Jump to content

Military talk thread


Macrosszero
 Share

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Nolicense said:

looks like you dont understand whats going on. THAAD is not AA. if you look at china pov, your 300 nukes is used as deterrent for counter strike, and say you can only launch 200 icbms becos most of them are made in the 70s and not reliable. at launch the icbms are most vulnerable because the trajectory is fly over NE asia to reach us, and THAAD in sk takes out 150 of them easily.

the 300 missles dont make much of a nuclear deterrent now. so in this case, before launching the nukes, you need to launch a strike into sk to take out the THAAD batteries.

china is weary of nk nukes. if the state fails, everyone would worry. not because they would use it but because terrorist or whoever would want to buy it.

why would sk develop nukes? any country that has a nuke risk being caught in a nuclear exchange. go read up the nuclear non proliferation treaty which sk have signed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons

 

 

Russia has its own theatre defence systems.. why don't prc go complain? And it's American action that defused a planned  Russian nuke strike on China previously. 

Why shouldn't sk get nukes when the madman up north is rattling those every chance he gets? Failing which why shouldn't it have THAAD against the fat man?

Why should sk put its sovereignty below prc wishes?

So no... ccp glass hearts need to look at their own actions,  they wanted nk but failed to control it.

 

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Beregond said:

Both US and China got no rights to stop any body be it SK , NK, JAPAN, etc etc etc from developing their weapons including nukes. Thats how i feel about it.

but still this is an all together different topic from USA striking a low blow at their own allies and hijack AU50b worth of contract 😆

Everyone will sleep better if ALL 3 don't have nukes... but unfortunately the crazy one has... so my sympathies are with sk and jp.

 

If our neighbourhood folks have nukes.. I realllyyyyy don't know what we will do. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Playtime said:

Everyone will sleep better if ALL 3 don't have nukes... but unfortunately the crazy one has... so my sympathies are with sk and jp.

 

If our neighbourhood folks have nukes.. I realllyyyyy don't know what we will do. 

Every1 will sleep better if every 1 dun have nuke.Esp crazy countries that use nuke before. that how i feel about it.

If 1 or a few countries have nuke ( including country that threaten to use them on china and vietnam etc  ) then all countries must have the rights to pursue or develop their own nuke.

I alway believe in fair and square and democracy , i dun believe in special privilege for a selected few. I alway believe the same laws and rules must apply for every 1.  But of course that is only me. 

Its ok that u feel differently from me.

But i think this is a totally different topic from aust buying US sub already 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Beregond said:

Every1 will sleep better if every 1 dun have nuke.Esp crazy countries that use nuke before. that how i feel about it.

If 1 or a few countries have nuke ( including country that threaten to use them on china and vietnam etc  ) then all countries must have the rights to pursue or develop their own nuke.

I alway believe in fair and square and democracy , i dun believe in special privilege for a selected few. I alway believe the same laws and rules must apply for every 1.  But of course that is only me. 

Its ok that u feel differently from me.

But i think this is a totally different topic from aust buying US sub already 😁

I think if everyone has nukes, there won't be all out wars between them.  All scared of mad men anyhow press that big red button.

Only recent wars between nuke countries are India-China (fighting using sticks and morning stars) and India-Pakistan (very limited wars). 

 

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Playtime said:

 

Russia has its own theatre defence systems.. why don't prc go complain? And it's American action that defused a planned  Russian nuke strike on China previously. 

Why shouldn't sk get nukes when the madman up north is rattling those every chance he gets? Failing which why shouldn't it have THAAD against the fat man?

Why should sk put its sovereignty below prc wishes?

So no... ccp glass hearts need to look at their own actions,  they wanted nk but failed to control it.

 

did russia place their abm system in mongolia? donno what logic you use why us must have theirs in sk.

what benefit is it to nk to nuke sk when they want to unify it? nuke already is waste land that will pollute the entire korean peninsular. the nuke is a deterrent. if you use it it becomes useless as a deterrent. and the nukes is against the us, in case you missed the summit ah pui and the dotard had in sgp.

in case you didnt know, us wanted to nuke china also before they helped nk during the korean war. but that would escalate and bring in the soviets. stopping the soviets from nuking china would result in the soviets firing all their nukes eventually if there was all out war between china and the soviets. never ever think that just because 2 countries exchange nukes they wont throw some at any other country. take an example india, you think if they exchange nukes with pak they wont throw some chinas way? just like the soviets, if they lose, they make sure no body wins.

go read proud prophet. it seems you have no background in nuclear weapon strategy. all these strategies evolved by the us over the decades. they are just as valid today. and the irony is the us is now going against their knowledge they developed by thinking they can win a nuclear war. 

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

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, happy_man said:

That might just to be solution - MAD 2.0 ! 🤗   For e.g. 

When everyone has nuke weapon, Peace is ensured. Just look at NK.

Don't be like Afghanistan without nuke,. See what happen to them ?

And Iraq, Libya, Syria.... 

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, happy_man said:

Using today's ST article as reference, a single US nuclear--powered Virginia-class submarine costs around US$2.7 billion (S$3.63 billion).

This is cost of x7 German Type 212-class AIP sub which SG has ordered an advanced  variant Type-218SG

I am curious how many tonnes of iron ore, wine, apples, beef, coal, pork and milk the Aussies have the export to pay for those new toys.😝

 

Rich people got money buy Lambo, let them buy lor.  Why be jealous ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Nolicense said:

did russia place their abm system in mongolia? donno what logic you use why us must have theirs in sk.

what benefit is it to nk to nuke sk when they want to unify it? nuke already is waste land that will pollute the entire korean peninsular. the nuke is a deterrent. if you use it it becomes useless as a deterrent. and the nukes is against the us, in case you missed the summit ah pui and the dotard had in sgp.

in case you didnt know, us wanted to nuke china also before they helped nk during the korean war. but that would escalate and bring in the soviets. stopping the soviets from nuking china would result in the soviets firing all their nukes eventually if there was all out war between china and the soviets. never ever think that just because 2 countries exchange nukes they wont throw some at any other country. take an example india, you think if they exchange nukes with pak they wont throw some chinas way? just like the soviets, if they lose, they make sure no body wins.

go read proud prophet. it seems you have no background in nuclear weapon strategy. all these strategies evolved by the us over the decades. they are just as valid today. and the irony is the us is now going against their knowledge they developed by thinking they can win a nuclear war. 

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

 

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

in operation vulure , US  and FRANCE  even had a plan to nuke vietnam.

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Volvobrick said:

And Iraq, Libya, Syria.... 

well... i am not in favor for nuclear proliferation.. anyone can go search on the cons. plenty of it, dont need to list it here since some people think having a nuke is very simple thing.

that said, for small countries who are in existential threat, israel, even nk, it is a good deterrent. no first use.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_first_use#Israel

but that means many neighbors sit uneasy and want their own nukes too.. so its never ending.

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Nolicense said:

once you have nuke, its tempting to use it. very tempting..

yes because its a cure all.

the only way to stop being nuke or using nuke, is the 1 that is going to nuke others know that he risk being reiterate with nuke also .

the most dangerous situation is only 1 country or 1 small group of alliance got nuke. because he/they know nobody will nuke them back, 

 

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Feeling betrayed, Frenchie throws tantrum and cancel Washington Gala

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/china-france-furious-new-u-s-security-alliance-britain-australia-n1279345

The French canceled a gala in Washington D.C. that was planned for Friday to mark the 240th anniversary of the Battle of the Capes, a critical French naval victory that helped the colonists win the American Revolution, the French embassy confirmed.

  • Haha! 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, happy_man said:

Actually no one, including China, don't give a hoot about Aussie getting subs since the Aussies had been shopping for replacement since the last 3 PM gov. The fun fact however is US-UK basically step in and kill the 2016 billion $ Aus-France deal for 12 non-nuclear powered  Shortfin Barracuda sub which ex PM Turnbull signed. AFAIK. Obviously, the French are very very pissed.

2016 - France wins A$50bn Australia submarine contract - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-36136628

2019 - A not-so-long-ago happier times when the deal was signed with France.  😜

50880916-2dcc-11e9-80ef-0255f1ad860b_ima

 

 

Totally agree... instead of anti-china shit (smokescreen), I think the main aim is to con Aussie into pumping their billions (and future annual maintenance fees) to the US military complex.

Biden got to payback to his election backers.

  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, t0y0ta said:

Totally agree... instead of anti-china shit (smokescreen), I think the main aim is to con Aussie into pumping their billions (and future annual maintenance fees) to the US military complex.

Biden got to payback to his election backers.

Nuclear subs first steps. Nuke weapons next. Makes perfect sense for Australia to have nukes. Anyhow nuke own coastline if there is an invasion also only would harm a few wallabies. 

And they already have the Uranium. 

Edited by Volvobrick
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/france-recalls-ambassadors-from-us-australia-over-submarines-row?utm_campaign=stfb&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR34KOdqZRkj_KEYUHPx3jwkn8x4Uqy_cGQMla6KXXM7Fuzbba4iWI6OSDw

france is more then angry🤬

France recalls ambassadors from US, Australia over submarines row

The French ambassador recalls from the United States and Australia, key allies of France, are unprecedented.

  • Haha! 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Beregond said:

https://www.straitstimes.com/world/europe/france-recalls-ambassadors-from-us-australia-over-submarines-row?utm_campaign=stfb&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR34KOdqZRkj_KEYUHPx3jwkn8x4Uqy_cGQMla6KXXM7Fuzbba4iWI6OSDw

france is more then angry🤬

France recalls ambassadors from US, Australia over submarines row

The French ambassador recalls from the United States and Australia, key allies of France, are unprecedented.

Maybe France should also start selling its nuclear subs to anyone willing to pay to make up the lost sales. Can knock on Indonesia's door.  And Japan, Korea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Volvobrick said:

Maybe France should also start selling its nuclear subs to anyone willing to pay to make up the lost sales. Can knock on Indonesia's door.  And Japan, Korea.

ya indo also sound off they buay song about the deal. they can take over part of the package instead ( if they got the money 😅)

i read on youtube, some of the comment thats trying to justify aust act is that france delivery of their sub take many many years.

but then from limited info, i believe the delivery of US  sub could take as many years also 😂

 

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...