It's not a good sign when Israel

[Primalex]

Personally, I believe that Zionism - and if I understand the definition correctly ~ the right of the state of Israel to exist - should be defended by this country and the rest of the free world. Just as we would defend the UK. Call me a lemming if you want, but I have made the choice based upon both history and my personal affinity for the Jewish people/culture.

Just out of curiosity: Would you support that the American Indians get back 1/3 of the States to form their own country?

 

[Primalex]

Saddam had already demonstrated his willingness to gas his own people

with the help of the US government. Irony is sweet.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

Just out of curiosity: Would you support that the American Indians get back 1/3 of the States to form their own country?

Ouch. Good one.

Do you think they'd want that much? Look at the Cherokee Indian nation - are they happy?

 

[Breaker_Morant]

with the help of the US government. Irony is sweet.

Are you referrng to the Iran/Iraq war? Lessor of two evils - besides this was when Iran was holding our people hostage. Who do you think we're going to side with?

You also have to remember the world was different then. There was this big black giant bear in the neighborhood.

 

[Primalex]

Ouch. Good one.

Thanks.

Do you think they'd want that much?

I don't know. Well, at least the size of a state like West Virginia. If Jews get 21k sqmi although they lost the land 500 bc then the Indians should get at least the same size.

Look at the Cherokee Indian nation - are they happy?

Well, if happiness of the population is a prerequisite, we wouldn't have 192 nations in the world for sure...

 

[Breaker_Morant]

I don't know. Well, at least the size of a state like West Virginia. If Jews get 21k sqmi although they lost the land 500 bc then the Indians should get at least the same size.

Here's the question - for arguement's sake - let's say WV was given over to the Cherokee Nation or to all the various organized tribes and let them divide it up amongst themselves. What next?

While not trying to defend the actions of the past - there is no undoing it, I think alot of the tribes have done well from themselves in that they are using what they currently have and maximizing their return. One example is Foxwoods Casino in CT. Other tribes are doing other things, obviously, I know of a tribe near Philadelphia, MS that has done the same thing. Would their forefathers have approved? Probably not - Native Americans tended to live in harmony with nature and would have shed more than a few tears over the commercialization of the tribal lands, current tribe members are (hopefully) able to improve their position with the profits garned by such usage. I recall (don't ask for a citation because I can't remember) that some tribes are using the profits to buy up private property.

However, I don't think comparing the state of Israel and the various independent Native American nations in the US is comparing apples to apples. You don't have foreign powers trying to bomb the Cherokees out of existence.

 

[Kennundrum]

Economically we are a Super power. $13.84 trillion GDP which pretty much ties the entire EU GDP of $14.38 trillion even though they have 60% more people.

Militarily we are a super power. We have 11 carriers and two under construction. The entire rest of the world has 11. In fact, you'd have to combine the next 17 countries to equal our tonnage as far as ships go.

China is loved? For what? Killing our pets and polluting the planet? Killing monks? Forced labor camps? Human rights of any kind?

The USA is *a* superpower, no doubt about it, and noone in this thread has suggested otherwise. This is different to the statement "the world's great superpower" which implies singular, and/or greatest. There was a period after the fall of the USSR when the USA was the world's great superpower. This time has passed.

To address your comical strawman argument regarding China being loved, if you read the sentence from my previous post, you'll see it says "need to be loved, respected, or feared", with a certain amount of emphasis on the "or". China is feared, and somewhat respected. It predictably gets no love for the atrocities you've mentioned. What you either left out of your response, or fail to understand is that, internationally the USA is neither loved or respected, simply feared.

China has respect because of the weight of her history, and the vigour with which she has been pulling herself into the world stage, economically, industrially and politically. That also brings fear, as it's hardly the most liberal of societies, which you've extravagantly pointed out.

The USA has lost any measure of respect that they "earned" in the first and second world wars, by being continual bullies and aggressors. It is still feared; fear of reprisals against percieved/imagined/invented threats, almost exclusively to benefit American expansionism. This expansion has come at a cost that cannot be maintained. The 11 carriers you mentioned each cost, on average, $160m each year to maintain. They also seem rather vulnerable to somewhat cheaper technology.
America has engaged in naval wargames with a number of cuntries in posession of diesel submarines , and each time the opposing country has managed at least 1 carrier kill. With a single carrier costing what 5 diesel-powered subs cost, and the anual maintenance being almost double that of the subs, as a military investment these 11 carriers are somewhat of a liability.

The military aspect is also restricted due to America's political situation. The American public have(justifiably) shown in both Vietnam and Iraq that they have no stomach for large casualties on their own side. In a conflict with China, it can be assured that casualties would be massive on both sides, but also that America's spirit would break first. China would happily send millions to die to win- the contemporary American public couldn't/wouldn't stomach 100000 of their own dead.

Looking at the financial situation, as you said America is #2 in the world to the EU as far as GDP. Sure, the EU has more mouths to feed, but what matters is they have more money to spend on the international stage, which means more influence. The US economy, as I'm sure you're aware, is on the slide, in no small way due to it's mammoth, and arguably mispent military budget. China's economy is booming, has a military that the US is afraid of, and costs only 1.7% of their GDP, as opposed to 3.9% of the US's. Given another few decades, and China too will overtake the USA in the financial stakes.

America's foreign policy has left them with few political allies. The US military is overrated, and certainly not enough to take on either of the other two obvious superpowers, and financially in a downward spiral.

None of this means America isn't a superpower- if you refer to the definition of the word, they qualify. But "the world's great superpower"? No. America has fallen back to the pack, and is at best now a superpower in decline.

 

[WriterDom]

Let's give them Arizona. 17% of them are already there. That will be 16.8% less to move. Besides, I bet they suck ass at mining coal. They can turn Arizona into another Nevada.

 

[Kennundrum]

Let's give them Arizona. 17% of them are already there. That will be 16.8% less to move. Besides, I bet they suck ass at mining coal. They can turn Arizona into another Nevada.

To run with Primalex's comparison, you wouldn't be given the choice of what land was taken - it'd be up to the Indians, the same as it was up to the Jews.

On the bright side, hopefully you'd be better at mining coal than you are at history

 

[Primalex]

Here's the question - for arguement's sake - let's say WV was given over to the Cherokee Nation or to all the various organized tribes and let them divide it up amongst themselves. What next?

I don't know. Maybe they can feel proud again or so. I guess the Cherokees would have the same reason for WV than the Jews for Israel - the land of the ancestors, religious land etc. pp.

However, I don't think comparing the state of Israel and the various independent Native American nations in the US is comparing apples to apples. You don't have foreign powers trying to bomb the Cherokees out of existence.

Oh, you have to do it properly:

The United Nations declare that the Cherokee have from now on their own nation where North Dakota was (it fits better than WV). Canada decides to work on a Red River barrage. The Cherokees are pissed off, because this would make them lose 11% of their water and their own barrage would be 35% less useful. So they do minor attacks to delay and prevent the Canadian barrage. They colonize Canadian and US border land. Canada and the US are finally so pissed off that they opt for military intervention to teach them a lesson. A big failure, after 6 days the Cherokees have captured a whole Canadian county and half of South Dakota.

And you think Canada and the US wouldn't be really pissed off by now?

 

[WriterDom]

China spends 4.3% on their military. Do you have a link to your war game story or was that just a fairy tale?

 

[Kennundrum]

China spends 4.3% on their military. Do you have a link to your war game story or was that just a fairy tale?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Armed_Forces

Have a read, you might accidently learn something.

 

[WriterDom]

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html

4.3% but I have heard they are spending a lot more. Just have ways of keeping it off the books.

 

[WriterDom]

So I assume the sinking of carriers in war games was pulled out of your ass as well?

 

[Kennundrum]

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ch.html

4.3% but I have heard they are spending a lot more. Just have ways of keeping it off the books.

Got any figures from 2008? CIA website, aside from it's bias, is quoting 2006.

Re: the subs, I read it in a marine corp performance review and evaluation document I found about 3 years ago. Trawl for it yourself

If that's the best you can come up with, try this on - look at what damage a handful of guys with semi-sharp instruments did on 9/11. Look at the USS Cole.


I'll be back later, we'll play more.

Before I head off though, I did I quick google.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=132086

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2008/April/AntiSub.htm

http://www.upi.com/Security_Industr...ubs_vs_carriers_--_Part_2/UPI-46771207752332/



Check it out. Learn. Grow.



Or don't

 

[caela]

The military aspect is also restricted due to America's political situation. The American public have(justifiably) shown in both Vietnam and Iraq that they have no stomach for large casualties on their own side. In a conflict with China, it can be assured that casualties would be massive on both sides, but also that America's spirit would break first. China would happily send millions to die to win- the contemporary American public couldn't/wouldn't stomach 100000 of their own dead.

Yeah I snipped the post, but this was the only section I felt any need to argue with since I don't want to look up info on the rest of it tonight.

I think the idea that US citizens wouldn't be able to stomach 100000 of their own dead is just wrong. Granted the public has shown, with Vietnam and Iraq both, that they are unwilling to stomach such high casualties in wars which we feel are unjust or simply none of our business. That being said, however, I think it would be a far different matter if a country, like China, were to actually attack us.

American's can be very aggressive when they feel threatened. Just look at the national attitude after 9/11...for the most part we were out for blood until we got caught up in a quagmire we didn't think was relevant. If someone were actually attacking us still we'd find it very relevant and you can bet that some of the loudest naysayers of the Iraq war would be singing an entirely different tune.

 

[Netzach]

Here's the question - for arguement's sake - let's say WV was given over to the Cherokee Nation or to all the various organized tribes and let them divide it up amongst themselves. What next?

While not trying to defend the actions of the past - there is no undoing it, I think alot of the tribes have done well from themselves in that they are using what they currently have and maximizing their return. One example is Foxwoods Casino in CT. Other tribes are doing other things, obviously, I know of a tribe near Philadelphia, MS that has done the same thing. Would their forefathers have approved? Probably not - Native Americans tended to live in harmony with nature and would have shed more than a few tears over the commercialization of the tribal lands, current tribe members are (hopefully) able to improve their position with the profits garned by such usage. I recall (don't ask for a citation because I can't remember) that some tribes are using the profits to buy up private property.

However, I don't think comparing the state of Israel and the various independent Native American nations in the US is comparing apples to apples. You don't have foreign powers trying to bomb the Cherokees out of existence.

The WORST health care, education, and most glaring poverty can all be found on reservations. Casinos notwithstanding. Every poverty think tank of every stripe will tell you this.

Just sayin'. Carry on.

 

[WriterDom]

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/04/news/China-Military-Budget.php


The Wiki thread quotes this article. If anyone is biased it is the Chinese government. Like it says in the article most counties triple their estimate.

And I wouldn't worry too much about China sinking a carrier. War is not something they want. We could never conquer China. But within two weeks we could turn out their lights and grind their economy down to nothing. Besides, we are buying all the shit those people are making for 30 cents an hour. Why fight your best costumer?

 

[Breaker_Morant]

I don't know. Maybe they can feel proud again or so. I guess the Cherokees would have the same reason for WV than the Jews for Israel - the land of the ancestors, religious land etc. pp.



Oh, you have to do it properly:

The United Nations declare that the Cherokee have from now on their own nation where North Dakota was (it fits better than WV). Canada decides to work on a Red River barrage. The Cherokees are pissed off, because this would make them lose 11% of their water and their own barrage would be 35% less useful. So they do minor attacks to delay and prevent the Canadian barrage. They colonize Canadian and US border land. Canada and the US are finally so pissed off that they opt for military intervention to teach them a lesson. A big failure, after 6 days the Cherokees have captured a whole Canadian county and half of South Dakota.

And you think Canada and the US wouldn't be really pissed off by now?

And they would do this with what? Bows and arrows?

Your scenario is missing the decades of animosity that Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon and Palestine have with Israel. Creating an independent Native American nation would be like Quebec finally voting to become an independent nation. There wouldn't be near as much hatred and the newly formed nation would be dependant upon the US and/or Canada to stir th pot. The Dakotas are landlocked.

Your analogy doesn't hold water you have yet to compare apples to apples.
I know someone else is going to weigh in on this particular vein of this thread but sorry, Primalex, you're not convincing me.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

The WORST health care, education, and most glaring poverty can all be found on reservations. Casinos notwithstanding. Every poverty think tank of every stripe will tell you this.

Just sayin'. Carry on.

Valid point. As I just said, I know someone is about to weigh in here on this topic (and probably blast me better than Primalex.)

 

[Breaker_Morant]

Re: the subs, I read it in a marine corp performance review and evaluation document I found about 3 years ago. Trawl for it yourself

If that's the best you can come up with, try this on - look at what damage a handful of guys with semi-sharp instruments did on 9/11. Look at the USS Cole.


I'll be back later, we'll play more.

Before I head off though, I did I quick google.

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=132086

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/issues/2008/April/AntiSub.htm

http://www.upi.com/Security_Industr...ubs_vs_carriers_--_Part_2/UPI-46771207752332/

Aren't google and wikipedia and other websites beautiful things? It means that it is not longer necessary to subscribe to Janes Defense Weekly.

Yes, an aircraft carrier is vulnerable to attack by submarines. The biggest submarine threat was the Oscar class submarine. The other major threat was a Bear bomber hunter/killer group. Both modes of attack would involve a swarm attack on the CSG (carrier strike group) along different axis of attack; ideally from opposite points of the compass. Both of those weapons systems were develped by the USSR and while still a potential threat, the Red Navy and Red Air Force are a hollow shell of their former selves and would need to do a serious train up in order to have decent chance of launching a successful strike. Side note: The Kursk was an Oscar II class submarine.

Now the PLAN (Peoples' Liberation Army Navy) doesn't operate Oscars. They operate Kilo class, diesel electric boats. While stealthy, these boats are limited in range and speed and like all diesel electric subs, they either have to surface to run on the diesel engines (not bloody likely) or raise their snorkel to recharge their batteries, by running their diesel engines and to replenish their air supply thus making them vulnerable. The Navy could simply operate their P3 Orions (and let's not forget those of allied countries, Japan for instance) in the area near and around the PLAN's naval basis. Also operating off those same said bases would be Los Angeles class submarines or possibly even Seawolf class submarines to detect and destroy the Kilos as they left their base.

Theoritically not all the Kilos would be found as they left their bases. Therefore the CSG would be left to deal with the remaining threat. Again, ideal attack would have several subs attacking along several axises of attack but the CSG would have as a part of its carrier air wing both fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft to deal with the threat along with the various ASW surface ships and submarines in the strike group.

The threat is real but managable. End of lesson.

 

[Noor]

Iraq did fire long range tactical missiles, albiet conventional into Kuwait after Iraqi Freedom kicked off. Took out a shopping mall in Kuwait City. Saddam had already demonstrated his willingness to gas his own people (well the Kurds - guess he didn't consider them "his" people) - the fact that the IDF stood down a bit just meant that they felt that Coalition forces had established air supperiority and could detect an incoming launch. Also don't forget, we had established Patriot batteries all around Israel - just in case.

And while this may seem as a non-reply - we don't know everything that went on either.

I heard from a fairly reliable source that it was not the faith in the coalition forces that caused the IDF to stand down but the US pressure.. The patriots were not established until after the scuds started flying. Plus the patriots didn't really work, but luckily the scuds didn't work that well either.

I think there is some public documentation of some of this as well.

 

[Breaker_Morant]

The USA is *a* superpower, no doubt about it, and noone in this thread has suggested otherwise. This is different to the statement "the world's great superpower" which implies singular, and/or greatest. There was a period after the fall of the USSR when the USA was the world's great superpower. This time has passed.

To address your comical strawman argument regarding China being loved, if you read the sentence from my previous post, you'll see it says "need to be loved, respected, or feared", with a certain amount of emphasis on the "or". China is feared, and somewhat respected. It predictably gets no love for the atrocities you've mentioned. What you either left out of your response, or fail to understand is that, internationally the USA is neither loved or respected, simply feared.

China has respect because of the weight of her history, and the vigour with which she has been pulling herself into the world stage, economically, industrially and politically. That also brings fear, as it's hardly the most liberal of societies, which you've extravagantly pointed out.

How long ago was then end of Moa's Long March that ended with Chiang Kai-shek moving his Nationalist Chinese government to Tawain? 60 years? The PRC considers Tawain as a run away province and has the stated objective of "returning it to the Middle Kingdom".

If China lacks the political will to accomplish this, do you really think that they're willing or able to take on the US and its Pacific Rim allies?

 

[jockdom]

I think that corner of our little planet is destined to be fucked up for the rest of time.

 

[Kennundrum]

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/04/news/China-Military-Budget.php


The Wiki thread quotes this article. If anyone is biased it is the Chinese government. Like it says in the article most counties triple their estimate.

And I wouldn't worry too much about China sinking a carrier. War is not something they want. We could never conquer China. But within two weeks we could turn out their lights and grind their economy down to nothing. Besides, we are buying all the shit those people are making for 30 cents an hour. Why fight your best costumer?

I agree, you'd never defeat China, and China won't attack the US mainland, in the short term. All I'm doing is showing that they're certainly currently competative in a military sense, and I'm glad you see it my way. Regarding my(credible and recent) source for the military budget info, when you learn to read properly, give it another go. It doesn't say "most countries triple their estimate", it says "Other countries say China vastly underestimates how much it spends on its military and the real figure could be three times as much as the publicly released figure", without quoting the other countries. Also, try finding a current unbiased source of your own. 2006 stats from the CIA regarding the military spending of one of it's 2 major military rivals don't hold water. The CIA have played you for fools in the past, they are at present, and they will again in the future.
You're not very good with reading, or quoting. Points for trying though, there were probably a lot of words you struggled with in that article. Have a lollypop for effort.


caela - This has all been in response to the ignorant patritotic ramblings of 1 or 2 Americans who think that the USA is "the world's great superpower". As I said earlier in this post, the China isn't *currently* in a position to succesfully invade America, but America *never* will be in a position to challenge China. If the USA was being invaded, I agree, you would be willing to send hundreds of thousands, then millions to their deaths. The flip side to that coin is, by the time it happens, the choice will be either to go give your life for America, or stay home and learn Mandarin. Given the faling US education system, obviously more will go and die than attempt to learn something.


Morant- I like how you closed your eyes and ignored the non-naval(P3 Orion aside) aspects that I put forward. Can you respond to the non-miltary aspects of my post, while understanding that the USA's poor political and financial state directly impact on any ability to future bankroll the firepower you've put forward?

Still think that the USA is "the world's great superpower"? Or just one of three: China (increasing it's world influence politically, financially, and militarilly with each year), the EU (currently finding it's feet and place in the world, while attempting to be diplomatic with it's new-foud combined military, political and financial influence), and the USA (the only superpower in decline, hamstrung politically and financially by it's military obsession that is isolating it politically while bankrupting it)

Try to respond to everything that has been put forward, see how you go. Good luck, and thanks for playing. It's been a lot of fun so far.