President Obama's speech to the UN today

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/26/wo...ical.html?_r=0


amazing.
we pay trillions, 1/5th-1/4th of the feds annual budget goes to defense, to protect us against countries like china.


quick, who here knew china had exactly ZERO air craft carriers??? now, they have one. it's a training vessel, and they don't even have carrier landing capability!!!
unreal.

Ignoring China's military buildup is not a wise idea. The idea that China building aircraft carriers shouldnt be something that we are concerned about is pure folly. We have countless threads about stimulus and how great spending money is yet when talking about cutting defense US jobs are lost. If we are going to needlessly spend money to stimulate the economy I'd rather it be on the military than wind farms or something else that will ultimately cost us money anyway.

Remember that much of the money that is used by the Chinese to build up their military comes directly from us.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Ignoring China's military buildup is not a wise idea. The idea that China building aircraft carriers shouldnt be something that we are concerned about is pure folly. We have countless threads about stimulus and how great spending money is yet when talking about cutting defense US jobs are lost. If we are going to needlessly spend money to stimulate the economy I'd rather it be on the military than wind farms or something else that will ultimately cost us money anyway.

Remember that much of the money that is used by the Chinese to build up their military comes directly from us.

yeah, but it's not much of a buildup if they don't even have one working carrier.
do you know how long it will take them to get even close to our military? and what about our allies?
i'd imagine that most of the worlds military belongs to us, england and france.
and yes, i know that it would cut jobs. but i also know how much we spend on defense, and it's obscene.

[Danzig]

here, check this out on military spending. it's an eye opener-or should be.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

yeah, but it's not much of a buildup if they don't even have one working carrier.
do you know how long it will take them to get even close to our military? and what about our allies?
i'd imagine that most of the worlds military belongs to us, england and france.
and yes, i know that it would cut jobs. but i also know how much we spend on defense, and it's obscene.

What do we really know about China? Pretty much nothing.
The worlds second largest military is Russia.
The Chinese are 3rd.

http://www.globalfirepower.com/count...tes-of-America

This isnt something that we want to be wrong about. It isnt as though the Chinese are about to attack us but what if they decide that Taiwan needs to come back to the motherland? What if they decide they are still pissed at Japan about WW2? I'm sure their buildup isnt only looking in our direction. Their neighbors to the north arent exactly shrinking violets.

[Cannon Shell]

I think the scary part about that article is the idea that it will take the Chinese a long time to develop planes that have the technology to land on carriers. Why couldnt the just buy the technology from the Ukraine who they bought the Carrier from or some other country with carriers?

I'm supposed to believe that the Chinese have developed nuclear weapons but cant figure out how to land planes on ships which is something that has been done for 75 years?

That entire article smells like propaganda and considering the source not surprising.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I think the scary part about that article is the idea that it will take the Chinese a long time to develop planes that have the technology to land on carriers. Why couldnt the just buy the technology from the Ukraine who they bought the Carrier from or some other country with carriers?

I'm supposed to believe that the Chinese have developed nuclear weapons but cant figure out how to land planes on ships which is something that has been done for 75 years?

That entire article smells like propaganda and considering the source not surprising.

carrier landings are a dicey proposition. our guys make it look easy. many other countries still don't have the capability to fight at night. what we take for granted, others take as sci fi.

there are 21 carriers extent. we have 11 of them

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

carrier landings are a dicey proposition. our guys make it look easy. many other countries still don't have the capability to fight at night. what we take for granted, others take as sci fi.

there are 21 carriers extent. we have 11 of them

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

Italy has 2. It wont take them too long.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Italy has 2. It wont take them too long.

lol
one was commissioned in '85. they're both stovl carriers, which is nothing compared to our supercarriers. they are limited to harrier type aircraft.
we have harriers, they can be used on amphibious ships, which is why the marines have them. harriers can land/take off pretty much anywhere a chopper can. those give us that many more available planes.
then there are our bases like diego garcia-a dot in the middle of the ocean, in the middle of nowhere. for fueling purposes for our bombers, etc.

and the harriers that the brits and others use-they're good, which is why we have them. but not as good as our other planes.
it's why afganistan annoys me to no end. people look at that and say wow, the us can be defeated. not in a conventional war we can't.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

carrier landings are a dicey proposition. our guys make it look easy. many other countries still don't have the capability to fight at night. what we take for granted, others take as sci fi.

there are 21 carriers extent. we have 11 of them

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/w...w/16549441.cms

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...craft-carrier/

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/w...w/16549441.cms

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...craft-carrier/

and?

so we're supposed to have a dozen to their one? do you know how much one carrier costs?
how big will theirs be? will it be nuke capabble, which means years of operation before it needs fueling? doubt it.


did you look at what i posted above regarding world spending on the military? did you notice that most of the spending is by us, then china and russia, followed by two of our biggest allies? that france and england each keep pace with russia.
is that feasible for us to continue? did you see our portion of gdp towards military, compared to the others? did you see who was involved in the top 15? how many of those are considered a threat to us? i don't mean, we don't see eye to eye on everything threat-i mean a real, actual, could attack any moment threat.
i'll tell you how many. none.
we could cut our spending in half, and still outspend and outdo any of the others. they don't have a single working carrier, still. that rehashed thing i linked to earlier-not a threat.
they'll have to ramp up training before they can land on a carrier during the day, let alone at night.
then there's keeping one at sea. they can't stay out constantly, which is why we have so many. some are out, some are in, some are being re-fit.
and with harriers, we actually can have more planes in more areas, because those can take off and land where regular jets can't.

hey, our military is an amazing thing, with the coolest toys ever. but many do we pay thru the nose. we could cut it by a third, which is a huge amount of money, and still not have a worry.