http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Another+british+fuck+who+got+to+take+his+confidence+problems+out+on+the+US+navy

'nuff said

The first two results are some American president...tshhh.

Aww, did xykt get his ego hurt cause his country's leader wasn't mentioned?

I'm like 100% sure aircraft carriers are meant to hold aircraft, not decimate fleets.


Haha I laughed hard.

I love hearing about military strategy from guys whose only experience is bf4, civ whatever and warlight.....any admirals out here to support their blubbering.

The guy that speaks about "radioactive acid" in nuclear reactors on aircraft carriers and how easy they can blow up should probably take a few months break and read a few books first, preferably some about nuclear reactors.

And that boat you can sink with a spoon is armed to the teeth with anti-submarine measures, surrounded by a whole fleet of anti-submarine vessels, has a bunch of state of the art aircraft, helicopters etc. and is the pinnacle of sea warfare. I have a spoon....wanna go for it? I'll even give you my silverware.

On the other hand a submarine sinking a carrier on a exercise...yes it's a big deal (on a exercise), but sinking one carrier doesn't win the war. USA military might is more than it's carriers. You don't win wars by winning just the military engagements.

Get your heads out of your asses.

^That's right the best way to win a war it to use millions of nukes

Lol yea, and everyone knows who has the (second) most nukes in the world!

What lies in Sardinian basements and evil hearts do far more than any military can.

Is it just me,or are cruisers kind of redundant in modern naval combat? Hear me out :

Subs : underwater ambush other ships.
Destroyers : Light armament,destroy subs.
Battleships : Heavy armament, slow flagship.
Carrier : Holds aircraft for forward deployment.
Minestuffs : More underwater warfare.
Transport : For (now somewhat outdated) amphibious invasion.

Cruiser : ???
They just seem like light battleships in my experience. They're only good against destroyers and lighter cruisers. Missile cruisers are redundant because of submarines, and destroyers are good for electronic warfare.

So the question is, are cruisers useless? (Not including the ban of battleships into this equation).

Let's not forget the Dong Feng Ballistic Missile, which the Chinese have been working on for some time and are about 5-10 years away from perfecting.

The US still needs its aircraft carriers though, to maintain a military presence in parts of the world where their army and air force doesn't exactly reach. They don't really need the navy to engage in actual military exercises, as long as their presence is felt.

The reality is China has the edge in terms of its military. They have a standing army of 2.3 million, with another 800,000 in reserve and some 1-1.5 million military police, compared to the US Military with 1.3 million active personnel and 850,000 in reserve. While the US is spending about 600 billion USD on their military this year alone, the PRC is managing to stretch its 141 billion USD a lot farther (think of India spending a measly 74 million USD on its Mars mission, which NASA would probably need just to pay their personnel each year). You get more bang for your buck in that part of the world.

Not to mention that when you're competing with 1.3-1.6 billion people for a comfortable middle class lifestyle in a country with little-to-no human rights, you might be willing to go the extra mile. They're a whole other breed of individuals out there.

Also, yes Myhand clearly is a leftist living in Germany who doesn't think much of America, but he has good reason to feel that way. The majority of the men and corporations screwing over the economy and environment and causing all this civil unrest are American or American sponsored. And the American media responds by focusing all of our attention on anything but American economics and foreign policy. Typical and the worst part, is that it's working.

Also, yes Myhand clearly is a leftist living in Germany who doesn't think much of America, but he has good reason to feel that way. The majority of the men and corporations screwing over the economy and environment and causing all this civil unrest are American or American sponsored. And the American media responds by focusing all of our attention on anything but American economics and foreign policy. Typical and the worst part, is that it's working.

My issue is that Myhand seems to have a pattern of relentlessly bashing the U.S as if it's the worst country in the world while ignoring problems caused by any other countries. Yes, U.S.A is a badly broken country, but it's far from the only one. Many problems in America permeate through much of western society as well.

Actually taisho, we have a national draft system in place for men 17 - 22? In case of emergency.

Also, we spend a lot of money on better equipment than what China has.

But, a lot of your other points were perfectly correct, tai.

China makes everything for us.

China makes a lot, but not everything.

Can you not tell an exaggeration?

Fine most everything

korea makes the rest...

nah