Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ...
5
6
7
8
9
LastLast
  1. #121
    The Unstoppable Force Theodarzna's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    24,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Budong View Post
    You are very naive if you believe the U.S. wouldn't enter a conflict with China if they started shutting down trade routes through the South China Sea or began to seriously threaten our allies in the region.

    China also has a strict policy regarding nukes. Here's a quote from a translated copy of their military strategy doctrine. "China will not use nuclear weapons to attack or threaten non-nuclear states; that China will not use nuclear weapons in response to any conventional (non-nuclear) attack; and that China will only use nuclear weapons after confirming an incoming nuclear attack."

    China knows it can't win a nuclear war with the U.S. They can do extensive damage but their arsenal is very small and a minor part of their overall defense strategy. France has more nuclear weapons than China. The U.S. has almost 7,000 warheads, China has 260.
    We lost the last war we fought with China, and would the American public actually go for it. 100 is enough to create radically altered climate and poison the air., so we have bout 6,900 more than needed and we have to maintain ALL of them.

    China's policy? Ha, China will do what anyone does to ensure survival. But they need only threaten us on trade and create chaos that pisses off the America public to undo us. Heck could the government really get American's into a war with China unless China actually attacks us on American soil?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by judgementofantonidas View Post
    not what I said. I said that we cannot use current means that are openly at our disposal. to state that we could NEVER go toe to toe with China because of current deterrents is just silly.
    We could never because getting the public to support it would be a challenge thus the great problem Vietnam and Iraq had. Plus convincing Americans their lives need be sacrificed so trade lanes stay within our sphere of control is unlikely to be a major rallying cry for people to risk their lives.

    That and we could never actually fight a real war with China for the same reasons China isn't going to fight a real war with us.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    i think I have my posse filled out now. Mars is Theo, Jupiter is Vanyali, Linadra is Venus, and Heather is Mercury. Dragon can be Pluto.
    On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.

  2. #122
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    100 is enough to create radically altered climate and poison the air.
    Not really, the Russians have set off more than that in a single month.

  3. #123
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    Perhaps its best to compare the US to a more recent Empire, the Soviet Union in the respect that I am talking about. Mainly a ever growing complex system facing a conflagration of problems and filled with such entrenched interests in maintaining things as they are that reform becomes impossible until either collapse or the back is to the wall.
    I think comparing the US to the Soviet Union is a bit of a stretch. Market dynamics make the US a lot more fluid and flexible to adapt to new situations. Something the Soviet Union was not able to do and Russia still isn't able to do. Skroe posted an interesting graphic in the other thread where the majority of exports from Russia are still natural resources instead of manufactured items or high tech. This isn't happening in the US.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  4. #124
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    We lost the last war we fought with China, and would the American public actually go for it. 100 is enough to create radically altered climate and poison the air., so we have bout 6,900 more than needed and we have to maintain ALL of them.

    China's policy? Ha, China will do what anyone does to ensure survival. But they need only threaten us on trade and create chaos that pisses off the America public to undo us. Heck could the government really get American's into a war with China unless China actually attacks us on American soil?
    I don't think you understand the concept of treaties.

    Also the Korean war ended in a stalemate. The U.S. was very close to using nuclear weapons but allied forces were able to push the North Korean/Chinese force back to the 38th parallel so nukes weren't used.

  5. #125
    The Unstoppable Force Theodarzna's Avatar
    7+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    NorCal
    Posts
    24,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    I think comparing the US to the Soviet Union is a bit of a stretch. Market dynamics make the US a lot more fluid and flexible to adapt to new situations. Something the Soviet Union was not able to do and Russia still isn't able to do. Skroe posted an interesting graphic in the other thread where the majority of exports from Russia are still natural resources instead of manufactured items or high tech. This isn't happening in the US.
    I think that is missing my over all point about complexity and entrenched interests. The comparison is simply an entrenched system with flaws that are currently tractable but building up to some later disaster. Reform is possible but unlikely because of the same factors, entrenched interests that have built up around the current complex system.



    Here is a nice lecture with better details than I can give.
    Quote Originally Posted by Crissi View Post
    i think I have my posse filled out now. Mars is Theo, Jupiter is Vanyali, Linadra is Venus, and Heather is Mercury. Dragon can be Pluto.
    On MMO-C we learn that Anti-Fascism is locking arms with corporations, the State Department and agreeing with the CIA, But opposing the CIA and corporate America, and thinking Jews have a right to buy land and can expect tenants to pay rent THAT is ultra-Fash Nazism. Bellingcat is an MI6/CIA cut out. Clyburn Truther.

  6. #126
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    I think that is missing my over all point about complexity and entrenched interests. The comparison is simply an entrenched system with flaws that are currently tractable but building up to some later disaster. Reform is possible but unlikely because of the same factors, entrenched interests that have built up around the current complex system.



    Here is a nice lecture with better details than I can give.
    The US has shared some of the most dramatic social and economical shifts in humanity, sometimes even lead them: Human rights, industrialisation, global war (twice), computerisation, automation, the internet, biotech... just to name a few. And sometimes, they just went and did something everyone thought impossible at the time, like going to the moon, because why the hell not?

    I think you severely underestimate the American thrive for adventure when it comes to new situations and their natural and apparently still inherent pioneeric enthusiasm. Trenched politics? Sure, just as much as everyone else. But when it counts, they always agreed and bloody did something useful. See, unlike the Soviet Union, where criticism to the system was not asked for or even tolerated, the US revels in being its own worst critic. Not a day goes by in which the media doesn't slam this or that politician for something they did or didn't do. Not a week where some weird ass social injustice, as stupid as it may be (keyword: triggering) is given it's (un)due respect and analysed.

    Nah, I still think the comparison to the Soviet Union, which was a rather inflexible and as it turns out brittle construct, the US has grown organically and has a robust political and social system. They're far from perfect, but any comparison to an "Empire" like the British or the Romans does at this point lack any evidence to support it. They are not imperialistic in the sense that they depend on exerting their influence through conquest. I'm pretty certain that they could turn isolationist tomorrow and it wouldn't change much in their daily lives.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  7. #127
    Quote Originally Posted by Budong View Post
    I don't think you understand the concept of treaties.

    Also the Korean war ended in a stalemate. The U.S. was very close to using nuclear weapons but allied forces were able to push the North Korean/Chinese force back to the 38th parallel so nukes weren't used.
    The Korean War was just an epic clusterfuck by any measure that the entire world would probably be better off forgetting altogether. Apart from all the lives lost and eminent possibility of nuclear war to achieve, at the end of the day, literally nothing, perhaps the most pathetic part of the whole debacle was that whole charade by both sides to run out the clock until Stalin died to sign an armistice.

  8. #128
    Warchief Torched's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Reykjavik, Iceland
    Posts
    2,247
    That's one of the ugliest ships I have ever seen
    “A man will contend for a false faith stronger than he will a true one,” he observes. “The truth defends itself, but a falsehood must be defended by its adherents: first to prove it to themselves and secondly, that they may appear right in the estimation of their friends.”
    -The Acts of Pilate.

  9. #129
    Legendary!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    On the road to my inevitable death.
    Posts
    6,362
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    Armored warships died with the battleships. It is too heavy and does not provide enough protection.
    From what I heard, only certain parts of ships like the crew quarters, command centers, fuel tanks, magazine stores ... etc. are armored because it was found that ships can take a heck a lot of damage and still stay afloat as long as munitions or fuel don't get hit.
    Internet forums are more for circlejerking (patting each other on the back) than actual discussion (exchange and analysis of information and points of view). Took me long enough to realise ...

  10. #130
    Quote Originally Posted by Torched View Post
    That's one of the ugliest ships I have ever seen
    It looks pretty bad ass from the front view.

  11. #131
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    Or they can make more knowing we could never get away with using them, China still has the ultimate weapon, nuclear weapons essentially can be used anywhere, even detonated in meaningless areas enough fired would be devastating globally. We won't risk war with China, we can't and they know we can't.
    China's nuclear response capability does not reach MAD levels, they would not be stupid enough to use them against the US over the South China Sea as they are aware it would end in the destruction of China even if the US retains enough warheads to ensure MAD against Russia.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    Augustine's point is more or less that in science we are involved in a technological arms race; with every victory over nature the difficulty of achieving the breakthroughs that lie ahead is increased. Norman Augustine described this as the "Death Spiral." mainly that complexity and cost continues to rise.

    So for example the number of B52 bombers we produced and their cost compared to say the B2 Stealth bomber were we produced an excellent, technically magnificent device, but we only could make 21 of them, so great we have this wo gee wiz amazeballs death machine but fuck, it can only be at 21 places on the planet at once. This is the result of growth in complexity.

    - - - Updated - - -



    So we could never actually use this device?
    The B-52 also has zero chance of surviving hostile airspace for more than 10 seconds, the B-2 has at least a fair chance of surviving. So, 21 bombers that survive to deploy weapons beats 350 that never will. Everyone is suffering from cost increases reducing the number of deployed systems.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by SodiumChloride View Post
    From what I heard, only certain parts of ships like the crew quarters, command centers, fuel tanks, magazine stores ... etc. are armored because it was found that ships can take a heck a lot of damage and still stay afloat as long as munitions or fuel don't get hit.
    Weight and cost are the drivers to limit the armor to vital spaces, that held true even on battleships (hence the lack of deck armor sufficient to defeat a plunging shot from a 16" gun). Modern warships have very little armor if any, and those that do are generally only effective against subsonic missiles using a unitary/blast-frag warhead under 500lbs (i.e. something like the Exocet).

  12. #132
    We lost the last war we fought with China
    Lol what? The last war we fought against China was the Korean War, which ended in a stalemate, not a loss.

  13. #133
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Marcellus1986 View Post
    Lol what? The last war we fought against China was the Korean War, which ended in a stalemate, not a loss.
    Even China would not have been able to sustain their casualty rate indefinitely, they were losing troops faster than the US as a portion of the population. America just doesnt have the mentality to wage prolonged warfare on a grand scale, and it has grown significantly less since Vietnam (that really turned the US into casualty counting wimps).

  14. #134
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    Even China would not have been able to sustain their casualty rate indefinitely, they were losing troops faster than the US as a portion of the population. America just doesnt have the mentality to wage prolonged warfare on a grand scale, and it has grown significantly less since Vietnam (that really turned the US into casualty counting wimps).
    It's not even really the casualties. Not very many Americans die in wars anymore. It's the cost of the wars and the fact that they never seem to end.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  15. #135
    Legendary!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    On the road to my inevitable death.
    Posts
    6,362
    Quote Originally Posted by Reeve View Post
    It's not even really the casualties. Not very many Americans die in wars anymore. It's the cost of the wars and the fact that they never seem to end.
    There is a sure way to end any war - against an opponent you are militarily superior to. Permanently.

    Whether the US has the stomach for it is another matter.
    Internet forums are more for circlejerking (patting each other on the back) than actual discussion (exchange and analysis of information and points of view). Took me long enough to realise ...

  16. #136
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by SodiumChloride View Post
    There is a sure way to end any war - against an opponent you are militarily superior to. Permanently.

    Whether the US has the stomach for it is another matter.
    I certainly don't "have the stomach" for genocide. And I don't think it's a particularly admirable thing to have that sort of stomach.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  17. #137
    Legendary!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    On the road to my inevitable death.
    Posts
    6,362
    Quote Originally Posted by Reeve View Post
    I certainly don't "have the stomach" for genocide. And I don't think it's a particularly admirable thing to have that sort of stomach.
    It's effective though. Can't deny that.

    Choice of strategy for the likes of Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great.

    PS: The utilitarian in me also kind of feels that it might be better in the long run. Genocide or decades of war ... not sure which is the greater evil.
    Internet forums are more for circlejerking (patting each other on the back) than actual discussion (exchange and analysis of information and points of view). Took me long enough to realise ...

  18. #138
    Banned Kellhound's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Bank of the Columbia
    Posts
    20,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Reeve View Post
    It's not even really the casualties. Not very many Americans die in wars anymore. It's the cost of the wars and the fact that they never seem to end.
    No, its the casualties, that is why every service member killed is headline news across the country. We are a country that has no stomach for war after a few months.

  19. #139
    Merely a Setback Reeve's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    28,800
    Quote Originally Posted by Kellhound View Post
    No, its the casualties, that is why every service member killed is headline news across the country. We are a country that has no stomach for war after a few months.
    I don't think that's true. The total Amercian soldiers killed in the Iraq war was 4,425, according to the DOD. 4,425 over 9 years is less than 500 per year. More people die in car wrecks on Wisconsin roads every year.

    I don't think we consider soldiers who sign up to fight and potentially die to have a lower threshold for acceptable losses than farmers.
    'Twas a cutlass swipe or an ounce of lead
    Or a yawing hole in a battered head
    And the scuppers clogged with rotting red
    And there they lay I damn me eyes
    All lookouts clapped on Paradise
    All souls bound just contrarywise, yo ho ho and a bottle of rum!

  20. #140
    I am Murloc! shadowmouse's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Dongbei, PRC ... for now
    Posts
    5,909
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe
    I'm not sure if I'm understanding you clearly, but China's claims are utterly baseless. The Nine Dash line as the basis of the claims, is a work of fiction.
    Let's get something cleared up here. You seem to think you have yourself a live one, someone Chinese to thump the drum of American glory to and you're ramping up your comments to that effect. Nope, you're trying to tell an elderly American who served six on active duty to buy into the sales pitch for these programs and I've seen enough over the years to be skeptical. Peace time designs are guesses that may or may not perform as hoped when theory meets fact.

    If you bothered to look up the letter in question you would have seen that the Macartney Embassy in 1793 was treated in accordance with the Chinese view that all other states were vassals. In comparison with the squabbles over glorified sand bars, it highlights how ridiculous the current situation is all the way around.

    Quote Originally Posted by Qianlong
    I have ever shown the greatest condescension to the tribute missions of all states which sincerely yearn after the blessings of civilization, so as to manifest my kindly indulgence. I have even gone out of my way to grant any requests which were in any way consistent with Chinese usage. Above all, upon you, who live in a remote and inaccessible region, far across the spaces of ocean, but who have shown your submissive loyalty by sending this tribute mission, I have heaped benefits far in excess of those accorded to other nations.
    Source: http://rhs.rocklinusd.org/subsites/A...0/Qianlong.pdf

    The various historical claims to island in the South China sea reflect, and are complicated, by the history of the region and include disputes over the relationship between various rulers. Taken literally, China had might as well claim the UK because George III was a vassal. We can guess that the UK might not agree on that point.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe
    The US doesn't really do Un Conventions anymore. Generally speaking, we're above that.
    No, we often like to think we are, but as weak as international law can often be, you're asserting we're somehow above laws. We get away with a lot of crap, but it gets noticed and that doesn't always go well for us.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe
    These ships are all being based in the Pacific, because they're anti-China weapons. Let's be very clear: that is happening, the US is rushing anti-ship, long range weapons, increasing ship building speed, enhancing our technology, basing the newest stuff in the Pacific, because China's arms build up has us spooked. So we're preparing. Just in case. If China tries something, we'll teach them the oldest lesson of all. It's that simple.
    "It's that simple" except when it isn't. Wars don't happen in the vacuum of war games. Our record on teaching other countries a decisive "lesson" is pretty spotty. This happens in part because we get so impressed with our own claims for things like shock and awe that we aren't prepared to deal with things outside of that script.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe
    THAAD is highly scalable.
    Yes, it does many things very well; however, it is a missile defense system and it isn't going to deal with enemy artillery on the scale North Korea has pointed at Seoul. If we actually get involved in an armed conflict in the South China Sea, it won't (as I myself noted) be WWIII. It will, however, have a very good chance of splashing over onto Taiwan and South Korea, with other countries in the region getting pulled in. That would get messy fast.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe
    Scale models and simulations over years have held up pretty well.
    Right, and I read that in the voice of a Blizzard rep telling me that WoD was going to fix things and be wonderful. Tests are good, tests are necessary, tests give useful information in many situations. Tests are still not the real thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe
    Railguns are ready to go. The heat problem was solved years ago.
    You need to get Rear Admiral Fanta to read the memo then.

    “It’s engineering at this point, it’s no longer science,” Fanta said. “It’s no longer the deep dark secrets of what can I do with this sort of energy. It’s engineering and how much power density can I get, how much beam quality can I get, what sort of metallurgy do I need to sustain multiple shots over multiple periods of time. The rail gun as well as the laser.”
    Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/def...1000/78443016/

    Fanta said that he believes that an operational railgun is feasible within the next five years.
    Source: http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...E2%80%9D-14869

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe
    Well first, I normally don't attack journalists, but David Axe
    Thanks for managing to address only one of several sources I quoted and failing to address their sources for information. I fell asleep from the remaining wall of barely related blather. As far as I can tell, you've basically ended up saying what I said some time back.

    Quote Originally Posted by bungeebungee
    The truth is probably somewhere in between the media hype and derision, but in the end the Zumwalt class is a concept platform.
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroe
    The Zumwalt will not be mass produced, in favor of the Arleigh Burke restart. But the Flight III Arleigh Burkes integrate Zumwalt tech, and the Zumwalt will form the basis of the next class of Large Surface Combatant that will replace the Burke, not to mention the application of it's computer infrastructure and power generation of ships on any size (something that is happening with TAO(X) and LS(X), which implement Zumwalt subsystems.
    Last edited by shadowmouse; 2016-05-23 at 05:31 AM. Reason: attribution
    With COVID-19 making its impact on our lives, I have decided that I shall hang in there for my remaining days, skip some meals, try to get children to experiment with making henna patterns on their skin, and plant some trees. You know -- live, fast, dye young, and leave a pretty copse. I feel like I may not have that quite right.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •