Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

"China lands first jet on aircraft carrier" confuses me, they are a threat?


  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 Brokenbad

Brokenbad

    Cam is my hero

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,550 posts

Posted 25 November 2012 - 05:36 PM

The headline of an article on CNN.com

Here is the link if you are interested: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/25/world/asia/china-aircraft-carrier-landing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

It confuses me, because every time a conversation comes up about America's most powerful enemy, China and North Korea are always brought up. Yet, China is JUST NOW landing a jet on an air carrier (how long has US been doing that) and North Korea cannot even successfully launch a rocket when attempting to display all of their power to the world.

With a bad economy, the US may appear vulnerable, but who is a legit threat? I am sick of hearing about China or NK being threats to our country. In my opinion, the only country who can cause the US to fall is themselves, see The Roman Empire.

#2 Floppin

Floppin

    Smooches

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,662 posts
  • LocationShallotte, NC

Posted 25 November 2012 - 05:40 PM

The headline of an article on CNN.com

Here is the link if you are interested: http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/25/world/asia/china-aircraft-carrier-landing/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

It confuses me, because every time a conversation comes up about America's most powerful enemy, China and North Korea are always brought up. Yet, China is JUST NOW landing a jet on an air carrier (how long has US been doing that) and North Korea cannot even successfully launch a rocket when attempting to display all of their power to the world.

With a bad economy, the US may appear vulnerable, but who is a legit threat? I am sick of hearing about China or NK being threats to our country. In my opinion, the only country who can cause the US to fall is themselves, see The Roman Empire.


Militarily, there is no real threat to the US. We spend almost as much money on defense as the entire rest of the world combined.

We "officially" spend around 711billion a year on "defense". The rest of the world COMBINED spends around 1 trillion, with the closest single country being China with 143 billion.

#3 Happy Panther

Happy Panther

    Now even funnier.

  • ALL-PRO
  • 17,553 posts

Posted 25 November 2012 - 05:45 PM

China is not a threat in traditional warfare. A full USA carrier group is basically invincible still these days as far as I know.

Nobody on Earth has this 'cept us:

A carrier strike group (CSG) is an operational formation of the United States Navy. It is composed of roughly 7,500 personnel, an aircraft carrier, at least one cruiser, a destroyer squadron of at least two destroyers and/or frigates,[1] and a carrier air wing of 65 to 70 aircraft. A carrier strike group also, on occasion, includes submarines, attached logistics ships and a supply ship. The carrier strike group commander operationally reports to the commander of the numbered fleet who is operationally responsible for the area of waters the carrier strike group is operating in.
Carrier strike groups comprise a principal element of U.S. power projection capability. Previously referred to as Carrier Battle Groups (a term still used by other nations), they are often referred to by the carrier they are associated with (e.g., Enterprise Strike Group). There are currently 11 carrier strike groups: five based on the West Coast, five based on the East Coast, and one forward-deployed to NS Yokosuka, Japan.
The carrier strike group is a flexible naval force that can operate in confined waters or in the open ocean, during day and night, in all weather conditions. The principal role of the carrier and its air wing within the carrier strike group is to provide the primary offensive firepower, while the other ships provide defense and support. These roles are not exclusive, however. Other ships in the strike group sometimes undertake offensive operations (launching cruise missiles, for instance) and the carrier's air wing contributes to the strike group's defense (through combat air patrols and airborne anti-submarine efforts). Thus, from a command and control perspective, carrier strike groups are combat organized by mission rather than by platform.


http://en.wikipedia....er_strike_group

We can still dominate if it comes down to country vs country despite some of our failings. Although we could certainly win a Pyrrhic victory.

Where we would lose is non-traditional warfare which is multi-dimensional.

But even NK would be dumb to start any war. And china and US economies are so intertwined it would be mutual suicide to start a conflict.

Knock on wood but I seriously doubt any superpowers are going to wage war against one another in our lifetimes.

#4 TANTRIC-NINJA

TANTRIC-NINJA

    The holy ghost of Mr. Miyagi

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,068 posts
  • LocationColumbia, South Kacky

Posted 25 November 2012 - 05:53 PM

We spend more than the rest of the world combined on the military..So what does that say about us..

#5 Ronald Reagan

Ronald Reagan

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 207 posts

Posted 25 November 2012 - 06:41 PM

Peace through strength.
And a few bucks.


Posted Image

#6 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 23,330 posts

Posted 25 November 2012 - 09:08 PM

Its not even a Chinese built aircraft carrier. It's an unfinished Russian one that the Chinese bought. Oh and the plane design is licensed from Russia.

#7 cultclassiccat

cultclassiccat

    flash

  • ALL-PRO
  • 1,539 posts
  • LocationG spot

Posted 26 November 2012 - 07:04 AM

Someone once told me that it was never a matter of army vs army, more like an economy vs ecomnomy. Their mentality is to conquer us financially.

#8 YourMomsLover

YourMomsLover

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,872 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 07:36 AM

Chinas whole "human wave" tactics might be the only threat on the battlefield. They used this tactic against us in the Korean War correct?

Murica fug yea!

#9 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,512 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:28 AM

Online gaming..we used to have this saying...numbers numbers numbers.

To the mainland US? Sure...no one is much of a threat. To our allies? Ask the South Koreans or anyone else that wanted to resist communists back in the day.

Just watched Red Dawn...and no...that can't happen.

#10 GOOGLE RON PAUL

GOOGLE RON PAUL

    fleet-footed poster

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,181 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 10:50 AM

speaking of which, is red dawn neocon propaganda, or is it an allegory for american foreign policy?

also is it true that the remake was going to be about a chinese invasion, but they digitally altered the picture to make them north koreans? tbqh i'm not too worried about north korea invading the US

#11 SZ James (banned)

SZ James (banned)

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,919 posts
  • Locationfresh out the grave

Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:21 AM


Posted Image

#12 Panther17

Panther17

    HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,910 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:25 AM

WTF people. It was a movie.

#13 Darth Biscuit

Darth Biscuit

    Dark Lord

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 33,365 posts
  • LocationWilmington, NC

Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:29 AM

speaking of which, is red dawn neocon propaganda, or is it an allegory for american foreign policy?

also is it true that the remake was going to be about a chinese invasion, but they digitally altered the picture to make them north koreans? tbqh i'm not too worried about north korea invading the US


Haven't seen it so idk about the propaganda part... but yes, they had to re-shoot a good bit of it, especially the NK Commander guy's part due to it all being filmed with Chinese language stuff, but they decided that it would be a NK invasion instead...

It was even supposed to be released in 2010.

#14 Sean Payton's Vicodin

Sean Payton's Vicodin

    Banned

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,244 posts

Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:48 AM

It's funny how they put "HOME OF THE BRAVE" as a subtitle, but then had to change the antagonists from the Chinese to fuging North Koreans

Thank god this piece of poo bombed at the box office

#15 Doyle

Doyle

    Headed to the county line

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,148 posts
  • LocationRiverboat Rivera

Posted 26 November 2012 - 11:54 AM

It's funny how they put "HOME OF THE BRAVE" as a subtitle, but then had to change the antagonists from the Chinese to fuging North Koreans

Thank god this piece of poo bombed at the box office


I hope they lost a ton of money. Maybe then they will stop recycling old movies for a quick buck.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com