hate these ads?, log in or register to hide them
Page 1846 of 2059 FirstFirst ... 84613461746179618361843184418451846184718481849185618961946 ... LastLast
Results 36,901 to 36,920 of 41162

Thread: The Official Russian [USA Politics Thread]™

  1. #36901
    thebomby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    6,459
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorvil Barranis View Post
    I too remember the time that Iran sacrificed their air force to destroy a carrier, must be true. We better start blowing stuff up before it is too late. It worked in Iraq, right?
    This, where the fuck did this bullshit about Iran wanting to sink a US carrier come from? The Dick Cheney school of modern marketing?
    Будь смиренным, будь кротким, не заботься о тленном
    Власти, данной Богом, сынок, будь навеки верным...
    Я люблю Росcию, я - патриот

  2. #36902
    Smuggo
    Guest

  3. #36903
    Donor Pattern's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    6,236
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.

  4. #36904
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    10,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    reminder

    and the Gotland class, while quite advanced, is not out of the grasp of most nation states to develop the tech for and build.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  5. #36905
    Smuggo
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.

  6. #36906
    Donor Tellenta's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    16,123
    Quote Originally Posted by thebomby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorvil Barranis View Post
    I too remember the time that Iran sacrificed their air force to destroy a carrier, must be true. We better start blowing stuff up before it is too late. It worked in Iraq, right?
    This, where the fuck did this bullshit about Iran wanting to sink a US carrier come from? The Dick Cheney school of modern marketing?
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...ips-secret-ar/

    They went as far as building a representative of a US carrier and performing wargames with it.

    This has been going on for a while, essentially once or twice per year Iran threatens to destroy a carrier. The basics is Iran threatens to shut down access to the Persian Gulf, US sends a carrier group and sits either in the Persian Gulf or the Gulf of Oman, Iran threatens to destroy the carrier. This has been occurring at least once almost every year since 1979.

  7. #36907
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    6,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    reminder

    and the Gotland class, while quite advanced, is not out of the grasp of most nation states to develop the tech for and build.
    Sweden barely spends any money on their military and was able to win that wargame, whereas the US navy pours all its money into 19 gigantic floating targets whose primary mission is to move planes around that drop bombs on fishing villages.

  8. #36908
    Donor Tellenta's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    16,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.

  9. #36909
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    6,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002

  10. #36910
    Joe Appleby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    in front of the class
    Posts
    12,537
    http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...aircraft-18912

    The French used a 30yo sub to sink the whole carrier group.



    That is the USS Enterprise in 2007 from the periscope of a German U-Boat.

    http://translate.google.com/translat...nd-machte.html
    (Google translated article) Also states how a sub of the same class passed a LA class US attack sub undetected, very much troubling the visiting US officers.
    And those were old 206A diesel subs, no AIP or anything onboard.
    nevar forget

  11. #36911
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    10,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    that's what gave birth to the whole LCS boondoggle.

    the LCS project was then warped, and warped again until it became a massively overpriced frigate replacement with "modular" armament that's markedly worse than the 25 year old Danish project that inspired it.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  12. #36912
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    6,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    that's what gave birth to the whole LCS boondoggle.

    the LCS project was then warped, and warped again until it became a massively overpriced frigate replacement with "modular" armament that's markedly worse than the 25 year old Danish project that inspired it.
    Because like all peacetime military spending in the US, it's mostly about paying defence contractors tons of money and not actually producing an effective warfighting asset.

  13. #36913
    Donor Tellenta's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    16,123
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    I always treat simulations and wargames with suspicion. I've faced a ford F150 and a crew of 6 that was impervious to tow missiles and .50 caliber ammunition during "war games". Not sure how the Navy does theirs though.

  14. #36914
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    10,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Liare View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    that's what gave birth to the whole LCS boondoggle.

    the LCS project was then warped, and warped again until it became a massively overpriced frigate replacement with "modular" armament that's markedly worse than the 25 year old Danish project that inspired it.
    Because like all peacetime military spending in the US, it's mostly about paying defence contractors tons of money and not actually producing an effective warfighting asset.
    i am not even sure the whole StanFlex/Modular approach makes sense outside of a small armed force anyway, take the Absalon class, it's never going to be as good as any given role as a dedicated and specifically designed warship for that role, be it Command and Control, Transportation duties, Mine clearing or ASW duties.

    on the other hand it gives the armed forces the ability to rapidly ship a platoon of tanks and a supporting infantry company to "the colonies" in a reasonably well defended and armed package in a matter of days but if you've got dedicated LST's why would you ever want such a flexible combatant in the first place?
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  15. #36915
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    6,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    I always treat simulations and wargames with suspicion. I've faced a ford F150 and a crew of 6 that was impervious to tow missiles and .50 caliber ammunition during "war games". Not sure how the Navy does theirs though.
    We're not talking about SQUAD

  16. #36916
    theBlind's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Posts
    1,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    I always treat simulations and wargames with suspicion. I've faced a ford F150 and a crew of 6 that was impervious to tow missiles and .50 caliber ammunition during "war games". Not sure how the Navy does theirs though.
    Well if it's the one I think it is, the navy re-floated their carrier, forbade that particular tactic and ostracized the red team leader. I think several times.
    Tanks: theBlind[URBAD] (in my heart there will always be a place for [FAIL])
    Planetside2: [UBAD]theAngelic

  17. #36917

    Join Date
    July 14, 2013
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlind View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    I always treat simulations and wargames with suspicion. I've faced a ford F150 and a crew of 6 that was impervious to tow missiles and .50 caliber ammunition during "war games". Not sure how the Navy does theirs though.
    Well if it's the one I think it is, the navy re-floated their carrier, forbade that particular tactic and ostracized the red team leader. I think several times.
    the US military has done this a few times. IIRC, there was a team put together to test the security of things like military bases, ammo depots, etc.

    They were testing vulnerability to terrorist attack.

    They were criticized for attacking a facility from the unfortified rear.
    Totally not Victoria Stecker forgetting his password and not having access to his work email.

  18. #36918
    Donor Aea's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    13,732
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlind View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    I always treat simulations and wargames with suspicion. I've faced a ford F150 and a crew of 6 that was impervious to tow missiles and .50 caliber ammunition during "war games". Not sure how the Navy does theirs though.
    Well if it's the one I think it is, the navy re-floated their carrier, forbade that particular tactic and ostracized the red team leader. I think several times.
    OPFOR basically exploited the rules on the first day though (i.e. doing physically impossible things) leading to the thing becoming more scripted. But that script was basically a laughing stock as it would guarantee victory.

    A disaster of egos.

  19. #36919
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    10,896
    Quote Originally Posted by Aea View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by theBlind View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Tellenta View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Smuggo View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Pattern View Post
    Tbf, any nation with a submarine could sink a carrier.

    In a war, they wouldn't last the week.
    Sure, doesn't make Nerdstern's assertion that Iran would sacrifice it's entire airforce to sink a US carrier any less ridiculous.
    That's because it's nerdstrom, he says things that are not quite right all the time. Iran would use their ship killing missiles, submarines or try to attack the carrier with an invasion force. That's their plans, heck they might even work.
    They would, the US ran a wargame where they simulated an attack on a carrier fleet by motorboats from a not-iranian force operating close to shore (aka the persian gulf) and the carrier force was wiped out.

    I'd imagine the first thing a sane commander would order if war broke out with Iran would be to either put into port in Qatar or something or get out of the persian gulf asap

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002
    I always treat simulations and wargames with suspicion. I've faced a ford F150 and a crew of 6 that was impervious to tow missiles and .50 caliber ammunition during "war games". Not sure how the Navy does theirs though.
    Well if it's the one I think it is, the navy re-floated their carrier, forbade that particular tactic and ostracized the red team leader. I think several times.
    OPFOR basically exploited the rules on the first day though (i.e. doing physically impossible things) leading to the thing becoming more scripted. But that script was basically a laughing stock as it would guarantee victory.

    A disaster of egos.
    this does not match what i've heard, red team did play loose with the rules of engagement but the reasoning leading to that where valid, it was unexpected that red team would flat-out use every asset available in a single massive strike leading to the utter destruction of a CVBG, ironically cold-war era naval tactics dictate precisely this sort of approach, you want to overwhelm the enemy defences rather than attacking piecemeal, so AEGIS And attendant systems should have been geared to handle such a attack.

    here's a bit more on that exercise.
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  20. #36920
    Alistair's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Missing My Sadie Cat
    Posts
    11,798
    Has this been posted yet?

    https://www.thenation.com/article/a-...ears-dnc-hack/

    So possible DNC leak, not a Russian Hack. This, based on (supposedly) hard science, provided by a left-wing source/group.

    Judge for yourselves.
    Last edited by Alistair; August 11 2017 at 09:48:55 PM.


    "Nothing left to do, but smile, smile, smile......" Robert Hunter, "He's Gone"
    "...we looked very closely at the matter and concluded that unfortunately arseholes also get to benefit from democratic freedoms." Andreas Geisel, Interior Affairs Senator, Germany


Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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