Really, if the F-22 were that invulnerable as its fanboys make it out to be, why wouldn’t they export it? The fact that they are not tells you the greatest weapon of the F-22 is the fear of the unknown. To sell it to even a close allies means exposing vulnerabilities that allied militaries will discover. Which opens the possibility of it becoming public. Keeping it within the US contains at max any possible leaks.

Interesting to see the outcome. It’ll be a an embarrassment of tremendous proportions for either side that loses. If it happens that a MKI beats a Raptor, big sales for the Russians and opposite for any prospects of selling the Raptor overseas. If the MKI doesn’t get to go up against a Raptor, then we know the US is afraid of the PR nightmare if it loses.

If Iran did initiate a war with the US, it would give new meaning to the word ‘masochist’.

Bri:cool:

The only way Iran will start the war is when the US does a Gulf of Tonkin on them. Realistically, why would they start it when it’s US with the itchy trigger finger? Politically for domestic and international reasons, all Iran has to do is wait for the US to fire the first shot. Like it’s unimaginable?

Yeah, like that makes a whole lot of difference when it doesn’t change what happened.

This is the point though DA….as shown above 5nm is NOT deadly striking range to the USN fleet. Torpedoes travel at specific speeds for specific periods of time if you fire a torpedo at a target thats too far away to catch then you waste the torpedo its that simple!.

I’ve read that Song torpedos have a range ~20nm, so apparently 5nm is “deadly” in the sense at that range there not much room and time for countermeasures according to what the “experts” are saying about this incident. Hence, why so many seem to be alarmed. Plus, 5 nm is a deadly range for Song anti-ship missiles. Also, you’re assuming that this was ineptness in part of the Song skipper. Nothing suggests that the Song was forced to surface so it must have been intentional to only when KH routine patrols spotted it. Maybe they chose 5nm as a safe distance to send their message and not turn it into an out of control situation.

bring it on here wins my nomination for the award for excellent timing 2006!

Pinko states

….and his utter guesswork is thrown into sharp relief by the below statement from bring it ons article:

Mullen’s comments come after the head of U.S. Pacific Command responded to the initial Washington Times story earlier in the week by saying the incident could have escalated into “something that was very unforeseen” if the Kitty Hawk had been conducting anti-submarine warfare operations at the time.

So we have from the initial article this statement:

The Kitty Hawk and several other warships were deployed in ocean waters near Okinawa at the time, as part of a routine fall deployment program.

Indicating that its not uncommon for the USN to be exercising in those particular waters at this time of year…that there is confirmation that no ASW was being undertaken and still the best that this amazing Chinese sub could manage was to surface 5 miles astern of its ‘target’ and decidedly out of position!!!.

…and to some this is indicative of Chinese Naval skill at arms. No wonder the Chinese Govt are officially shrugging their shoulders at this!!!

A lesser sub got into deadly striking range of a advance US fleet and all you can do is spin it that they missed by 5 miles? Yeah, submarines can only strike if it’s sitting in the middle of the targets. I love the spin about the fleet wasn’t in ASW conditions. Funny how the same type of excuse was used when that Sa’ar 5 got hit when the crew was essentially at a state of war. And again, IT WAS A LESSER SUB! It shouldn’t have happened in the first place.

I think you make a good point in some of those cases.

We certainly should not sell weapons to nations which we fear may use them irresponsibly or to nations that abuse their own citizens, period. Aiding someone to commit a crime, through your action or inaction, and you are no better than the criminal yourself.

You know how many countries that abuse human rights all the time the West sells arms to? Quit with the phoney righteousness.

What does this have to do with the thread?

And in any case, I think that you will find that the maority of the violence in Iraq is caused by Iraqi factions ( Suni, Shia or Kurd) killing each other, and that coalition troops are trying to stop the insurgency. If you are going to make claims like this, back it up with some evidence. Here is mine:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/145806.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1411247.stm
http://www.christusrex.org/www1/sdc/hr_facts.html

That crime wasn’t committed by Iraqi factions. It was committed by Americans. You don’t watch the news about crimes against innocent people committed by Western forces? Don’t need back-up when that story of American troops raping and murdering a little girl after stalking her and killing her family was on the news all over the world!