dark light

sealordlawrence

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1,216 through 1,230 (of 5,730 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: future falklands deployments #2491804
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    your talking about criminal law sir, thats a very differant ballgame alltogther.

    No he is talking about human nature. Another example: You go into a shop and buy a paper but dont have any change so you hand over say £10, the shop keeper makes a mistake and gives you only enought change as if you had handed over £5. You are in a hurry and rush out of the shop not realising until you get down the street, do you……….

    A) Assume that the shopkeeper has made a mistake and go back and politely explain.

    B) Assume that the shopkeeper has made a mistake but decide that you probably earn more than the shopkeeper anyway and that you are in a bit of a rush so you just leave it.

    C) Assume that the shopkeeper has somehow wronged you, march back into the shop gun down all the employees steal all the money from the till and set fire to the shop on your way out?

    If your answer is C then you are only a court case away from a very long prison term.

    The invasion of Afghanistan was proportional to the events of 9/11, what would not have been proportional would have been nuking Afghanistan until you were sure that all human life was exterminate there.

    in reply to: Venezuela 'sends tanks to border' #2491839
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    True. Except that with those attacks you achieve nothing, only encourage local population to vote for even more stupid and radical leader having the anti-US bashing as its main agenda.

    If you want to bash the US knock yourself out, after all its a human right. However if Chavez wants to attack Columbia (and lets be honest neither regime is perfect) then I would suggest that taking a few more insults for the benefit of preventing such an attack and destroying the largest part of the conventional combat capability of the Venzuelan armed forces would be worth it.

    in reply to: future falklands deployments #2491864
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    I cant see how proportionality played any role in the illegal regime change in Iraq; one that was based on false pretense from the start. A war that the UK willingly particpated in. Im not so sure its on that idealistic side of the fence.

    1) I wish everybody would get over this International Law cr*p. Domestic law works because the state, the sponsor and enforcer of the law, maintains a monopoly on the use of organised violence. On an International level this is simply not the case, there is no state an no monopoly. The laws were written by the criminals and it is the criminals who enforce them and judge upon them. They are designed with such flexibility as to be interpretable to any desired conclusion. The very reason that many of the Iraq resolutions got passed was because one side genuinely thought it meant what they wanted whilst the other thought it meant what they wanted. In reality it meant both. So please leave the illegal war BS alone.

    2) Given Saddams history on human rights and invading other peoples countries I think that it was entirely proportional and the use of force was set to achieve the desired objective. Granted this was incompetant in many cases, especially the attacks on infrastructure but the use of force was proportional to the objective and the conflict certainly morally justifiable. Unless of course you think genocidal evil dictators are a good thing. The argument there is one of intervention. China argues that no state should have the right to intervene in the internal affairs of another (partially explains there lack of effort over Darfur) this is largely because of their own internal activities such as Tianamen square. The west on the otherhand tends to support interventionism (why they have pushed the Darfur issue so much), now the question is what is the difference between intervening in a state to prevent famine and intervening to remove a genocidal regime?

    in reply to: Cavour vs Vikramditya #2088608
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Russia has clear lead in SSK/SSN/SSBN and associated missle system in all aspects. as well as Naval Aviation.
    you are not going to see bigger boats in Ru Navy becasue they are developing completely new generation power plants independent of Ukriane prduction.
    and where is invention comes from?

    You cant keep a bad racist down.:mad:

    in reply to: future falklands deployments #2491889
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    oh please, you sound like some talking head from the UN when you talk about proportionality. So your seriously telling me wars have to now be proportional? Really this ‘proportionality’ you talk about is only really used by certain UN countries to critisise other UN countries, its mumbo jumbo lawfare talk to be quite frank and holds no place in the real world.

    It holds plenty of places in the real world. It is part of the reason why we do not live in a perpetual state of total war and why insects have not inherited the Earth.

    in reply to: Cavour vs Vikramditya #2088645
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    In the terms of shiphulls alone, none could dispute the fact that Chinese indeed are building alot more and in far faster rate than Russians.

    But wheter they (chinese) are building better or more sofisticated vessels, well that is incorrect or at least highly disputable.

    Chinese major surface combatants that were build after soviet union’s breakdown pretty much covers all the relatively modern chinese hulls. These are the 052 Luhu class (2 units), 051B Luhai class (1 hull), 052B class(2 hulls), 052C (2 hulls) class, 051C class (2 hulls), 054 class (2 hulls) and the 054A class (apparently 4 hulls). One could add the Jiangwei-II class (8 hulls) to it as well.

    That makes 15 or 23 hulls compared to the russian post-92 laid down hulls of…??….2? (how many pr. 20380 have been laid down?)

    Now add to that the chinese have laid down 2 Luda and at least 6 Jianghu class after 1992 which both classess presents technology of the late 40’s (updated systems ofcourse, but the hull design and machinery is nevertheless the orginal). Also basicly all of the relatively modern designs laid down after 92 have somewhat similar proplems. The chinese shipbuilding and warship designing has envolved and matured alongside with these various shipdesigns, but unfortunetly it has a downside of that the designs, exspecially in the early stage (Luhu & Luhai for instance) are only relatively modern. The have elements which are/were almoust state-of-the art back when they were designed but lacked considerably in some other areas. No way can they be called fully comparable to counterpory designs offboard. This is repeated with the later designs as well. Altough for instance 052C have its airdefence suite quite impressive and at least in theory at the same level as the best systems abroad, still have issues which aren’t exactlty satisfied in modern standarts.

    Main weakness is in the ASW suites. The best that chinese have for example in sonarfits in their very latest systems is basicly the French DUBV-23 and Soviet MGK-335 Platina or their local copies. Those systems however weren’t the best systems that the orginal countries had even in the late 80’s! As the russian navy is in question in here, the Polimon and Zvezda suites were superior/were about to surpass the Platina in service. The cap in the actual ASW armament is even larger.

    Now the fact however is that Soviet union ceded to exist in 1991. This means that the russian naval technology is unfortunately left (if you consider those ships/systems in service) to the 90’s era and due limited funding is not being modernised/updated very actively. This however has nothing to do with the technology and capacity itself, but is so due other far larger reasons. Chinese however have only started their naval build-up to the large player standarts after the soviet union ended to exist. Basicly they started their competition after the “rival” was forced to whitdraw from the race. Still chinese have only started to reach the level that soviets had in their final days in some areas, still lacking far behind in others. Also if you take under consideration all the systems, equipments, armaments and shipdesigns that were under development or in the design board (and which some have been continued trough out the new russian era) when the soviet union collapsed, the level in sophistication is miles ahead of what china has now.

    But it remains to seen wheter the russia will start up new equally extensive weaponmodernisation than china currently goes trough. If it does (which I however somewhat doupt) then the lead that china is now just about to aquire would propaply be eaten very fast, so huge is the “base” for russia where to push compared the one that china has due its decades of neglect in tehcnology.

    …as if this anyhow has anything to do with comparing New Conte and old Gorgy…

    All true. However the only destroyers that Russia has laid ddown in the last decade+ have been for export to China.

    in reply to: Venezuela 'sends tanks to border' #2492056
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Good !

    Then we can pull our troops out of Afganistan, since the US scream for troops is just BS.

    You dont need many ground troops for an air war conducted by aircraft based on US soil and tomahawks fired from USN ships.

    in reply to: Cavour vs Vikramditya #2088703
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Hmmm it is so difficult to get a clear picture with the leap in Chinese development. Arguably in some areas the newest build ships like the 052C are as good or even better then Russian vessels. What is clear now is that China no longer wants complete hulls out of Russia rather they want technology.

    True, but in the case of SSN’s/SSBN’s I would say that there is no doubt that Russia is building better boats. However beyond that it gets confusing. The largest class of major surface combatant that China has laid down in the last few years has consisted of just 4 hulls. My suspicion is that we will continue to see such small production runs until China gets to the technology level they want.

    Of course star49 will chime in with his racist ‘asians cant invent thngs’ BS now.:mad:

    in reply to: Venezuela 'sends tanks to border' #2492091
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    That is the really interesting question. They can either use large tankers and make a several thousand mile detour around South America, or they use rather small tankers that fit the Panama channel (which is USA controlled). For China Venezuela is somehow a useful allie with its socialistic attitude, however, China does not show any system preference when picking its allies (different than the Soviet Union during Cold War). China must consider that in case of a major crisis with the USA, the oil shipments from Venezuela are the first to stop (cause they are so easy to interdict by the USN).

    Dont get carried away with the idea of China being allies with Venezuela, they buy oil from there and have a few other economic ties but there is no way that China will involve itself in US/Venezuela relations. BTW, you can see Chinese economic influence in most of Latin America.

    in reply to: Cavour vs Vikramditya #2088711
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Is that why you have been reworking the Varyag at Dalian for past four years? You are getting beyond boring with your bias, get a life..

    In fairness he has a point, the PLAN is procuring ships at a faster rate than the Russian Navy. In most cases they are not as good as what Russia is building but the likes of the 052C, 054A and Yuan are probably not far behind.

    I will take the carrier building comment with a pinch of salt, that story comes round religiously like the changing of the seasons and we have never (in at least in the 8/9 years that I have been hearing them) seen a Chinese carrier under construction.

    in reply to: INS Vikramaditya delayed until 2011! #2088713
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    What is this rubbish about the Zhuk AE only in prototype form from you fanboylaurence? And in either case, clearly the Indians don’t care about the AESA. They are going to be flying MiGs, not Subpar Hornets.

    If the Indians did not not care about AESA why would they have specified it for the MMRCA requirement?:rolleyes:

    Zhuk-AE is still in prototype form, unless you can provide a source to the contrary?:rolleyes:

    Please stop making stupid comments here.:rolleyes:

    in reply to: Venezuela 'sends tanks to border' #2492157
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    The US wont invade Venezuela. I dont why everybody is so obsessed with the idea but it aint going to happen. I Chavez is stupid enough to attack Columbia then he can say goodbye to his shiny new Flankers and most of the rest of his armed forces and probably a large part of his national infrastructure too.

    in reply to: Google Earth catches a Tomahawk mid-flight #2492383
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    I think its an airliner, there are two contrails coming from the rear fuselage suggesting a pair of rear mounted engines and you can make out black wing shapes beyond the white parts of the wings. If you look at the enlarged image you you will see what looks like a cockpit window round the front of the forward fuselage. Probably something like an MD-90.

    in reply to: KC767, KC330….what latest? #2492539
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    The A330 line is also busy, so Airbus would have had to expand it or open a new line for the KC-45 order even if it didn’t need to build it in the USA for political reasons, & opening that line in the USA fits in perfectly with the Airbus plan to source more from dollar zone countries. Win-win for Airbus: the KC-45 order guarantees work for (& thus finances) the US line Airbus wanted anyway, & because it was a prerequisite for getting the order, the French & German unions can’t kick up a stink. Once you have the line, using it to build the A330 freighter makes perfect sense, to keep the line occupied, & otherwise it’d be a problem finding space for it on the Toulouse assembly line – and Airbus has spread its currency risk nicely, thank you very much. 😀

    Exactly, I cant actually think of another procurement deal in recent times that has made so many people so happy on so many levels. Everything you stated, + the economic benefits and the prevention of a LM/Boeing monopoly. The USAAF even gets the best aircraft for job as a bonus.:D

    Its just a shame about the pathetic ‘not designed here’ BS.

    in reply to: India test fires first under-sea missile #1788132
    sealordlawrence
    Participant

    Not really, Please look up on Agni a bit, the Agni 2 and AT ranges was always underreported, true range being told by some biographies, and the Agni 3 is a new platform altogather to develope a new generation of missiles, in that sense Agni 3 with 2 stage is the precedeeser of the full fledged ICBM Agni 4 with a third stage, the Agni 3 already has more than 5k range [mentioned in host of interviews], it was tested in dampened trajectory, something of which you can make out if you see the launch pictures.

    Range is a non issue for India, but this Sagarika range is a bit puzzling, lets wait for whats actually cooking. 700 kms doesnt cuts the ice or is enough to do the job…

    I have done plenty of ‘looking up’ on Agni.

Viewing 15 posts - 1,216 through 1,230 (of 5,730 total)