cannot rely on them.
I can show you thousands and thousands of false or flawed Puki articles.
I keep hoping you're going to say something of substance, but it never happens. I think my solution is to reduce my expectations of you. I look forward to your terse response and/or animated gif.
Poor thing. You just need an adult to explain them.
Come on... how else could Mircea blow his own trumpet?
What he doesn't understand is that there's a difference between "referencing" something and "talking about" something.
There's nothing wrong with "talking about something", but there is something a bit hypocritical about criticizing someone who uses Wikipedia to gain information as compared to not referencing anything at all.
And I say this as a person who, generally, finds a lot of good stuff in his posts.
No, it isn't as if saying anything.
My post stands on its own without you playing silly word games.
if you are not able to see the flawed logic, I believe you.
However other people are able to see it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
