Talk:United States Fifth Fleet/Archive 1

Results of 2002 Wargames

Whether other editors like it or not and regardless of whether or not another editing believes the source to be true, the article states that the 2002 wargames resulted in the fleet being sunk. Try to remove a relevant, sourced and clear account of the war games conclusion and it will be reverted. Find a bunch of articles that dispute this claim and we can add another paragraph to the section with another viewpoint and I will not rollback these edits.

We don't censor articles here. Unregistered editors who disparage an author's political viewpoint and use labels like the idiotic "conspiracy theorist" are introducing bias and should be more neutral. Our articles need to be balanced, cite sources and be without ommissions. - Shiftchange (talk) 23:12, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me? maybe you don't realize it, but the entire source was questionable, since it was also saying that the Bush Administration stated that they were to sacrifice their entire fleet for a selfish purpose, and not only that, but another article on the site also said that Bush was also behind the 9/11 attacks, and that Eminem exposed the truth via a new album made by him as well as Mb Def and Immortal Technique.

Heck, the entire news site was nothing more than a radical bias site. The site was named after Voltaire, a Political Extremist. We need a more credible source for it, like CBS, or NBC, or AJC, or ABC, or something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.165.13 (talk) 00:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I can't understand you. Is what your saying that because there are some artists whose material includes lyrics regarding government complicity in the events of 9/11 that therefore the 2002 wargames did not result in the destruction of the US Fifth Fleet?

When it comes to informing people about the consequences of deploying military forces (in hostile regions on the other side of the planet) I would consider that their track record, vested interests and conflicts of interests mean that sourcing purely from mainstream American media sources is equally unreliable as those claimed to be "radical conspiracy" sites.

At the time, other reports were released that indicated the Fifth Fleet would be heavily damaged. None claimed the wargames resulted in any sort victory for the fleet. It was all bad news because of Iran's missile air defense. I didn't come across any that were as specific and to the point as the one I used by Michael Salla. Also the article is found across many websites so your point about that is irrelevant. - Shiftchange (talk) 01:23, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Ok, then, I'll be sure to ask people in real life if this has actually happened, THEN I and some others will find out for sure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.32.165.13 (talk) 11:55, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

We have now a reasonable article on Millennium Challenge 2002, the exercise in question. Once reliable sources are added that attribute the exercise to the Fifth Fleet, the material can be readded into the article. Buckshot06 (talk) 22:02, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Split

I proposed this because of the long period of inactivity between the two fleets. It's a number. Of course it'll be re-used. It's just that the one fleet has little or no relevance to the other. Faceless Enemy (talk) 10:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

This is a ridiculous idea. Every military unit has its history in its article - and is usually very proud of it. Buckshot06 (talk) 08:23, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Apparently your opinion is pretty important. Faceless Enemy (talk) 14:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

How much does it cost?

It's rather extraordinary that in the entire article there is not a single dollar sign or any other mention of the cost of maintaining this fleet. Most of it's raison d'etre is to provide for the flow of oil and gas. So every US taxpayer is subsidizing the oil and gas industry worldwide, and subsidizing a reliance on fossil fuels. How much does the Fifth Fleet cost, annually? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benefac (talk • contribs) 21 November 2014 (UTC)

WP:NOTSOAPBOX applies. Yaush (talk) 18:16, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on United States Fifth Fleet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090417181924/http://www.sofmag.com:80/news/permalink/2008/10/1/114139.html to http://www.sofmag.com/news/permalink/2008/10/1/114139.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:35, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

"deter Iran from bad behavior"

You're aware that this wording is inappropriate for this platform? Please clarify what kind of behaviour you mean or remove that phrase. --dealerofsalvation 05:22, 7 May 2017 (UTC)