Talk:Naval Station Ingleside

Battleship

I DID NOT KNOW THAT THE BRAC PEOPLE HAD THE POWER TO CLOSE THE ONLY REAL NAVY GULF PORT STATION CAPABLE TO DEFEND TEXAS AS A FIRST RESPONDER ! NOW WE ONLY HAVE 2 LARGE COAST GARD BATTLE CRUZERS THERE I SUPPOSE BRAC FEALS LIKE TEXAS IS NOT WORTH DEFENDING FROM THE COUNTRY THAT LOST HER IN 1836 AFTER THE BATTLE FOR THE ALAMO AND THE BATLE AT SAN JACINTO THE NAVY ALWAYS KEPT SEVERAL BATTLE CRUZZERS AT INGLESIDE TO WATCH OVER OUR GULF AND STOP THE ILLIGAL HORD OF MEXICAN FISH BOTS FROM STEALING SCHRIMP AND REDFISH ET ALL FROM OUR COSTAL WATERS WE SEAM TO WANT TO TRAVEL THOUSANDS OF MILES TO HELP DEFEND OTHER COUNTRYS BUT BRAC DONT CARE TO DEFEND TEXAS AND OUR TEXAS GULF COAST BRAC ALSO CLOSED KELLY AFB IN SAN ANTONIO THERE WE HAD OVER 30 B-52 BOMBERS ALWAYS READY TO DO THEIR JOB I SPENT 3 YEARS FIGHTING THE MARXEST HORDE IN KOREA AND WE WALKED AWAY WITH ONLY A TRUCE AFTER SHEEDING THE BLOOD ON THAT SOIL FROM 59 THOUSAND OF OUR HEROS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WE TEXANS AID THE NAVY FIFTEEN MILLION DOLLARS FOR THE UN WANTED BATTLESHIP ONLY TO HAVE HER WEASELED OUT OF OUR PORT IN THE DEAD OF NIGHT WITHOUT A BY YOUR LEAVE NO BODY UP NORTH WANTS TO TAKE CREDIT FOR THAT WE DONT EVAN HAVE A BRAC TAG TO HANG ON IT NO BODY UP THERE WANTED THE BATTLRSHIP SO TEXAS AND OUR WORKING POOR ALONG WITH THE DALLAS COWBOY BAUGHT HER AND I WANT HER BACK !!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.74.207.89 (talk • contribs) 15:24, September 6, 2008

I'm sorry, but it's hard to read something rife with misspellings and written in all caps. If you have something to improve the article with, provide some dates and sources. Especially the 15 million part. We're trying to help see Talk:USS Wisconsin (BB-64)#USS Wisconsin in Texas, but your not giving us much to work with. And don't use all caps... --Dual Freq (talk) 15:39, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Naval Station Ingleside. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120224032452/http://www.caller.com/news/2010/mar/03/naval-station-inglesides-last-sailor-deployed/ to http://www.caller.com/news/2010/mar/03/naval-station-inglesides-last-sailor-deployed/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120804174014/http://www.caller.com/news/2012/jul/31/port-corpus-christi-leaders-accept-bid-100-acre-pi/ to http://www.caller.com/news/2012/jul/31/port-corpus-christi-leaders-accept-bid-100-acre-pi/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:34, 14 February 2018 (UTC)