USN giant, stealthy new destroyer

[159th_Falcon]

Problem is, the US needs to have offensive based systems.

Because there idea of Homeland Defense is go and invade other country's before they attack you.

 

On an other note, this thread is pretty funny to be honest.

Seen F all of the ship though.

[Kuky]

Because there idea of Homeland Defense is go and invade other country's before they attack you.

 

and that's what's wrong with it... you don't go hitting people on the street because you think they might hit you one day, something needs to trigger the reaction (action=reaction anyone :music_whistling:)... and this preemptive strike is just bollocks.

[159th_Falcon]

and that's what's wrong with it... you don't go hitting people on the street because you think they might hit you one day, something needs to trigger the reaction (action=reaction anyone :music_whistling:)... and this preemptive strike is just bollocks.

 

Wonder if that would hold up in court over in the U.S.

 

I'm not guilty of murder cause i wacked that dude cause he could have wacked me at some point in the future........:doh:

 

BTW, prolly a good thing that forum rules keep us from discussing politics.

Though, i think this classify's more as ethics. Continue plz.:D

[wilky510]

if there is one thing that is sticking high on the radar it has to be the price..with 3.5 billion dollar a piece its no wonder USN is only getting 3 of those .. .

Just an FYI bro, the USN cancelled the other orders and just stuck with 3. Then they used that money put it into the more cheaper, affordable Arleigh Burke class destroyers. It wasn't because they are so uber 1337 expensive they could only afford 3. They bought 3, and cancelled the orders for more. And put the money else where. That simple. the USN has done this in the past. Seawolf vs Virginia class submarines anyone?

 

I also need to stop coming to the reality section. I feel like most of the people here are anti American and it almost makes me feel i'm not welcomed.

Edited November 1, 2013 by wilky510

[OutOnTheOP]

Wonder if that would hold up in court over in the U.S.

 

I'm not guilty of murder cause i wacked that dude cause he could have wacked me at some point in the future........:doh:

 

BTW, prolly a good thing that forum rules keep us from discussing politics.

Though, i think this classify's more as ethics. Continue plz.:D

 

It sure is big of you to happily note that you're not allowed to discuss politics while you make a political statement. Classy.

 

Kaktus; as far as US military procurement goes, you are trying to make the connection that the US military is pursuing the folly of buying systems that are too advanced, and therefore too expensive, and will therefore find itself short on the numbers needed. This would be true, if it weren't for the fact that the US generally has both numbers AND capabilities on its side. Yes, they buy very advanced F-22s. But they have 187 of them: almost the size of the Russian Su27 fleet (355). Yes, the US buys expensive M1A2 SEP tanks. But they have 1500 of them, where Russia has only about 350 T90s. It's hard to make that comparison to Nazi German production numbers stick. ...though in reality, even the Nazis didn't build things the way armchair generals seem to think they did: up to the very end of the war, over half of their tanks were Panzer Mk 4, NOT Panthers or Tigers or any other "uber weapon".

 

Personally, I think you just wanted to make an underhanded attempt to associate the US with Nazism. I have yet to see you write anything positive about the US in anything you've posted to this forum, and I've certainly seen you take every opportunity to belittle them.

[maturin]

Also, calling the Russians and Chinese barbarians isn't very nice.