|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:18 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| The Hammer wrote: |
| Uhhh... and just which navy got smoked at Pearl? |
Easy question, Hammer: the same navy that turned around and not only destroyed the attacking navy, but won its unconditional surrender, occupied its homeland, and then, among other things, created bases which it maintains today.
China turned its back on naval power long ago. Just ask those who saw the Chinese fleet disbanded in the fifteenth century. Beijing may want to develop naval power today, and I think they should. These sea lines of communication impact their interests as well as ours. I do not necessarily see them as our enemy, however. And even if they were, they are fielding mostly diesel submarines today and they lack the sea power to get to Taiwan.
Let us keep this in perspective. |
Sounds cool! You've won me over. Now I too support the Pearl Harbor Sea Battle Doctrine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Which of these names sounds better?
a.) CVN-21 USS William Ayers
Nickname: USS Bomber
b.) CVN-21 USS Joe Wurzelbacher
Nickname: USS Plumber |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 3:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How about:
c.) CVN-21 USS The Hammer
Nickname: USS Tool |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gopher I'm not sure what you're arguing at. Is it your hypothesis that a carrier group, if attacked by a full spread of wave-riding super sonic russian missiles launched from subs, it would survive?
Let's hope this hypothesis is never real world tested.
A carrier group is a wonderful thing and you don't want one parked off your coast if you're not a super power and the USA is not friendly to you. That's for sure.
But realistically, I think it's highly vulnerable to a concentrated attack by a good slew of super sonic anti-ship missiles. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Carrier groups field formidable, in-depth defense screens that you seem to dismiss. For such an attack that you describe to succeed, an enemy would have to penetrate those defenses, close to striking distance, and then hit their targets before being destroyed themselves.
The scenario you propose is a most unlikely one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
How about:
c.) CVN-21 USS The Hammer
Nickname: USS Tool |
Haha!  Hells yeah! I'm voting C.
I'm John McCain and I spent a lot of my time at the naval academy praying for Cs because I'm fcuking stupid and I support this message and my supporters are aholes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
Carrier groups field formidable, in-depth defense screens that you seem to dismiss. For such an attack that you describe to succeed, an enemy would have to penetrate those defenses, close to striking distance, and then hit their targets before being destroyed themselves.
The scenario you propose is a most unlikely one. |
Let's just pretend that Chinese sub didn't get get close enough to pop off a shot because hey man our CSGs have in-depth defense screens that can't be penetrated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hammer and Mindmetoo: why are you insisting on characterizing that submarine as an enemy submarine, and treating the story you seem to admire, moreover, as a successful, realistic penetration of the carrier group's defenses?
Further, Mindmetoo: this thread has to do with discussions re: America's pending collapse and end -- not to defend against the ridiculous although not wholly unrelated allegation that the Chinese Navy, which cannot even retake Taiwan, can stand toe to toe with the American Navy today because a submarine captain tracked an American carrier group in peacetime.
As I have said before: some people here simply squirm and cannot stand to hear any talk whatsoever about the United States that is not negative.
Let us look at this another way: order-of-battle. Here is America's Pacific Fleet. Here is COMSUBPAC.
| Quote: |
| The U.S. Pacific Fleet, the world's largest fleet command, encompasses 100 million square miles, more than half the Earth's surface, from the West Coast of the United States to the eastern shore of Africa. The Pacific Fleet consists of approximately 180 ships, 1,500 aircraft and 125,000 Sailors, Marines and Civilians. |
What does the Chinese naval order-of-battle in the Pacific look like? Or anywhere else, for that matter?
Last edited by Gopher on Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:54 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| Hammer and Mindmetoo: why are you insisting on characterizing that submarine as an enemy submarine, and treating the story you seem to admire, moreover, as a successful, realistic penetration of the carrier group's defenses? |
Because to think that a carrier strike group is impervious to successful attack is an invitation to disaster on the scale of ummmmm....
Pearl Harbor.
Our fleet was pretty bad ass at that time, but it wasn't so bad ass sitting on the bottom of the drink.
And as far as the Chinese sub that is being referred to, they weren't on a friendship mission to share some dimsum. They were practicing to blow our boats out of the water. All of the billions of dollars worth of offensive and defensive capabilities aren't worth squat if the crews are caught with their panties down.
Are you not haunted by the ghost of the USS Stark? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You have escalated my position, in your hyperbole and unrestrained sarcasm, to a foolish strawman. Where did I say "impervious to successful attack," Hammer? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
As I have said before: some people here simply squirm and cannot stand to hear any talk whatsoever about the United States that is not negative.
|
That definitely isn't a description of me because I'm hardcore down for my country. You'll never find one post from me that bad mouths the USA. Not one!
Now back to our regular programming.
Last edited by The Hammer on Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:28 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| You have escalated my position, in your hyperbole and unrestrained sarcasm, to a foolish strawman. Where did I say "impervious to successful attack," Hammer? |
You didn't, however you do concede that American warships can be successfully attacked, right?
I understand your position is that a successful attack scenario is unlikely, but possible, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You been drinking cause your posts make you sound like you've been hammered. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Not a drinker, Joo. Just another wild-eyed, hysterical and unrelentingly sarcastic, screaming, teen-aged poster, here to stand up, defy "the man," and defend the good people of the world, etc., etc. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 24, 2008 5:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Hammer wrote: |
| Gopher wrote: |
| You have escalated my position, in your hyperbole and unrestrained sarcasm, to a foolish strawman. Where did I say "impervious to successful attack," Hammer? |
You didn't, however you do concede that American warships can be successfully attacked, right?
I understand your position is that a successful attack scenario is unlikely, but possible, right? |
No response? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
