I realize that, which is why I know you're stupid. You are impervious to facts and you don't know where to find them, even though you apparently have a computer.
Chairman of Joint Chiefs thought Trump might attempt a legit coup
- Thread starter TheOriginalHappyGoat
- Start date
You can't deal with any view that isn't your own.Yes, you are uninformed on virtually every subject posted on this board. You cannot deal with facts because you don't have facts to back up your nonsense. Oh, here's another article about US Naval strength vs. China.
Eagle vs Dragon: How the U.S. and Chinese Navies Stack Up
Eagle vs Dragon: How the U.S. and Chinese Navies Stack Upwww.nationaldefensemagazine.org
You aren't presenting any facts - only others' opinions. And, in this case, you evidently didn't even read your own link.
“U.S. and other observers generally assess that while the United States today has more naval capability overall, China’s naval modernization effort … has substantially reduced the U.S. advantage, and that if current U.S. and Chinese naval capability trend lines do not change, China might eventually draw even with or surpass the United States,”
O’Rourke said. “In the South China Sea, some observers are concerned that China has already drawn even with or even surpassed the United States.”
I didn't realize Ted Bundy did his work in front of a TV camera.
Hey, how did revenue ever increase from the 2017 tax cuts? LMAO!
Yes, the Navy Times, and National Defense journal. Plus Aloha's opinion. You post garbage from right wing nut Tom Cotton.
Now who do you suppose is presenting factual evidence?
I'll go ahead and trust the Lieutenant General and Rear Admiral, who were commissioned to do the study.
You believe who you want.
Okay, you just quoted something from the article proving my point. Earlier in the thread you said China's navy can currently "blow the US Navy out of the water". Which is it? Make up your mind.
You haven't a clue who Ted Bundy was, do you?
(Don't Google it. Just admit you don't know.)
If you bothered to read what I've posted, I told Aloha it was hyperbole - for now.
The quote I pasted shows that, on the current track, the Chinese Navy is projected to overtake ours.
It's not difficult to figure out the track we're on, but you go on living in denial.
Even the Russians Think The U.S. Navy Would Defeat the Chinese
Konstantin Sivkov, a member of the Russian Academy of Rocket and Artillery Sciences, says superior U.S. reconaissance would give it the defining advantage.
nationalinterest.org
Hell in the Pacific: US 'would win' carrier battle - Asia Times
At the epic Battle of Midway during World War II, victory or defeat rested on which side first spotted the other side’s carriers, and then dispatched an
asiatimes.com
Sorry China, Not Even Russia Thinks You Could Beat The U.S. Navy
If U.S. and Chinese aircraft carriers were to clash, the U.S. Navy would win.
Why China isn't ahead of the US Navy, even with more ships
If you want to think about the size of navies, think mostly aggregate tonnage, not numbers of ships. By that measure, for what it's worth, we are still way ahead.
www.brookings.edu
What? Of course I do.
Are you still embarrassed about the revenue increases after the 2017 tax cuts?
LOL Having a fun Saturday?Even the Russians Think The U.S. Navy Would Defeat the Chinese
Konstantin Sivkov, a member of the Russian Academy of Rocket and Artillery Sciences, says superior U.S. reconaissance would give it the defining advantage.
Hell in the Pacific: US 'would win' carrier battle - Asia Times
At the epic Battle of Midway during World War II, victory or defeat rested on which side first spotted the other side’s carriers, and then dispatched an
Sorry China, Not Even Russia Thinks You Could Beat The U.S. Navy
If U.S. and Chinese aircraft carriers were to clash, the U.S. Navy would win.www.yahoo.com
Why China isn't ahead of the US Navy, even with more ships
If you want to think about the size of navies, think mostly aggregate tonnage, not numbers of ships. By that measure, for what it's worth, we are still way ahead.
What track are we on? You don't think the US can crank up production of ships that are in every way superior to China? You're insane.
Yes, I am! You can't be because you continue to be owned by every poster on this board including other Republicans.
You realize that the only people who agree with you are the craziest lunes on this board, right?
No one likes you.
You wrote "hyperbole -for now."
Again, you don't care if you express yourself clearly or not.
Edit to add: This is a matter of how you express yourself -- you leave things vague intentionally, so it is not a question whether you are being misunderstood.
LOL! Oh NO! No one LIKES me!
Boo Hoo Hoo Hoo 😭😭😭
Does this mean you're not inviting me to your next part? I know all the cool kids will be there!
The United States spends more money on defense than every country in the world combined...that includes China. Our military technology is second to no one.
If our priorities changed to building more warships, I think we'd be able to do it and do it very well. China's submarines are diesel powered. Their aircraft carriers don't have catapults to launch anything but fixed wing aircraft. Maybe in the future they will get there, but the certainly aren't capable of "blowing the US Navy out of the water."
You just can't get your head around that can you?
I have never seen a single post from you that has even a tiny bit of thought. You are right there with Mas and Crayfish. Loony tunes.
A bit of thought like "No one likes you"?
I can't decide if you're IU_Hickory or Goat/Bowlmania. You all have the maturity of a 3rd grader.
The Lieutenant General and Rear Admiral (Montgomery, who I've met, but wouldn't say I know well by any means) didn't write a report that says what you claim it says. The Navy has some issues they need to address and work out, but not the kind of issues that in anyway indicates that they're not a match for the PLAN.
No, my last ship was a conventional cruiser. We don't have any nuke cruisers in service now, but thanks anyway.
Last edited:
He just thought if he said nuclear it would make it more impressive.No, my last was a conventional cruiser. We don't have any nuke cruisers in service now, but thanks anyway.
The trend is not in our favor.
It's nothing new for our military to be overmatched. During the Cold War, the Soviets and Warsaw Pact dwarfed our forces. We were constantly on a defensive posture in Western Europe and all our war games ended with a Yorktown message - nuclear weapons to stop a Soviet advance.
My whole point was the Milley should be worried about our military, rather than get drawn into political battles. I don't know why he's bringing up a "coup" now, other than to sell a future book or gain political favor with the current Administration.
After the fall of the Soviet Union we found that we greatly overestimated the capabilities of the Soviet Navy. It was impressive on paper, but poorly trained and not as capable as we thought they were. On the ground they may have been able to cause far more trouble in Europe, but tank for tank, aircraft for aircraft, and just about any weapons system for weapons system, the Allies had the technological advantage. Nuclear capability was real though.
Also, Milley isn't bringing up a coup now. He's quoted in a book and the quote may or may not be accurate, but I actually don't have a problem with it if it was accurate.
Technological advantage, yes. Numerically, they vastly outnumbered us in tanks. And much of our equipment then was outdated or what came out of Vietnam after the drawdown.
We were always considered a tripwire in Western Europe.
And yes, I knew how incompetent their military was, being a Russian linguist there. Some of what we heard was downright hilarious. Of course, our military also had its share of screw-ups.
This is you, trying to figure out how US revenue went up after the 2017 tax cut.Milley was addressing the problem he saw in front of him. As for you ....
Damn! I was wading into uncharted waters, Commander!No, my last ship was a conventional cruiser. We don't have any nuke cruisers in service now, but thanks anyway.
DANC seems to have trouble with concepts like time and date and quote attribution.
Really? Is that your contribution to the discussion?
Way to up the level of discourse.
Well, your responses in this entire thread show you know WAY less than shit.
