posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:51 PM
reply to post by Freeborn
One ship? Okay.... This is funny because I just can't come up with another reaction that isn't totally over the top of offensive. I really
love the Texas saying "One Riot, One Ranger." It even has historical basis for having happened that way to spawn the saying and legends.
One Ship, One War...doesn't quite have the same ring to it and I'm sorry, but if the United Kingdom has become so unbelievabvly arrogant as to
believe that ONE SHIP is sufficient to go fight an entire nation with a very capable military of their own, then the British People need to reign in
that Government. (Oh...and Argentina isn't ALONE these days...South American nations work together and US/UK is NOT their idea of allied presence)
How about I sit here and say that with the U.S.S. George H.W. Bush, we can easily take and stomp the United Kingdom? Don't get offended.... Punch in
United States vs. United Kingdom to the same military forces inventory site I listed above. The "un-fair match-up' for forces and sheer raw POWER is
about the same in compared the U.S. to the UK and the UK to Argentina.
So.... Given that the UK is as trivial to US as Argentina is to the UK..can we just send ONE ship and take the British Home Islands?
sounds patently offensive as well as delusional when it's said that way, doesn't it? We'd need at least TWO carriers. You're right. We'd better
task the Enterprise as well. We needn't bother any more CAPABLE ships than than, of course... After all, we so badly outgun England as to make it a
Yeah... It's downright insulting and outright offensive...when put that way. ...and I am sure Argentina is no less offended or anxious to put that
one to the test and prove just who can stomp who when England is bringing their toys on a 7,700 mile logistics train. I lay 50/50 odds...and only give
THAT good because I know the English fight like hell and won't give up.