US is defenseless.

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 17 2013 @ 07:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
reply to post by rickymouse
 


Hell no the Russians are afraid of our country's acts lately.Our leadership is all haywire.They want a STABLE America. Not one that jumps into conflicts and starts others.
We can't meddle in other countries anymore without CLEARLY delineated threats being identified.
And not without congressional approval as the Constitution stipulates.
Thats why we are intercepting Bears again.


I think the Russians know that the Americans are crazy enough to use Nuclear weapons and know that the Americans technology to shield their missiles from being destroyed is better than theirs is. This means that the USA's missiles will better hit their target. This does not mean that the USA's defense system is appropriate though, except of course where the military's main headquarters are. Actually, who cares if Congress gets destroyed, as long as the ones at the top of the military are protected. This means that the Biggest Defense contractors have the best defense with adequate shields in place to deflect nuclear weapons from their area. I would say that the safest place to live is in the areas of the major Boeing headquarters myself.

Nah, I'm not paranoid, I wouldn't want to move there. I'll stay right where I am. Nobody who would desire to control the world would be stupid enough to target one of the worlds largest freshwater reserves with a nuke.




posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 

I have never personally met Kim J. I would guess he would be a far more unstable opponent that the US.
He sure would do it too.



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Adaluncatif
 


well our icbms still work and so do the slbm's so as long as our subs are patroling the worlds oceans we have the ability to wreck the globe or any one attacking us sure we may go down but we will take them and a few others with us


A test of the only US defense against long-range ballistic missiles failed on Friday. The Department of Defense said it was the third consecutive failure involving the interceptor system that is managed by Boeing Co.
from your link.....so we dont have aegis any more? and no more patriot batteries? pretty sure we have had a multi tiered defense for years,and have shot down satellites in space from the deck of a cruiser.....pretty sure were golden for the time being plus one of the advantages of bases all over the world in other countries is that to wipe us out you have to attack many other nations(turky,greece,most of nato,parts of austrilia,south korea japan,hell we have a few bases in hostile countries like cuba)etc otherwise we will have counter strike capability
edit on 19-7-2013 by RalagaNarHallas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by rickymouse
 

good point with every other nation but the usa you have to ask the question will they use nukes? under what circumstances....currently the usa answer is clear by what we did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki if the amount of potential dead Americas is too high we will use them

of interesting note china is the only nuclear armed nation that has a non first strike policy that they claim to adhear to meaning that they will allegedly only launch once they have been nuked/nukes are on the way to china



posted on Jul, 19 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas
 


That is interesting about China. I really have nothing against the Chinese, it is not their fault that the big corporations started buying everything from them and exported the work for those who aren't rocket scientists and want to work with computers all day.



posted on Jul, 20 2013 @ 12:31 AM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 

I haven't discounted a thing,we won 90% of the fights we engage in conventional combat HANDS DOWN
10 to 1 are normal odds soldier to soldier on the average.
Here is an example of which I speak:
www.youtube.com...

THIS IS WHITE WORLD info and it is a game changer for sure.



posted on Jul, 20 2013 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Adaluncatif
Yeah, America has the best weapons, and no other country has secret weapons.


I never said no other country has secret weapons. Nice try though. Now go fix your brain.
~$heopleNation



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   

This isn't the only ballistic missile defense system the US has. It's the one designed to stop ICBMs,.


That's just it though...this article is really vague. Just what failed? There are numerous parts to the US missile defense system. The midcourse step is only ONE part of it. (and, this part of it is the LEAST likely to score hits). Soon after launch, and before impact are the most accurate, if I recall from previous research. From foreign based missile batteries, to sea platforms, space platforms, and US ground based platforms, it's a fairly redundant system.

Why do you think Russia's answer was to build TONS of nukes vs. focus on accuracy? They knew the only counter against it was to overwhelm the missile defense system with targets. They would have known if it didn't work, they certainly had the spies in place to know....and they wouldn't have spent the dough if they didn't think it worked.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
reply to post by seagull
 

I haven't discounted a thing,we won 90% of the fights we engage in conventional combat HANDS DOWN
10 to 1 are normal odds soldier to soldier on the average.
Here is an example of which I speak:
www.youtube.com...

THIS IS WHITE WORLD info and it is a game changer for sure.



Rubbish British Soldiers can match Americans in training.

Not to mention Australians higher sucess rates in Vietnam.

The USA is good yes but so are a number of other nations.

Im sure if a Regiment of Americans went up against a GOOD regiment of Russians they would have a match.

Only diffrence is the US has money to spend on better tec or at least better tec in large quantities.


Take all the tec and airsupport away and a American GI is no diffrent than any other meat sack on the battlefieild. They are not special, any more motivated, have divine backing or any other exceptiolism nonsence.
edit on 22-7-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Why do you think the Australians and British, and all those other countries come to the US all the time to train? We have the most realistic training in the world, and they want to take advantage of it. Red Flag/Red Flag Alaska are purposely made to be so difficult that real combat is easy in comparison.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Why do you think the Australians and British, and all those other countries come to the US all the time to train? We have the most realistic training in the world, and they want to take advantage of it. Red Flag/Red Flag Alaska are purposely made to be so difficult that real combat is easy in comparison.



Because the USA has a lot of space too train and good trainling facilities to host such events.


Im not saying the USA military are rubbish or there training is terrible.

Dont get me wrong.

Im just saying British/Australian/USA forces are pretty interchangble once you take the tec away.
Both have there strenghts and weaknessed and all sides can learn from each other

Hence the Redflag ect as it gives a chance for everyone to learn. Im sure if things like redflag didnt exist all allied countrys would be the poorer including the USA as it gives a chance for everyone to share there experiances.


Though to be honnest? If I was makeing my perfect NATO army I would take a British (or better yet scotish) GI over a American GI and I would take a American fighter pilot over a British one.
edit on 22-7-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)
edit on 22-7-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 


Yeah, but Australia has plenty of space to put a Red Flag facility. The UK may not, but other countries do.

The biggest advantage that the US has over other military forces is the fact that they train more than any other countries, even their allies. US pilots get more flight time per year than some other countries entire air forces do.

It doesn't make them the greatest force in the entire world, but it gives you a huge advantage when you can operate your equipment almost blindfolded, when others are having to stop and think about what they're doing.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


As I said I would take a US Airforce pilot over a British one


But the USA is a logical choice to put such a big event. Im sure Australia would go broke doing it



My point is though on the front line develpoed highly trained countries like USA/UK/Australia ect are all extremly capable with there own skills to bring to the table. And when it comes to baisc infantry there is not a lot of diffrence to be honnest. Though I would take a Brit of a Aussie GI over a American one no offence



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 04:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Adaluncatif
 


US keeps their true power secret. An advice to you, never believe that US or Russia are defenceless. Never. They can destroy the world in a second if they want to with the weapons they possess



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by crazyewok
 

Since we have never fought,we don't know,I hope it is a question we never have to find out since England and American forces are sort of interrelated I don't see it happening, as well as I see ALL UK as equals as well.But about that Russian regiment,no way in hell. We have used and beaten Russian tactics against Russian trained opponents and they were easily overcome.Without chems or nukes ,we own them.I would love to see them at our NTC to demonstrate that. www.rand.org...
They didn't know how badly Iraq would do against us and we scared the crap out of them when we did it.
We are the king of conventional warfare(with the UK forces) Korea ,Viet Nam,my war.it's our free thinking and ability to use chaos. Just go to an American Cav unit and you will wonder how we get anything done like we always do."By the book" fighting is suicide against us. We fight almost exactly like we play football(our football) and in order to win individual survival is asided to do so BY THE INDIVIDUAL but it don't come cheap.Not to mention Americans penchant for pushing their luck which I KNOW British forces don't do very much because of not having a whole lot of gear and people.
As to aggression it's hard to say but I just assumed we are alike.



posted on Jul, 22 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7

As to aggression it's hard to say but I just assumed we are alike.


Haha well come to a town center on a friday at kicking out time you see why they dont let us have guns and be glade we dont



Na I concide to your point. Its a good post that expands on what you said. As I have read up on the Air Cav, they seem a good section and I can see how you think so very highly.


As for Britain going to war with the USA dont worry never going to happen two countrys I dont think have ever been so closly tied. If UK troops land on American soil its a training execrcise.
edit on 22-7-2013 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 11:08 AM
link   

US keeps their true power secret. An advice to you, never believe that US or Russia are defenceless. Never. They can destroy the world in a second if they want to with the weapons they possess


Well, minutes...not seconds...but yeah, that much is true. (or at least destroy most of it). The rest of the world (outside the blast zones) would die slower, but it would be a true hell on Earth for anyone surviving. We'd likely make ourselves extinct, as the survivors couldn't grow food.



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by cavtrooper7
reply to post by crazyewok
 

Since we have never fought,we don't know,I hope it is a question we never have to find out since England and American forces are sort of interrelated I don't see it happening, as well as I see ALL UK as equals as well.But about that Russian regiment,no way in hell. We have used and beaten Russian tactics against Russian trained opponents and they were easily overcome.Without chems or nukes ,we own them.I would love to see them at our NTC to demonstrate that. www.rand.org...
They didn't know how badly Iraq would do against us and we scared the crap out of them when we did it.
We are the king of conventional warfare(with the UK forces) Korea ,Viet Nam,my war.it's our free thinking and ability to use chaos. Just go to an American Cav unit and you will wonder how we get anything done like we always do."By the book" fighting is suicide against us. We fight almost exactly like we play football(our football) and in order to win individual survival is asided to do so BY THE INDIVIDUAL but it don't come cheap.Not to mention Americans penchant for pushing their luck which I KNOW British forces don't do very much because of not having a whole lot of gear and people.
As to aggression it's hard to say but I just assumed we are alike.

er yes we did america won, with french help mind. do a google search for american war of independence



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 12:42 AM
link   
reply to post by NateHatred
 


We just assumed others would understand that as we do.



posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 12:54 AM
link   
The defense is 3500 nukes ready to go in retaliation, now talking about terrorist that is touchy to determine who do you retaliate against. I say just pick 5 main countries in the middle east...that would at least hit close to the bulls eye.





new topics
top topics
 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join