Japanese boat crashes into US Navy destroyer in Pacific Fleet’s 5th collision this year

[Beast]

Because the US has greatly reduced the standard to recruit soldiers. They often represent the lowest of their social strata. Often times, they are desperate and need to pay for some bank credit. Otherwise, a US soldier has a much greater chance to be killed in an immoral war than any other country; hence, smart guys like Trump or Bush never do military service even when it is required.

Yup, thks for reminding us. Mexican, gypsy, reject of US society or even refugee.

So this is the standard of US military?

 

[Beast]

You do know G W Bush was a Texas Air National Guard Pilot and his dad was a WW2 fighter pilot?

And what do you actually know about military service? Have you been to a war? Or are you the kind of person who talk the talk but when it's your time to walk, you are going to sit on the sideline and let other die for you?

May I know what position Trump serve in US military? Cherry pick your arguement?

 

[TaiShang]

Yup, thks for reminding us. Mexican, gypsy, reject of US society or even refugee.

So this is the standard of US military?

I personally know some aged MA students, previously did military service in Iraq/Afghanistan, when I was a TA. They were heavily from minority backgrounds and were unwillingly recruited to pay for college or other sort of debt.

May I know what position Trump serve in US military? Cherry pick your arguement?

As if it really meant something.

 

[jhungary]

May I know what position Trump serve in US military? Cherry pick your arguement?

did I even highlight Trump?

By the way, he was in the military structure, he was a student in New York Military Academy earning the rank of Captain, which back then is more like State Guard, so you can say Trump was in the Military, if you count ROTC student are in the military, which according to Department of Defence, they do.

 

[Kyle Sun]

USN is stuck on bumper ships.

 

[AndrewJin]

Make Merika Graet Again！

 

[Han Patriot]

You nail nothing but some cheesy insult and threw in some illogical comment.

If I say you are my bitch, does that burden of proof on you proofing you are not my bitch?

Well, I never called you a bitch and I think that is wrong, so I reported you. I merely said I nailed you in my arguments.

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.

Nope, I am telling you who IS AT FAULT AND CAUSED the accident. You cannot be at fault if you didn't cause the accident, and no where did I say the commercial ship didn't cause the accident. The debate was about NAVAL PROFESSIONALISM which has got procedures in place to prevent such an accident and if that navy didn't manage to execute such procedures professionally, then it is not a professional navy. Until today you cannot explain to me how a party AT FAULT DIDN'T CAUSE THE ACCIDENT. You merely explained to me how two parties can be at fault and caused the accident. Understand genius?

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.

You still do not get my argument, I have never place any responsibility on any party, I am just saying the US NAVY is proven to be at fault and also one of the parties responsible to the accident. Hence, the US navy is both at FAULT and also CAUSED the accident since it take two to crash head on. So where is the evidence the commercial ship was at fault? If you are a law expert as you claim to be, the commercial ship is innocent until proven guilty. The US Navy on the other hand had already been proven guilty to be AT FAULT and also CAUSING the accident.

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.
.

Not me bro, it's the US who is saying the Navy is at FAULT, you see my name written on that report? If a US NAVY Ship is a subset of the US NAVY, then yes, the US NAVY is AT FAULT AND CAUSED THE ACCIDENT, regardless of whether the other party was also causing the accident. Again, you still haven't explain to me how a party AT FAULT didn't CAUSE the accident. Now go argue with them >

Navy crews at fault in fatal collisions, investigations find
https://www.defensenews.com/breakin...ault-in-fatal-collisions-investigations-find/

Or maybe you are the one who don't read, look at the report, it stated "DISCOUNTING ALL OTHER PARTY ACTION"

Just look at the response with your fellow inmate @Han Patriot At fault does not mean the US Navy are responsible for the accident.

Just exactly how thick were you guys? I mean I came across some dense people, but I don't think they top your cake.

Until now you cannot explain to me how a party at FAULT did not CAUSE the accident. It's like saying I stab the person, but the person died because of bleeding not because of my stab. Amazing education system you have there in US. Are you from a public school btw?

 

[Han Patriot]

They have zero responsibility, all blame trump and his former-callgirl wife.

It's very easy to debate with gambit or jhungary, they try to overwhelm you with alot of crap, you just need to nail in to their point of argument and dissect it. For god's sake, they didn't even attempt to contact the other ship.....this is just basic seamanship.

 

[AndrewJin]

They are banking on us not reading and then abandoning the debate so they appear victorious, if you dissect their crap, their points are just very simple but they do not want to tell you in a direct manner, they will first tell you about their cat named pussy and her lunch.

I think one of their gang should make a summary in one or two sentences everytime one of them makes long but shallow comments.

 

[Han Patriot]

I think one of their gang should make a summary in one or two sentences everytime one of them makes long but shallow comments.

I had already advised jhungary on this, he is still blurting like he always do. I told him to keep it simple and direct, so people can understand you and reply. If he was to work in a corporate setting, people would just delete his email. There is a term KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)

 

[AndrewJin]

I had already advised jhungary on this, he is still blurting like he always do. I told him to keep it simple and direct, so people can understand you and reply. If he was to work in a corporate setting, people would just delete his email. There is a term KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid)

Trump people.....
low IQ

 

[jhungary]

Well, I never called you a bitch and I think that is wrong, so I reported you. I merely said I nailed you in my arguments.

Report what? I was talking about the burden of proof.

If you accuse someone on something, the burden of proof is on you, same goes if I accused you for being an arsehole, I need to show proof that you are, not you need to show proof that you aren't.

Nope, I am telling you who IS AT FAULT AND CAUSED the accident. You cannot be at fault if you didn't cause the accident, and no where did I say the commercial ship didn't cause the accident. The debate was about NAVAL PROFESSIONALISM which has got procedures in place to prevent such an accident and if that navy didn't manage to execute such procedures professionally, then it is not a professional navy. Until today you cannot explain to me how a party AT FAULT DIDN'T CAUSE THE ACCIDENT. You merely explained to me how two parties can be at fault and caused the accident. Understand genius?

So, what make you qualify to "Judge" this case base on the facts and determine whose fault is it?

Are you aware of all the detail? Are you some kind of accredited accident investigator? Even if you are one, you need to be able to present all the facts before such a judgement are able to make, I don't think you would know what exactly happen and how exactly happen, I know people who were on that ship during the collision and they can't even tell me what's going on.

And no, it's not about professionalism, because if you argue since it was a navy, then they should have been more "careful and professional" is like saying if you are a racing driver, you should NEVER crash your car, otherwise you are not being professional. Fact to the matter is, a lot of racing driver still crash their car, on thwe track and off, does that make them unprofessional? Professionalism to the USN is to fight a war, not going from A to B. USN is not a taxi or ferry driver, even so, your argument hold zero sense.

And yes, I have already explained to you how people can be at fault but did not caused the accident, you are too simple to understand law and knows that "fault" can be compound. I cannot help you if you have low IQ.

You still do not get my argument, I have never place any responsibility on any party, I am just saying the US NAVY is proven to be at fault and also one of the parties responsible to the accident. Hence, the US navy is both at FAULT and also CAUSED the accident since it take two to crash head on. So where is the evidence the commercial ship was at fault? If you are a law expert as you claim to be, the commercial ship is innocent until proven guilty. The US Navy on the other hand had already been proven guilty to be AT FAULT and also CAUSING the accident.

How so? Do tell me which and how US Navy is "Proven" to be at fault? Like you claim, can you quote any or all finding as to how and why the US Navy AS A WHOLE, not individual, is at fault?

This is not a criminal case, this is an accident, there are no "Innocent until proven guilty" unless you can show either party INTENTIONALLY crash on the other, otherwise there are no "Guilty Party" in this case. And no, again, you did not proven the US Navy is at fault.

Say for example. The Navy Captain at sleep in his quarter during the crash is a fault, but he is asleep in his cabin alone did not cause this accident, because he did not leave the pilot house unstaffed and have everyone go to sleep (Which the US Navy is accusing ACX Crystal crew to did just that). So, the captain's action is wrong when he is sound asleep when the collision happen, that does not mean he or the US Navy in some extend, caused this accident. If you want to claim the US Navy is at fault, then you will need to prove it.

Just because you said so, does not mean it is true, of course you can say whatever you can, but without facts backing up. It's BS, I can claim the whole collision is Chinese Navy fault, and I can say it was. So?

And if you still do not realise, you are contradicting yourself. You begin with saying you have not lay any blame on the accident like this the word in Blue is directly contradicting to the word in red
​

Not me bro, it's the US who is saying the Navy is at FAULT, you see my name written on that report? If a US NAVY Ship is a subset of the US NAVY, then yes, the US NAVY is AT FAULT AND CAUSED THE ACCIDENT, regardless of whether the other party was also causing the accident. Again, you still haven't explain to me how a party AT FAULT didn't CAUSE the accident. Now go argue with them >

Navy crews at fault in fatal collisions, investigations find
https://www.defensenews.com/breakin...ault-in-fatal-collisions-investigations-find/


Until now you cannot explain to me how a party at FAULT did not CAUSE the accident. It's like saying I stab the person, but the person died because of bleeding not because of my stab. Amazing education system you have there in US. Are you from a public school btw?

No bro, the press release is stating the "SHORTCOMING" of the incident, it is the exact word in the press release, if a report did not investigate the other party, how can fault be determined?

You quote a third party link and say someone is at fault, which is useless. I can quote third party link suggesting otherwise, suggesting the ACX Crystal is at fault. Like this Sputnik Article.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201707141055527183-fitzgerald-crash-billions-liability-lawsuit/

ACX Crystal Owners May Be Liable for $2 Billion After USS Fitzgerald Crash

mind you , this article is from sputnik, which is number 1 anti-US media in the world. It is not from some US Fan site diehard defending US Navy position. Which I can quote around 10 article saying otherwise. So?

All these does not matter, it does matter is the facts, and this report released on Nov 1 did not consider the action of both ACX Crystal Alnic MC, that suggest the report did not lay any claim of who caused the accident.

It's very easy to debate with gambit or jhungary, they try to overwhelm you with alot of crap, you just need to nail in to their point of argument and dissect it. For god's sake, they didn't even attempt to contact the other ship.....this is just basic seamanship.

Much like yours,

At least I got 307 positive rating from my "Crap" you got what? -2? SO what does that say about your crap?

And HOW DO YOU KNOW THE US NAVY DID NOT CONTACT THE OTHER SHIP. It said so in the report the US navy tried to hail the Crystal. So, either it come out of your arse and out of nowhere, or you are simply straight up lying.

You cannot expect people are rubber stamper like you or expected to be like you. People have a mind to think, I don't know why you lot (you that @Beast @TaiShang) Could thought you can make a different, if you don't realise, you lot have zero credibility outside these Chinese Subsection, come make some street cred on other section before trying to "Tell me" how to debate with me. Because you are mile's off, son.

 

[gambit]

So, what make you qualify to "Judge" this case base on the facts and determine whose fault is it?

Are you aware of all the detail? Are you some kind of accredited accident investigator?

He is. And his accreditation is that he is anti-US.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/japanese-tug-boat-scrapes-us-navy-ship-during-145216763.html

A Japanese tug boat lost propulsion and drifted into a U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer during a towing exercise, the Navy said.

So now the Chinese on this forum have two reasons to celebrate. The Americans for their incompetent Navy and the Japanese for their incompetent sailors. We really cannot expect anything rational from the Chinese members of this forum.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

@Beast and @gambit
take a chill pill and relax

 

[Beast]

Report what? I was talking about the burden of proof.

If you accuse someone on something, the burden of proof is on you, same goes if I accused you for being an arsehole, I need to show proof that you are, not you need to show proof that you aren't.



So, what make you qualify to "Judge" this case base on the facts and determine whose fault is it?

Are you aware of all the detail? Are you some kind of accredited accident investigator? Even if you are one, you need to be able to present all the facts before such a judgement are able to make, I don't think you would know what exactly happen and how exactly happen, I know people who were on that ship during the collision and they can't even tell me what's going on.

And no, it's not about professionalism, because if you argue since it was a navy, then they should have been more "careful and professional" is like saying if you are a racing driver, you should NEVER crash your car, otherwise you are not being professional. Fact to the matter is, a lot of racing driver still crash their car, on thwe track and off, does that make them unprofessional? Professionalism to the USN is to fight a war, not going from A to B. USN is not a taxi or ferry driver, even so, your argument hold zero sense.

And yes, I have already explained to you how people can be at fault but did not caused the accident, you are too simple to understand law and knows that "fault" can be compound. I cannot help you if you have low IQ.



How so? Do tell me which and how US Navy is "Proven" to be at fault? Like you claim, can you quote any or all finding as to how and why the US Navy AS A WHOLE, not individual, is at fault?

This is not a criminal case, this is an accident, there are no "Innocent until proven guilty" unless you can show either party INTENTIONALLY crash on the other, otherwise there are no "Guilty Party" in this case. And no, again, you did not proven the US Navy is at fault.

Say for example. The Navy Captain at sleep in his quarter during the crash is a fault, but he is asleep in his cabin alone did not cause this accident, because he did not leave the pilot house unstaffed and have everyone go to sleep (Which the US Navy is accusing ACX Crystal crew to did just that). So, the captain's action is wrong when he is sound asleep when the collision happen, that does not mean he or the US Navy in some extend, caused this accident. If you want to claim the US Navy is at fault, then you will need to prove it.

Just because you said so, does not mean it is true, of course you can say whatever you can, but without facts backing up. It's BS, I can claim the whole collision is Chinese Navy fault, and I can say it was. So?

And if you still do not realise, you are contradicting yourself. You begin with saying you have not lay any blame on the accident like this the word in Blue is directly contradicting to the word in red
​

No bro, the press release is stating the "SHORTCOMING" of the incident, it is the exact word in the press release, if a report did not investigate the other party, how can fault be determined?

You quote a third party link and say someone is at fault, which is useless. I can quote third party link suggesting otherwise, suggesting the ACX Crystal is at fault. Like this Sputnik Article.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201707141055527183-fitzgerald-crash-billions-liability-lawsuit/

ACX Crystal Owners May Be Liable for $2 Billion After USS Fitzgerald Crash

mind you , this article is from sputnik, which is number 1 anti-US media in the world. It is not from some US Fan site diehard defending US Navy position. Which I can quote around 10 article saying otherwise. So?

All these does not matter, it does matter is the facts, and this report released on Nov 1 did not consider the action of both ACX Crystal Alnic MC, that suggest the report did not lay any claim of who caused the accident.



Much like yours,

At least I got 307 positive rating from my "Crap" you got what? -2? SO what does that say about your crap?

And HOW DO YOU KNOW THE US NAVY DID NOT CONTACT THE OTHER SHIP. It said so in the report the US navy tried to hail the Crystal. So, either it come out of your arse and out of nowhere, or you are simply straight up lying.

You cannot expect people are rubber stamper like you or expected to be like you. People have a mind to think, I don't know why you lot (you that @Beast @TaiShang) Could thought you can make a different, if you don't realise, you lot have zero credibility outside these Chinese Subsection, come make some street cred on other section before trying to "Tell me" how to debate with me. Because you are mile's off, son.

Sputnik is quick to report this news. Becos it will make USN look more stupid. Clearly US warship carries bulk of the fault for the collision. That fact, from Commander sacking to crew on watch gets reprimand. And even fleet commander steps down. Yet USN pursuit this stupid option to sue the merchant ship. Guess how merchant ship is gonna sue USN back until it's enough to paid for a brand new ford
Class carrier.