US Navy locks in a record purchase - Page 6
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 177
  1. #101
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Oregon
    Posts
    2,678
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    474
    Likes (Received)
    1897

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scottl View Post
    ...While the protestors based their claims on storage of spent nuclear fuel their actions would leave Australia vulnerable in the event an aggressive nation in the region chose to use its naval forces to threaten them.
    That doesn't make a lot of sense.

    These submarines don't get refueled- they are delivered with fuel to last the entire 33-year design life.

  2. Likes adh2000 liked this post
  3. #102
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    2,595
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scottl View Post
    Your knowledge of history is as poor as your reading comprehension. I said "Republic of China (Taiwan)".

    The battleship Missouri was the scene of the Japanese surrender in 1945. BTW, the Missouri spent about half of 1949 undergoing an overhaul in Norfolk Naval Shipyard.
    Very good. Now if you read what the US wrote in that piece of paper which defeated Japan signed, the island occupied by Japan and formerly called Formosa reverted to China.

    There was no Taiwan at that time. There was only China. There is and was ONE China.

    Taiwan was a creation by the losers of a civil war. Taiwan was not and never will be China. Jiang jie shi lost the civil war at huai hai, stole the assets of the country, ran off in the middle of the night and invaded an island nearby. This is equivalent to Jefferson Davis and three companies escaping to Cuba, calling it "the real United States", getting financial and military backing from the Soviet Union for the next fifty years, making it a crime to say that his American United States (new name for Cuba) was not "the real America" (for which the last person executed was in 1980), murdering thousands of the original inhabitants who resisted, and openly declaring the intention to one day invade the "false America" and re-institute his defeated confederate government.

    I know some guys in Mississip would like that, but as it pertains to reality, uhhm, right

    Them's the facts, Jack. Not the crap you linked to. And oh yeah, the "democratic" Taiwan finally got around to having their first elections in 1996. That's roughly fifty years and took the death of the peanut. I guess this election thingy is real difficult to figure out.

    As for the Republic of China (Taiwan), it is very much still a country despite the U.S. change in attitude in 1971 as we fell for The Great Deceit engineered by Henry Kissinger.
    Bzzzt. Wrong. It is not now and never has been. The United States decided that the island known as Formosa would revert to the ownership of China. The CCP later won the civil war, China is that land mass conaining 1.2 billion people to the northeast of Formosa, and the island, by decree of the US, winners of WW II in the Pacific, is a part of the People's Republic of China.

    Henry Kissinger had nothing to do with it.

    That was the beginning of the period of declining U.S. manufacturing and the middle class as China grew wealthier and more powerful with U.S. dollars.
    I would agree. Now ask US CEO's why they moved all their operations overseas ... China held out a nickel and all your guys knocked each other down scrambling to grab it.

    Whose fault is that ?

    There is also still a country called Tibet although it is currently under occupation by an unpleasant neighbor.
    Tibet was never a country, it's a religious colony. China, with somewhat more justificaion than India, occupied it after WW II because Tibet controls the water supply for both countries. China beat India to the punch, and India is still pissed about it. Mao bent over backwards to let the dalai llama control everything except the army would have to patrol the border. The saintly llama threw his people under the bus in a snitfit. Not that it matters because the purpose of the people of Tibet is to be slaves to the priests, so I guess it was his right.

    This history is from a paper done by the University of Chicago and thoroughly documented. Tibet is unfortunate; however, their religion is shit and their position geographically doomed them to becoming a "protectorate" of either China or India. WW II and flying the hump removed the impossible barrier of the Himalayas.

    Yeah right. Learn a little sobsister ignorant propaganda horseshit is more like it. Try facts for a change. You might consider sources other than General Ripper, Scott.

    And your other list, christ. One civil war and a bunch of border incidents. 3,000 years of history and China has been involved in invasions ... oh, let me think. Two or three times, maybe ?

    Meanwhile, the US surpasses that record every week.

    They had a guy in about the fourteenth, fifteenth centrury who took a fleet of ships around asia, perhaps all the way to India (the long way.) He came back and what was their repsonse ? "Fuck it, let them come to us." Not exactly the mindset of a bunch of invaders (in contrast with the yuropeens, if you will.)

    There is no predicting the future but your paranoia is not attractive. China is something of a world power already, but they do it by buying and selling, not sending in a division of tanks. Take your stupid incompetent Navy out of the area and you won't have this "military buildup" you fear so much. Chinese people are not stupid, they know that more bombs and guns means less teevees and LV purses. This is something maybe you dipshits could learn, too. Some day.


    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    You've been watching " Dr Strangelove " I presume.
    Know it by heart, but apparently some people do not know it at all

  4. Likes Tyrone Shoelaces liked this post
  5. #103
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Country
    DENMARK
    Posts
    3,463
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4033
    Likes (Received)
    12627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    There is no predicting the future but your paranoia is not attractive. China is something of a world power already, but they do it by buying and selling, not sending in a division of tanks. Take your stupid incompetent Navy out of the area and you won't have this "military buildup" you fear so much. Chinese people are not stupid, they know that more bombs and guns means less teevees and LV purses. This is something maybe you dipshits could learn, too. Some day.
    I've seen enough to believe that paragraph. There is so much the US could invest money and energy in that doesn't involve military. As things are it's an upwards, expensive spiral.

  6. Likes Greg White liked this post
  7. #104
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Vershire, Vermont
    Posts
    2,042
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1307
    Likes (Received)
    632

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tyrone Shoelaces View Post
    ... Maybe they could sail it up the Thames to deter the next knife wielding nut case running amok near Parliament.
    No worries. It's just Boris, sleepwalking again.

  8. #105
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Michigan
    Posts
    10,196
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    3459
    Likes (Received)
    3646

    Default

    QT EmanuelGoldstein: [There is no predicting the future but your paranoia is not attractive. China is something of a world power already, but they do it by buying and selling, not sending in a division of tanks. Take your stupid incompetent Navy out of the area and you won't have this "military buildup" you fear so much. Chinese people are not stupid, they know that more bombs and guns means less teevees and LV purses. This is something maybe you dipshits could learn, too. Some day.[]

    I agree with that also..except it is not the Chinese people but the Chinese Government..Government do stupid things. The Chinese government could go in and whack Hong Kong so hard the world would wish to get involved. Russia could decide to invade another country and the world might wish to get involved..
    Yes often the USA sticks its/our nose out too far.

    *China is a world power.
    I would put USA, China and Russia as the likely trouble makers with North Korea and Muslim terror groups in the mix.

    The USA can't regulate the world but some USA people and some in the USA government think we can, This could be dangerous thinking.

    Dumb the we need rattle swords to keep the calm..but it seems that we do.

  9. Likes Trboatworks liked this post
  10. #106
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Country
    DENMARK
    Posts
    3,463
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4033
    Likes (Received)
    12627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trboatworks View Post
    Sure it’s just the damn United States which has caused thousands of years of simply unending war in Eurasia.
    The USA is lucky in only having Canada to the north and Mexico to the south. Even then Mexico seems to be enough trouble to build a big wall. Maybe contract China to build it?

  11. #107
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,495
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2008
    Likes (Received)
    2201

    Default

    The ‘new’ and old world eh...
    Cross contamination occurs but for the real fun the ancient divisions of the old are still the real source of conflict.
    Is that gonna change?

    For all the claims of US militancy- has the US caused war so much as simply decided the outcome...

  12. #108
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Country
    DENMARK
    Posts
    3,463
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4033
    Likes (Received)
    12627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trboatworks View Post
    For all the claims of US militancy- has the US caused war so much as simply decided the outcome...
    In which wars since 1949 has the USA decided the outcome?

    I wonder now and then how often has US participation been to justify the size of your military more than the need to "help"?

    In the past century is there a war the USA has fought alone in and won?

    With some of you it's all about size. Big isn't always better. Who's going to be the first to attack a country that has nuclear weapons? Russia in fact has more than the USA.

  13. #109
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,495
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2008
    Likes (Received)
    2201

    Default

    Korean War for starters.
    Russia had wanted the 49 from the turn of the century.
    They would have gotten more in our absence.
    We intervened in an established regional power struggle.

    Following that a brief period of no consequence- the Cold War.
    Europe post 1950 without the US determined outcome..

    Give it your best shot- we didn’t make a difference to outcomes?

  14. #110
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    4,423
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4586
    Likes (Received)
    4595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jancollc View Post
    That doesn't make a lot of sense.

    These submarines don't get refueled- they are delivered with fuel to last the entire 33-year design life.
    Making sense doesn't matter. The objective of the antinuclear activists was to stop the acquisition of the submarines. The one leading the charge was the same professor Abbott mentioned in another thread who authored a study "proving" that nuclear power can't be a viable component of "100% zero carbon" energy. He's a hardcore old school antinuclear activist.

  15. #111
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    4,423
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4586
    Likes (Received)
    4595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trboatworks View Post
    Korean War for starters.
    Russia had wanted the 49 from the turn of the century.
    They would have gotten more in our absence.
    We intervened in an established regional power struggle.
    And the reason the country was split at the 38th Parallel was because the U.S. didn't have the capacity to recover the rest from the occupying Japanese. The Soviets saw the opportunity and took it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trboatworks View Post
    For all the claims of US militancy- has the US caused war so much as simply decided the outcome...
    Actually, yes. The power brokers who control what some call The Deep State have covertly and overtly instituted wars in all parts of the world for over a century. That is on them, not the American people who have been tricked into war so many times.

    Every political leader who has opposed them has been politically destroyed or even assassinated and that list includes several foreign heads of state.

    Currently they are trying to impeach a President who appears to be trying to throttle them back. Two "witnesses" have already testified that their major problem with this President was his attempts to change established policy. Established by who? This is reminiscent of when Reagan faced internal opposition after he decided to collapse the Soviet Union by exploiting its financial vulnerability. It wasn't words that destroyed the Soviet Union it was drying up its pipeline of western cash.

  16. #112
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Country
    DENMARK
    Posts
    3,463
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4033
    Likes (Received)
    12627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trboatworks View Post
    Korean War for starters.

    Give it your best shot- we didn’t make a difference to outcomes?
    Making a difference isn't quite the same as your original "... as simply decided the outcome".

    The United States came to the aid of South Korea at the head of a United Nations force composed of more than a dozen countries. Communist China joined North Korea in the war in November 1950, unleashing a massive Chinese ground attack against American forces. The Soviet Union also covertly supported North Korea.

  17. #113
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,495
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2008
    Likes (Received)
    2201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scottl View Post
    And the reason the country was split at the 38th Parallel was because the U.S. didn't have the capacity to recover the rest from the occupying Japanese. The Soviets saw the opportunity and took it.
    Are you teasing me Scott- didn’t the Soviet forces continue on the march down the peninsula for weeks after the declaration of an end to hostilities in WWII?
    It seems it didn’t matter much to the nations prerogative whether we or Japan were present- they still wanted that extended buffer south.
    That need was exercised in the Korean War.

    I find it implausible to call that influence the Soviet Union demonstrated in their support for the conflict as being a product of war mongers in the US.
    We accepted the need to become involved.
    That is of course a political calculation as we were not directly threatened and could have left the resolution to its natural outcome.
    But “deep state”..?

    The Korean War is that perfect example of where the United States did not cause the conflict so much as influence its outcome.

  18. #114
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Country
    DENMARK
    Posts
    3,463
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4033
    Likes (Received)
    12627

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scottl View Post
    And the reason the country was split at the 38th Parallel was because the U.S. didn't have the capacity to recover the rest from the occupying Japanese. The Soviets saw the opportunity and took it.
    Are we on the same planet? We certainly don't read the same history books.

    What did Japan have to do with the Korean war?

    I suggest you look at a map and see where Korea is and which country it borders.

  19. #115
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    2,595
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    1214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trboatworks View Post
    The Korean War is that perfect example of where the United States did not cause the conflict so much as influence its outcome.
    Not at all. Syngman Rhee (sp ?) was our boy, the US was devoted to making east Asia part of our sphere while the Soviet Union wanted a port that didn't freeze. We got Japan, the rooskies attempted to get their port via korea, we wanted to "stop communism" aka control that part of the world, so ... it's all pretty much the same. The US was involved from the git-go.

    The US is just as much an aggressor as the evil Soviets, we just use puppets more. Competition between the US and the soviet union is what caused that war, it was not a case where we were outsiders but stepped in for philanthropic reasons. The Koreans themselves were just pawns.

    Wars have reasons, sometimes sensible ones, but this stuff about saving the world for democracy, puh-lease. Don't make me puke.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    What did Japan have to do with the Korean war?
    They lost WW II, which left a huge vacuum in the area.

  20. #116
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,495
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2008
    Likes (Received)
    2201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    Making a difference isn't quite the same as your original "... as simply decided the outcome".

    The United States came to the aid of South Korea at the head of a United Nations force composed of more than a dozen countries. Communist China joined North Korea in the war in November 1950, unleashing a massive Chinese ground attack against American forces. The Soviet Union also covertly supported North Korea.
    A rhetorical fine point it is not.

    The US role in the Korean war was 'decisive'.
    I would go so far as to say in our absence there simply would have been no war as we know it- the United Nations would not have participated.
    Not to diminish the loss from other participants but of the UN forces the US fielded the vast majority of material and personnel as well as suffering the greatest number of casualties by a very large measure.

  21. #117
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,495
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2008
    Likes (Received)
    2201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Not at all. Syngman Rhee (sp ?) was our boy, the US was devoted to making east Asia part of our sphere while the Soviet Union wanted a port that didn't freeze. We got Japan, the rooskies attempted to get their port via korea, we wanted to "stop communism" aka control that part of the world, so ... it's all pretty much the same. The US was involved from the git-go.

    The US is just as much an aggressor as the evil Soviets, we just use puppets more. Competition between the US and the soviet union is what caused that war, it was not a case where we were outsiders but stepped in for philanthropic reasons. The Koreans themselves were just pawns.

    Wars have reasons, sometimes sensible ones, but this stuff about saving the world for democracy, puh-lease. Don't make me puke.
    Picking sides is not the same as starting a fight.
    The region was contested before our influence.
    It is as I said- the US did not so much start the wars as decide the outcome.

    Korean peninsula a has been a contest of will far before our influence.
    Many centuries before.

    Better to just let them 'fight it out between themselves'..
    Perhaps if a nation decides the cede influence- geopolitical pivots are just that- regions where influence for a broader context is decided.
    I don't think it charitable to grant to one party more blame than another for that contest being required.

  22. #118
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    4,423
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4586
    Likes (Received)
    4595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gordon B. Clarke View Post
    Are we on the same planet? We certainly don't read the same history books.

    What did Japan have to do with the Korean war?

    I suggest you look at a map and see where Korea is and which country it borders.
    Japan occupied Korea during WWII. At the end of the war the Soviets began moving into Korea, starting at the north. The U.S. began moving in from the south but only had enough men to go as far as the 38th parallel, removing Soviet justification to takeover the entire peninsula. That is how we got a divided Korea. Five years later Soviet Russia AND China encouraged the North to invade the South.

    Soviet pilots flew against U.S. forces during the war and Chinese troops entered the war as direct combatants as North Korea was on the verge of losing. At first their massive human wave attacks overwhelmed U.S. and South Korean forces but eventually were able to fight back until a stalemate was reached, leading to a truce that is in effect today.

  23. Likes Trboatworks liked this post
  24. #119
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Maryland- USA
    Posts
    3,495
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2008
    Likes (Received)
    2201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    Not at all. Syngman Rhee (sp ?) was our boy, the US was devoted to making east Asia part of our sphere while the Soviet Union wanted a port that didn't freeze. We got Japan, the rooskies attempted to get their port via korea, we wanted to "stop communism" aka control that part of the world, so ... it's all pretty much the same. The US was involved from the git-go.

    The US is just as much an aggressor as the evil Soviets, we just use puppets more. Competition between the US and the soviet union is what caused that war, it was not a case where we were outsiders but stepped in for philanthropic reasons. The Koreans themselves were just pawns.

    Wars have reasons, sometimes sensible ones, but this stuff about saving the world for democracy, puh-lease. Don't make me puke.


    They lost WW II, which left a huge vacuum in the area.

    "The US was involved from the git go"

    You sound again like you are again presenting a US aggression explanation for regional conflict.
    The "Pawns" begin subjected to a power struggle.

    So what would happen in the absence of the US- the region would simple be overrun by the strongest regional player.

    How would the outcome of a unified Korea under communist rule being present right now had we not "saved the world for democracy" rest with you- just fine?

    From where I am sitting saving the world for democracy worked out just fine given the alternative...

    8ba51359-add9-4fff-97d2-5ae759a4120c.jpg

  25. #120
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    4,423
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4586
    Likes (Received)
    4595

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Trboatworks View Post
    "The US was involved from the git go"

    You sound again like you are again presenting a US aggression explanation for regional conflict.
    The "Pawns" begin subjected to a power struggle.

    So what would happen in the absence of the US- the region would simple be overrun by the strongest regional player.

    How would the outcome of a unified Korea under communist rule being present right now had we not "saved the world for democracy" rest with you- just fine?

    From where I am sitting saving the world for democracy worked out just fine given the alternative...

    8ba51359-add9-4fff-97d2-5ae759a4120c.jpg
    The poster who identifies as "EmanuelGoldstein" is very much an advocate of China. Although he now identifies his location as United Kingdom at other times he has listed at least one U.S. state and even China itself as his location. In spite of the United Kingdom location I think he may still live in China as on the Tesla thread after repeatedly bragging about electric vehicles in China he responded to one of my posts saying I should see for myself, even inviting me "here" to see all the electric vehicles including 100% electric scooters. Does that sound like the UK to you?

    In post after post he presents the official Chinese version of history, and in numerous others he constantly belittles the U.S. and especially its military. In one post he belittled the USA for not using electric railroad locomotives, a conversion that would benefit China's CRRC since the USA has no domestic manufacturers of such and the heavily subsidized CRRC manages to offer lower prices than other foreign competitors.

    In short he's a shill for China, despite claiming otherwise. I think he's possibly part of their team of cyber-warriors who troll the internet trying to counter adverse opinions of China.


Tags for this Thread

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
  •