See my reply above, don't answer without thinking? Here let me copy here for you.
Btw, you still haven't explain to me how you are at fault and didn't cause the accident. You are telling me BOTH caused the accident. I am telling you the navy ship was at
FAULT AND CAUSED THE ACCIDENT. The captain of the commercial ship might be sleeping all I care but we are here to debate on professionalism of the navy and there are procedures to be followed, so here you go, the Navy and the commercial ship were most likely both responsible for the accident, but the NAVY was at fault for not following procedures which could have prevented it. I rest my case Genius.
Btw, this is the second time I nailed you. Please, keep it simple so I can nail you again, I don't want to waste my time reading through your grandfathers story.
Navy crews at fault in fatal collisions, investigations find
https://www.navytimes.com/breaking-...ault-in-fatal-collisions-investigations-find/
You nail nothing but some cheesy insult and threw in some illogical comment.
First of all, I was discussing who caused the incident, you are telling me who is at fault. If you are still too stupid to realise, the two are NOT THE SAME argument. As I pointed out to you, one can be at fault with respect to the law even tho one did not caused the accident.
In the Avoidance of Collision in high sea, it put both ship's responsibility to avoid one another, not just placed on one ship, now, there are many different scenario to consider whether or not who caused a particular accident. Was the navy personnel at fault? As I explained already, yes they did, and they are already relief of duty, but that does not mean they caused the accident, and certainly the Navy Report released on the Nov 1 did not lay blame on them.
now I was not in any of those ship and so were you, I don't know who caused that accident, but seems to me you are dead set against the US Navy is at fault, now unless you know something I don't (Which is not logically as I don't think you have access to Department of Navy) You keep saying the US Navy is causing the incident, then prove it beyond the reasonable doubt, otherwise your word is just fart and I can also blame the PLAN for this incident and telling you to proof otherwise.
There is no such sentence, I cant believe you have reach such low level by adding you own words into a US naval commander statement. What a cheapshot. Horrible.
@waz
A new report by the U.S. Navy into collisions involving two of its warships found both American ships at fault, Navy officials told Fox News.
Both collisions were “avoidable” according to the report released Wednesday morning, the official said.
"Both of these accidents were preventable and the respective investigations found multiple failures by watch standers that contributed to the incidents," Chief of Naval Operations Adm. John Richardson said. "We must do better."
The guided-missile destroyer USS Fitzgerald collided with a large container ship on June 17 off the coast of Japan killing seven sailors. Already the captain, the second-in-command and the top senior enlisted sailor have been relieved of their duties.
According to the International Rules of the Road for vessels on the high seas, USS Fitzgerald was in a crossing situation with the cargo ship, Crystal off to Fitzgerald’s starboard or right side. Fitzgerald was required to maneuver, but did not until it was too late.
“In the 30 minutes leading up to the collision, neither Fitzgerald nor Crystal took such action to reduce the risk of collision until approximately one minute prior to the collision,” the report said.
Fitzgerald’s Officer of the Deck “intended to take no action” in the minutes leading up to the collision until realizing it was “too late,” the report said.
“The Officer of the Deck, the person responsible for safe navigation of the ship, exhibited poor seamanship by failing to maneuver as required, failing to sound the danger signal and failing to attempt to contact CRYSTAL on Bridge to Bridge radio. In addition, the Officer of the Deck did not call the Commanding Officer as appropriate and prescribed by Navy procedures to allow him to exercise more senior oversight and judgment of the situation,” the report said.
REPORT: TWO NAVY SEALS EYED IN STRANGULATION OF GREEN BERET IN MALI
In late August, another guided-missile destroyer, USS John S. McCain, collided with a merchant vessel, this time an oil tanker near Singapore. Ten American sailors drowned when their berthing spaces flooded.
Before the deadly collision, the bridge team aboard McCain became distracted by a false alarm signaling the warship had lost steering, according to an official briefed on the report.
“It made a bad situation worse,” the official said, adding the destroyer was in a busy shipping lane at the time of the collision.
"We are a Navy that learns from mistakes and the Navy is firmly committed to doing everything possible to prevent an accident like this from happening again," Richardson said. "We must never allow an accident like this to take the lives of such magnificent young sailors and inflict such painful grief on their families and the nation."
Both McCain’s commanding officer and the executive officer, the second in command, were relieved of command earlier this month.
The USS John S. McCain is named after Sen. John McCain’s father and grandfather, both admirals in the Navy.
In September, the top two officers of the Navy’s Japan-based 7th Fleet – where both warships were based -- were fired.
NAVY RESCUES MARINERS, DOGS STRANDED IN PACIFIC OCEAN FOR 5 MONTHS
The Navy is currently without two warships capable of shooting down North Korean ballistic missiles, with the loss of McCain and Fitzgerald.
A second and more “comprehensive” investigation into a string of mishaps this year -- including a Navy warship running aground in Tokyo Bay in late January and spilling over 1,000 gallons of hydraulic fluid into Japanese waters -- is expected Thursday.
The Navy’s top officer, Adm. John M. Richardson, is set to hold a press conference at the Pentagon on Thursday as well.
And you are just going round and round and round with the same argument?
You know what, it is the Chinese Navy at fault, if it was not the Chinese Navy, there won't be the need for many US Navy sorties, so I blame the Chinese on this, now proof me otherwise.
Now, this is a stupid argument.
