![]() |
![]() |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I mean, really, if you wanted to flaunt "The recruiting officer (the referee) should stress all the benefits of service in the Middle East (fuel in abundance, air support, regular supplies and pay, and so on). In fact, the recruiting of- ficer would probably greatly overstate the advantages, describ- ing the area of operations as virtually a modern U.S. oil shiekdom, and U.S. soldiers living in luxury between their mis- sions," a radio transmission is not a great sales method. Showing up, in a big boat, with fuel, is going to help sell that premise. It's why you see sales people roll in Cadillacs and not Yugos. And let's revisit that quote - fuel in abundance, air support... That's not overstating the case because the next sentence is literally all about how to overstate all of that! Quote:
"The Jor- danians and the Israelis had done about as much as they could do in their area. Their respective governments decided that a presence in the Persian Gulf area would at least insure them a greater say in oil allocation. The Jordanians sent their crack 5th Armored Division. The Israelis sent the 35th Parachute Brigade, the 7th Armored Brigade, and supporting units." So Israel is there to get a share of oil/fuel. And as the book establishes, that has a cost ($7 for diesel, etc.). Fiat currency, like the Shekel, is probably not going to pay the bill. So, it's the barter system... What do they have that the RDF might want? How about munitions? You asked where munitions for this fleet might be coming from, this is a possible answer. So maybe it's not this particular missile, or maybe a U.S. frigate gets a mount refitted during a layover after escorting fuel over - the payment is the missile system (or whatever the munition is bartered between the parties). Again, if I have a task force, and I have fuel for that task force (plus enough to trade), and I have an ally who wants fuel (enough to ante up the Blood part of Blood and Treasure), and they possibly have munitions production capabilities based on a long history of weapons development and surviving infrastructure (the transfer of which which would also serve to protect their forces in region as well), I'm pretty sure that can all work out. And to recap - Kenya does not have to be involved. Last edited by Spartan-117; 07-16-2020 at 05:14 AM. |
Tags |
united states, us navy |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|