pull down to refresh
I thought we already came through this...stop copy and pasting your AI and use some common sense or original thought! Stick to what you know (from your previous posts, not much), my longest deployment so far was 19 months. It's obvious you havn't served, 8 months and change is not much and I don't care what the "record" is...STFU, you have no bearing about what you speak!
Show me another modern U.S. carrier that logged 250 consecutive days at sea and I’ll STFU. Otherwise, your 19-month Army deployment is beside the point.
And apparently my AI bullshit is worth your time, because you keep commenting on it.
You keep waving around “250 days” like the number itself proves misconduct. It doesn’t. “Unprecedented” is not a synonym for “unjustified.”
And spare me the claim that my 19-month deployment is beside the point. I’ve lived the extensions, uncertainty and separation you’re using as material for a political post.
If you can show Lincoln could have been relieved without compromising the mission, show it. Otherwise you’re a slimeball exploiting sailors’ hardship to score a political point you haven’t actually proved.
I use 250 days because they have been at sea for that long (roughly 6–8× normal) without touching land, which is extraordinary and significant and a reflection of what conditions aboard must be, and some of them are trying to jump overboard. So yeah, that’s out of the ordinary.
No shit it’s extraordinary. You’ve now repeated that several times as if repetition turns it into an argument.
Nobody disputed that 250 days at sea sucks. What you still haven’t shown is that it was unnecessary, avoidable, or the result of failed leadership. “Sailors are suffering” does not magically prove “therefore the mission was unjustified.” That’s an emotional leap, not an argument.
I’ve actually lived through deployments and unexpected extensions. You’re sitting on the sidelines using other servicemembers’ hardship as ammunition for your politics.
So either show how Lincoln could have been relieved without compromising the mission, or admit you don’t know. Repeating “250 days” a fourth time won’t fill that hole.
April: sailors report deteriorating conditions. Reports are dismissed.
July: sailor says, essentially, we need help after a record stretch at sea.
August: families are reporting attempted overboard suicides and confronting senior Navy leadership.
So dense! You keep repeating that the deployment was brutal. I F****** AGREE.
Now answer the question you keep dodging, could Lincoln have been relieved earlier without compromising the mission? If yes, show me the evidence. If you don't know, say you don't know.
A miserable deployment can be necessary. I've lived that reality. You keep acting like proving sailors suffered automatically proves someone made the wrong operational decision. It doesn't.
You're documenting hardship and pretending you've proven causation. You haven't.
, could Lincoln have been relieved earlier without compromising the mission?
Put a pen it.
We don’t know. Neither Congress nor the public has yet been given the operational explanation. What seems odd is the ship configuration: by late April, Lincoln, Ford and Bush were all in the region. Ford was sent home, Bush stayed, and Lincoln,
already due home around May, kept getting extended.
Fair point. The distinction here isn’t deployment length alone. The Lincoln has been deployed since November 21, nearly nine months, versus an originally expected seven-month deployment, and still has no announced return date. Carrier crews normally get a port call every 30 to 45 days. The Lincoln broke the modern U.S. carrier record at 207 consecutive days at sea and Navy officials now say it has logged 250 consecutive days at sea. This is unacceptable, inhumane, and a clear reflection of the negligence that has become this administration’s defining quality.