♪alt13
Well-Known Member
Give us a sense of scale. How many people are we talking about? Isn't it nearly 5k on the carrier alone?
The Official "Stop WWIII" hype train
- Thread starter babe
- Start date
Give us a sense of scale. How many people are we talking about? Isn't it nearly 5k on the carrier alone?
I thought it was 12. I think that's what was agreed with the Soviets from memory. The POMS will eventually have two, think the French and Italians have carriers, we've just bought two which are to be used as helicopter platforms officially but I would not be shocked if that changes once the f-35s are delivered. A decision was taken by the Australian government not to replace the Melbourne with the Ark Royal (I think) which was being offered by the RN, with its air wing of harriers because such an increase in capability would destabilise the region. Australian governments no longer act so responsibly.
5-6k on the carrier, about 3k is ship's crew, the rest are part of the air wing attached to the ship. Air wings are not monogamous, they can be assigned to different carriers.
The destroyers (DDGs) have about 200 sailors on board.
The cruisers (CGs) have about 350.
A submarine has around 150 sailors. I actually have no idea what type of sub, or even really how many, are attached to a strike group. But as far as I know they are there. It's not open info.
A DDG has over 90 missiles and when combined with the AEGIS system which can track, with fire control accuracy, over 200 targets at the same time. All missiles can essentially be fired at once, each at a separate and distinct target.
A CG also has the AEGIS weapon system and can carry over 120 missiles.
A carrier air wing typically has over 80 aircraft. It's funny but that puts a single carrier above all but a few nations in terms of air power. The U.S. Navy is the second most powerful air force in the world, just behind the U.S. Air Force.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Combat_System
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticonderoga-class_cruiser
A CG also has the AEGIS weapon system and can carry over 120 missiles.
A carrier air wing typically has over 80 aircraft. It's funny but that puts a single carrier above all but a few nations in terms of air power. The U.S. Navy is the second most powerful air force in the world, just behind the U.S. Air Force.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aegis_Combat_System
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticonderoga-class_cruiser
Thanks for giving us this analysis.
While I might not be considered by anyone an expert on the subject, when it comes to crazy people I think I'm world-class. It's elementary. Anytime you analyze the crazy out of the equation, citing purely reasonable considerations, you're gonna be wrong. So this analysis is simply wrong, of course.
Here's the crazy stuff that makes it wrong.....
NK still enjoys virtually unconditional love from both China and Russia, and always will, regardless of official rhetoric and posturing, and will not lose that love even if they launch nuclear attacks on the West.
Neither will the US ever launch a nuclear strike against NK. Yes, we will shoot down the missile if they launch one against us, but our news will never know that fact. Yes, we probably shoot down their missiles now, for practice. Expect to hear about a lot of failed missile tests....
NK leaders will always have these facts clearly in mind, and will always be building more missiles.... and parading them on TV.
What drives this "crazy" is psychology. NK/SK are devoted racists absolutely committed to their myth about being the mainspring of civilization that simply will always have a whole world of ignoramuses who don't have sense enough to appreciate them. And when it comes to such fanatical racism, there is no way either SK or NK will ever take second seat.
I say why should we care, get our troops out of SK, and wash our hands of the place entirely. Let them fight their own war and settle their issues. This would end the "unconditional love" both Russia and China have for their little spoiled brat neighbor, because if we truly just don't care about Korea, it will truly no longer be purposeful "love". Instead, they will need to worry.
China and Russia will then have the problem of defending themselves from their pestilential neighbor, and it will cost them trillions either in armaments or payola.
SDI, the strategic defense initiative, is the solution for us. And back to the original US foreign policy.... alliance with none, commerce with all.
Holy ****!?!?
Fight their own war? You mean, let NK annihilate several million SKers in the first couple days of conflict then march into the scorched earth and claim victory?
We own that mess. That's our ****ing mess.
Probably you'd get closer to my meaning if you just noted the subtler implications of our walking away, none too soon. Without worldwide significance and superpower alignments, it's probably more likely that NK/SK wouldn't do the whole scorched earth war the bigger world would envision.
Reminds me of a legendary conversation between Roosevelt and Churchill over the future of India... I think the gist of the remarks will suffice here.... R: Why don't you just give India their Independence? C: What!!!!! Have you no idea at all what would happen if we left India? R: Well, the American colonials did OK.
Walking away would destroy the NK/SK psychological construct. Nothing can beat the loss of significance for ending a puppet show.
If NK/SK were relegated to commonplace rhetoric and a struggle for making a place for themselves on the world stage, it's more likely that the border would be demilitarized and some deal made for building wildly beneficial auto plants, and other industries, in the North.....
Historically, it is rumored that in making the decision to start the Korean War, the Chinese made a calculated judgment of American character/politics. Our own politics was muddled enough through our inconsistent support of Chiang Kai-shek that the communists who won out believed we were just as likely to bungle things in Korea, which we did. McArthur we couldn't stand. I consider this all proof of my thesis, that things would really get better if we just went away.
If the US "just walked away" from SK then our word and promises would be worth nothing on the global scale. Alliances with NATO, Japan, Philippines, Israel and Australia would disintegrate as well.
This is a perfect way to make America a pariah in the world. A complete foreign policy disaster. It would absolutely lead to world much less safe for America(ns).
Comparing the British/Indian relationship to that of SK/USA is faulty on many levels.
This is a perfect way to make America a pariah in the world. A complete foreign policy disaster. It would absolutely lead to world much less safe for America(ns).
Comparing the British/Indian relationship to that of SK/USA is faulty on many levels.
https://www.reuters.com/article/northkorea-usa-russia-idUSL4N1HX1SQ
Getting China to move first is exactly what Putin wants, as Russia stands to benefit from Chinese aggression, as it allows them to exclusively negotiate with NK. He now can further align with another nuclear power and further fortifying his boarders.
Oil is the elephant in the room as usual. China is slowly moving off a fossil fuel economy, even further disengaging with Russian interests,. The bedrock of the Russian economy is energy extraction. They're banking heavily on finding oil in NK, as they began getting after it in 2015. Putin sees what energy dependance does for an economy and national security. We're rich, bitch and don't **** with us.
Here's an idea. Wanna crush Russia? Move to a renewable economy and cripple them into the next century.