Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I found it amusing that Trump used a peculiarly antique word- armada- instead of the much more forceful modern term for a carrier group- strike force.
A single modern carrier group has more strike power of an entire WWII attack fleet. With a fraction of the ships and sailors. That's why it came into use. It's a vastly more threatening term than 'armada'. Except to those who don't know anything at all about them.
He probably didn't even know the current term. His use of 'armada' brought up visions of square-riggers and 17th century sea battles with muzzle-loading guns, firing broadsides at each other.
Fun to watch in old movies on TV, but I seriously doubt Old Ironsides will ever go sailing into battle again. Or any of her surviving sisters.
Found it!
If Liberals were in the Defense business this is what we would have for a Navy
For those that know: is it true, in a general sense, that said submarines are much more powerful than the carries and such?
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus
Aside from the standard torpedoes,
We have the Ohio class SLBMs, which carry up to 24 nuclear missiles with multiple warheads.
We also have the Ohio class SSGNs, which carry 150 or so Tomahawks.
The SSNs carry Tomahawks as well, though not near as many as the SSGNs.
But I do not think it is a valid comparison between carriers and subs, it is actually a dump statement by him though technically correct.
in addition to the ohio class subs, there is also the virginia class and seawolf class subs. and they pack a pretty good wallop as well.
the biggest advantage of the submarine fleet though is stealth, you dont know when they are there, or what they are doing. with a carrier you know where it is, or you can find it fairly quickly which mitigates some of its offensive firepower.
each have their strengths and weaknesses, and depending on what you want them to do, one can be more powerful than the other. working on concert with each other though, in a war zone, and they can be devastating to the enemy.
Let the south Koreans take care of their own businesses since they have such a powerful military.
Everybody happy! Remember the Korean war? Remember how many Americans died fighting N Koreans and the Chinese? Learn from your lesson, and mind your own businesses.
Mind your own business? Seriously?
Why didn't you tell your Supreme Orangutan that before he decided to drop bombs on Syria and Afghanistan recently?
Why didn't you tell your Supreme Orangutan that before he decided to drop bombs on Syria and Afghanistan recently?
Well, I wish I could tell him that. Do you have a problem with that? Kimchee? Do you want the Americans losing their lives for other people? I certainly don't.
If Liberals were in the Defense business this is what we would have for a Navy
Uh, no.
Since 2008, Congress has authorized and Pres. Obama signed the bills for:
8 new submarines that are all completed or under construction
1 Completed aircraft carrier
2 under construction & commissioned
20 Littoral ships, a brand-new, multi-purpose class of battle ships that are now mostly completed.
7 new class, multi-configurational amphibious ships which are under construction, with an 8th completed.
1 (possibly more) new class multi-role assault ship. There may be more, but finding the number was complicated.
I found this all on the official Navy website in about 10 minutes.
The Obama administration was given an aging and partly obsolescent fleet when it began. For the following 8 years, Obama authorized more new naval vessels than any other President since Reagan. A few were already in the works, but the vast majority of them were authorized in his terms in office.
In doing so, he made our Navy more modern and much better able to fight the wars of the 21st century than what he was given when elected.
Our total number of vessels will be smaller than the Navy of the 20th century, but thanks to Obama, our Navy will be faster, more versatile, and much better to effectively fight in all waters anywhere on the planet than ever before. Our Marine Corps will have much greater fighting capability as our assault troops as well.
Good thing, too. Trump knows doodley squat about warships; he calls them 'armadas'.
He only builds golf courses. And is rumored to become seasick easily.
That Trump loves to fake out the media and other fools. It was pretty funny
Wasn't the Obama puppet Susan Liar ordered to blame a YouTube video after our U.S. Ambassador was assassinated? Only there the worthless media carried Obama's water.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
since they have such a powerful military. 
....... You promised us an armada! We want an armada...
