OT: US Navy ship attacked twice this week

Submitted by StephenRKass on October 12th, 2016 at 10:38 PM

This week, for the first time in history, a US Navy Destroyer, DDG87, the Mason, was attacked with ballistic missiles. They were fired by Houthi rebels from a land-based site in Yemen. The first attack of two missiles took place around noon ET Sunday, the second attack with two more missiles took place today. I know that there was at least one hard kill (incoming attacking missile taken out with a countermeasure defensive missile from the Mason.) The ship continues under heightened alert as it patrols the Red Sea. The Pentagon has vowed retaliation, and this has been confirmed. There are two other ships in the area:  Destroyer USS Nitze and US Ponce, a ship that transports special forces.

This post is completely offtopic to the board . . . but is relevant to me because my daughter is an Aegis Computer Network Technician on this ship. Her job is to maintain and repair the network of computers controlling the Aegis Radar and Missile weapons system. That is precisely what protected the ship. My daughter wrote via FB, "We heard (the code for) "incoming missile attack, all hands stand by." She then added, "I just can't describe the feeling of knowing you could all possibly die in a matter of seconds."

Retaliation was planned prior to this morning's attack. With this second missile launch, a military response is virtually dictated from the US Navy. Follow the story, if of interest to you.

Now, back to our regularly programmed wife day and football posts.

EDIT:  latest news from Washington Post as of 11:15pm EST, Wed. Oct. 12:  Navy launches Tomahawk Missiles at Rebel Sites in Yemen after attacks on U.S. Ships.

According to the article 3 remote radar sites on the Yemen coast were hit by US missiles launched from the USS Nitze. This is close to real time:  the missiles were launched about 4am local time Thurs. morning (8pm EST Wed. night). It appears they were specifically not targeting any heavily populated area.

EDIT 2:  FTR, all information in this post came from public media sources (with the exception of my daughter's personal emotions when under attack.) Do a Google News Search on "USS Mason" to find dozens of news sources.



October 12th, 2016 at 10:42 PM ^

Before people go crazy here, I just want to say that I'm glad your daughter is okay. Thanks for raising someone who is willing to get missiled at while I sit on the a couch and read a book while watching football. 


October 13th, 2016 at 7:44 AM ^

Preface: I'm very thankful that the OP's daughter and everyone aboard that ship is okay. I also have the utmost respect for those who choose to risk their lives in the service of their government's decisions.

Please, though, can we dispense with the invalid logic that these actions protect our freedoms? It makes no sense. I mean, would you not be sitting on the couch reading and watching football if these naval actions weren't occurring? Would you be in a bunker with a M16  in your backyard? Would you be forced to work in the mines by a totalitarian regime?

I'm really, really tired of the argument that what our soldiers are currently doing overseas is actually defense of this country and our freedoms. Yes, they're risking their lives and therefore are incredibly brave. Yes, they're doing it because they're serving their county. But if, for example, we lost in Afghanistan and pulled every single one of our troops out, we would have just as much freedom here in the US.

To say that if we don't fight overseas then we won't have freedom is the logical equivalent of saying that if we will have freedom then we do fight overses; i.e. to have freedom we must fight overseas.

Did anyone here in the US become less free or less safe when we lost in Vietnam? Hell, no. So let's stop believing that what we're currently doing abroad has anything to do with our freedom or safety at home.

turd ferguson

October 13th, 2016 at 7:55 AM ^

There might be some truth to that, but where did he say that the military is enabling him to sit on a couch, read a book, and watch TV? I think his point was just that he's pleased that others have it in them to do that - or raise kids who do - because he's not wired that way.

SRK -- Best wishes. Your daughter is braver than I am.


October 13th, 2016 at 7:57 AM ^

Ok, we can dispense with the argument that anything our military does overseas necessarily has anything to do with our freedom here in the US. If I hear you correctly, what you're saying that we should stop believing that what the military does abroad has anything to do with our freedom or safety at home. I understand what you're saying.

The most we can definitely say is that those who serve in the military do so at the pleasure of the President, the Pentagon, and Congress, and have chosen to potentially put themselves at perrsonal risk in the service of our government.

While there is a difference of opinion, that kind of debate and argument doesn't belong here. It is good for me to avoid any kind of overall statements about freedom and the purpose or need or utility of the military.


October 13th, 2016 at 8:16 AM ^

over seas has a profound impact on our freedom.  Left unchecked, a powerful Soviet nation could have overrun Europe.  Then look across either ocean and try to knock off their largest threat.

Or, a single nation could be controlling the majority of the oil production in the Middle East.

I appreciate what your daughter and so many others do for our freedoms.


October 13th, 2016 at 8:02 AM ^

You have to take it in the aggregate. Sure, if one guy deserted post and didn't participate in D-Day, nothing would've changed. Doesn't mean that he wasn't fighting for our freedom by running up that beach. The point is that if 100% of the US population was like us non-vets and elected to never do anything related to national defense, world peace-keeping, etc., 0% of us would be able to have the luxury of our greatest angst of November come via The Game. Best case scenario, it would probably be some sort of soccer crap....and nobody wants that.

Also, by them volunteering, the rest of us have more freedom by not being subject to mandatory service or the draft.


October 13th, 2016 at 4:42 PM ^

over the world to keep America strong, and that keeps us safe. Look at how agressive our enemies have become while we are perceived to be weak. And yes if it weren't for the brave that have volunteered now and in the past you might be in a bunker right now.


October 12th, 2016 at 10:46 PM ^

Thank you, Mad Hatter. We may disagree on some things, but we can be thankful together for those who serve.

The nice thing for me:  she never could have afforded to go to UofM on my salary, but with the GI Bill, she may end up applying to Michigan when her contract is over, and pursuing either an environmental or electrical engineering degree. A good amount of her Navy training is relevant to the latter.


October 12th, 2016 at 11:01 PM ^

SRK, From one retired navy man to another Thoughts and prayers to go out to your daughter and to you and her mother. I know it has to be tough to be parents of someone under fire and I am sure you are proud of her. I am and thankful for her service. Glad to know she is safe, and hopes for fair winds and following seas for the rest of her tour.

rob f

October 13th, 2016 at 12:27 AM ^

Here I am stressing over my daughter's wedding this weekend while you're stressing over something that, by it's very nature, is exponentially much more stressful.

Puts things quickly back in perspective for me.

My prayers are with your daughter and with you and your family. Thank you for her brave service.

Meanwhile, nothing about the missiles on the news channels, they're apparently too clogged up with the political soap opera to cover this news.

Go Blue in NC

October 12th, 2016 at 10:43 PM ^

Thoughts and prayers for your daughter. Glad no one seems to have been injured. My father served 32 years (Air Force) so I personally know what it means to have a loved one deployed and in harms way.


October 13th, 2016 at 8:29 AM ^

I wasn't implying that every minor or mid-level conflict we are involved in directly affects our freedom, but those men and women who volunteer for our army still do so knowing that someone has to for there not be a draft, and also that they may die at the orders of our government. 

That, to me, is incredible. 


October 13th, 2016 at 9:06 AM ^

OTOH, you can paradoxically theorize that the large nuclear arsenals of industrialized nations prevent mass warfare through a sort of Nash equilibrium. Except there needs to be an absolute foolproof means of tracing the origin of nuclear debris such as if Kim Jong-Cheeks equipped a rogue militant group who then detonated one, there'd only exist Korea since the word south would no longer be needed.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad


October 12th, 2016 at 10:55 PM ^

On the other hand, this:


"I am reminded that we have the freedom to enjoy football games and many other things in our country because of sacrifices made by all military forces."


Is not an apolitical statement, however much you may want it to be. It's also not really true unless you restrict "all military forces" to "US-allied military forces", which then goes back to the whole "apolitical" thing.