No Fly Zone
- Thread starter Rockslinger
- Start date
Actually you are the undisputed fool here.
BTW, I wish the Chinese good luck. They need to spend more billions and cost few lives in the coming decades before they could achieve something similar to Tom "Maverick" Cruise, LOL.
By then USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) should be ready to handle more advanced UAVs or something.
Nope, aircraft carrier is still the platform of choice.
Who are "they"? Your master the "Red China".
BTW, I would say exactly the same thing like the Admirals if that means more politicians are in the MIC pockets.
Nope you are the winner here....
Point IS, today USN Admirals are very nervous....
Hardly, knowing too much already and their limitation.
Even the Chinese themselves despise the practice, albeit they could not say so on the record.
Sure but the Americans have already known all the strength and weakness of those Russian design when the Chinese are busy to do the refurbishment.
Simply put, those Russian designs are impressive in terms of firepower but they are more vulnerable compared to the Americans.
Plus the Russian quality of shipbuilding work is sub-par, albeit not as worse as the Indians.
Sounds like notty usual tact to hype up non-American weapons in order to bash our neighbor, aka the Great Satan.
Again, good luck for the Chinese to get their weapons working and their Beidou satellite systems in place for precision navigation.
Again nope, your 33K+ post is the proof of your idiocracy.
Sure if that's the strategy to get more money for MIC or at min deter any misguided move from the teabaggers to cut the defense budget.
Hardly, knowing too much already and their limitation.
Even the Chinese themselves despise the practice, albeit they could not say so on the record.
Sure but the Americans have already known all the strength and weakness of those Russian design when the Chinese are busy to do the refurbishment.
Simply put, those Russian designs are impressive in terms of firepower but they are more vulnerable compared to the Americans.
Plus the Russian quality of shipbuilding work is sub-par, albeit not as worse as the Indians.
Sounds like notty usual tact to hype up non-American weapons in order to bash our neighbor, aka the Great Satan.
Again, good luck for the Chinese to get their weapons working and their Beidou satellite systems in place for precision navigation.
You don't have to break up the post into individual sentences. I can read a whole paragraph and grasp its message.
All good point about Russian technology and manufacturing skills, but that doesn't necessarily slide over onto the Chinese.
There you go again!
Channeling JAJA.....
He has a point, though. Anybody with over 20,000 posts must be a little bit nuts.
Specifically, given that money was invested in military aircraft carriers, rather than carriers better suited for humanitarian work, aircraft carriers are the platform of choice.
They are, however, stupendously expensive for the job, and due to their heavy military nature, have to come protected by an armada of defenses that are also extraordinarily expensive.
If our goal really were just to be ready for humanitarian interventions there are no doubt far less costly solutions that COULD be developed, but haven't been.
Pretty much explain why China put on hold to refurbish one for decades until they have to, say becoming the 2nd largest economy.
PLAN is desperately needed to be modernized at break neck speed before they are confident to protect their merchant ships and more importantly the oil tankers from the ME. The Americans decision makers (not the joker like Woody) are fully aware of this evolution but they are feeling "nervous" due to China's relatively lack of transparency on Defense matters, difficulty to have accurate assessment on the Chinese motives, and the lack of protocol/mechanism to handle disputes on the sea, not their hardwares per se.
There you go again!
Channeling JAJA.....
Peckkker you are special here and as such you can insult as much as you want
You need to be rated on facts and content then your 6 or 7 post might mean something
I wish a mod had the where with all and would take you to task for your posts.
Ban me if you like but woody is not a contributor here on TERB
The proper question is how many times have carrier had to defend themselves against a first world opponent...like say...China...
So the fact that one faction of the military is hoping, hoping, to build some new carriers is evidence that they are:
a) cost effective;
b) will be able to survive a high intensity environment:?
Seriously?
