ante_climaxS. Korea Eyes Fighter Jet for Landing Ship
Scoot you’re a visionary 🙂
ante_climaxMay be if the Russians hold out for more ****, we should just dump the MRTA and invest in the A400 🙂
ante_climaxMay be if the Russians hold out for more ****, we should just dump the MRTA and invest in the A400 🙂
ante_climax1. The USA is free to do whatever it wants in its own interest. So is anybody else. And everyone is free to complain about all of those matters. If complaining was outlawed, the internet would die out in 4.5 seconds anyway
I agree completely
2. The F-35 is a major waste of time and money for the USA in my opinion. It’s not what it could be, and what it is doesn’t fit with what we need. But if someone wants to shell out the money for it, that’s their decision.
Its fine to speculate about the capabilities of an aicraft that is yet to enter service. But to pass judgment on it like its a success or failure is beyond me. Let us wait and see. The F 22 had its share of doubters.
3. I was standing at Camp Victory in Baghdad in 2004 when a roadside bomb comprised of a chemical-filled artillery shell was partially detonated. This whole incident must have been a figment of everyone’s imagination, including the media that reported it worldwide, because there is no way there were any WMDs anywhere in Iraq.
I agree (disagree) that there was no WMDs in Iraq. But most of the media and population in the U.S bought the theory. Iraq was a strategic war to secure vital resources for the future, and it will prove to be worth it in the future imo.
4. Iran should be able to pursue whatever weapons programs it desires. The US supports other nations behind Islamic extremism like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia with weapons deals, why should Iran be any different? Iran even has oil!
You pointed out the irony correctly, but the solution you put forward is not the right one. The U.S should stop supporting Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The problem with this is if they do other countries will engage them (in the case of Saudis) and will make U.S increasingly reliant on Russia for Afghan supplies (in case of Pakistan). The diplomatic stage is a place where pragmatism and brinksmanship counts for more than morality and fairness.
5. Support for Israel has to end. And if they’ve promised to never use WMDs, then why keep them?
As a deterrent, even the mighty U.S.A will think before invading a nuclear state, Israel in its hostile neighborhood has a greater chance of survival with the WMDs. The American support to Israel is not going to end, ever.
6. The American populace is mostly ignorant of world affairs, yes. But why should they care, when the rest of the world doesn’t want the US to interfere anywhere anyway? It’s not like the politicians are representative of the typical middle-class American anyway.
Its the same in the case of most big counties who are like a world in themselves. I do not think there is anything wrong about a country or people putting their interests first. There is never going to be a fair ‘world government’.
7. Most politicians are in fact assclowns.
I would rather have them than any type of direct democracy. The swiss have some very discriminatory laws which do not comply with other western nations, not every man has the ability to make big decisions, the representative system is much better even if many representatives are assclowns.
ante_climax1. The USA is free to do whatever it wants in its own interest. So is anybody else. And everyone is free to complain about all of those matters. If complaining was outlawed, the internet would die out in 4.5 seconds anyway
I agree completely
2. The F-35 is a major waste of time and money for the USA in my opinion. It’s not what it could be, and what it is doesn’t fit with what we need. But if someone wants to shell out the money for it, that’s their decision.
Its fine to speculate about the capabilities of an aicraft that is yet to enter service. But to pass judgment on it like its a success or failure is beyond me. Let us wait and see. The F 22 had its share of doubters.
3. I was standing at Camp Victory in Baghdad in 2004 when a roadside bomb comprised of a chemical-filled artillery shell was partially detonated. This whole incident must have been a figment of everyone’s imagination, including the media that reported it worldwide, because there is no way there were any WMDs anywhere in Iraq.
I agree (disagree) that there was no WMDs in Iraq. But most of the media and population in the U.S bought the theory. Iraq was a strategic war to secure vital resources for the future, and it will prove to be worth it in the future imo.
4. Iran should be able to pursue whatever weapons programs it desires. The US supports other nations behind Islamic extremism like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia with weapons deals, why should Iran be any different? Iran even has oil!
You pointed out the irony correctly, but the solution you put forward is not the right one. The U.S should stop supporting Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The problem with this is if they do other countries will engage them (in the case of Saudis) and will make U.S increasingly reliant on Russia for Afghan supplies (in case of Pakistan). The diplomatic stage is a place where pragmatism and brinksmanship counts for more than morality and fairness.
5. Support for Israel has to end. And if they’ve promised to never use WMDs, then why keep them?
As a deterrent, even the mighty U.S.A will think before invading a nuclear state, Israel in its hostile neighborhood has a greater chance of survival with the WMDs. The American support to Israel is not going to end, ever.
6. The American populace is mostly ignorant of world affairs, yes. But why should they care, when the rest of the world doesn’t want the US to interfere anywhere anyway? It’s not like the politicians are representative of the typical middle-class American anyway.
Its the same in the case of most big counties who are like a world in themselves. I do not think there is anything wrong about a country or people putting their interests first. There is never going to be a fair ‘world government’.
7. Most politicians are in fact assclowns.
I would rather have them than any type of direct democracy. The swiss have some very discriminatory laws which do not comply with other western nations, not every man has the ability to make big decisions, the representative system is much better even if many representatives are assclowns.
ante_climaxI have expressed mine as well. We can agree to disagree then. No I do not have a wierd understanding of democracy. In a democracy the government acts according to the will of its people, or what the majority wants, the responsibility of an elected government is towards the people of that country and not towards the morals of foriegn relations.
Thats all.
ante_climaxI have expressed mine as well. We can agree to disagree then. No I do not have a wierd understanding of democracy. In a democracy the government acts according to the will of its people, or what the majority wants, the responsibility of an elected government is towards the people of that country and not towards the morals of foriegn relations.
Thats all.
ante_climaxYet, the article claims the second of the class would be much larger! (i.e. 65,000 tons vs ~40,000 tons) Which, in fact would not make it a IAC……Sorry, I am still confused????:confused:
There are conflicting reports and this is likely to be a misquote or what the defense minister thinking. In reality I think we are going to have three Vikrant class IACs (the 40000 ton class) and then two or three 65Kton IACs,
IAC only means Indigenous Aircraft Carrier.
ante_climaxAgreed… we have a nice berth lined up for her in Pompey!;):D
I am sure we can find her a nice home here like we did with the Vikrant, no need to send her to Britain. 😎
ante_climaxAm I reading that correctly. That India is now going to build only one IAC. Which, will be followed by a larger 65,000 Carrier or Carriers????
The first two atleast are likely to be similar class vessels. The third or fourht one will be a 65kton ship. The drydock must be expanded to house her.
ante_climaxAmerican public has so far demonstrated incredibly poor level of even the most basic knowledge about anything further than 20 miles off their coast.. Letting Fox News watchers decide about Iraq is like letting a chimp decide about allowable volume of amethocaine for spinal anesthesia.
Your comments will be considered insulting by many Americans. It is a democracy is it not, where majority decisions prevail (the representative system acts as a safeguard to this than a direct democracy) but the congress was also convinced.
I spoke to a member of our former govt, he told me it was more a political trade than anything else. Our govt has agreed to the Iraq thing for certain political benefits, they didn’t believe the story either.
I never said your government agreed to it. I just pointed out that when you are in alliance with a ‘big brother’ state like the United States, you will lose some strategic autonomy which compared to the benefits is worth losing asfiac.
OK, but why should I support Americans benefiting from this?
You are free to support Americans or to disagree with them. I am not discussing the moral or legal implications of the War just the strategic reasons. I am pragmatic and believes a country should do what is best in her interest. I know I prefer America in her position than any other state.
ante_climaxAmerican public has so far demonstrated incredibly poor level of even the most basic knowledge about anything further than 20 miles off their coast.. Letting Fox News watchers decide about Iraq is like letting a chimp decide about allowable volume of amethocaine for spinal anesthesia.
Your comments will be considered insulting by many Americans. It is a democracy is it not, where majority decisions prevail (the representative system acts as a safeguard to this than a direct democracy) but the congress was also convinced.
I spoke to a member of our former govt, he told me it was more a political trade than anything else. Our govt has agreed to the Iraq thing for certain political benefits, they didn’t believe the story either.
I never said your government agreed to it. I just pointed out that when you are in alliance with a ‘big brother’ state like the United States, you will lose some strategic autonomy which compared to the benefits is worth losing asfiac.
OK, but why should I support Americans benefiting from this?
You are free to support Americans or to disagree with them. I am not discussing the moral or legal implications of the War just the strategic reasons. I am pragmatic and believes a country should do what is best in her interest. I know I prefer America in her position than any other state.
ante_climaxThe EU is never going to fullfill its potential as a single European entity. The constitution is rejected in many countries, and now at times of crisis the leaders sit together and do the blame game. The EU is facing its greatest challenge now and its hardly the time to think about pissing the Americans off.
They can’t seem to get NK or Iran to give up their nuclear ambitions and they’re borderline incompetent.
The soft dealing of North Korea have given Iran the belief that if she explodes a device, she would be given more respect ( and possibly she will be ). It was a bad precedent to set.
ante_climaxThe EU is never going to fullfill its potential as a single European entity. The constitution is rejected in many countries, and now at times of crisis the leaders sit together and do the blame game. The EU is facing its greatest challenge now and its hardly the time to think about pissing the Americans off.
They can’t seem to get NK or Iran to give up their nuclear ambitions and they’re borderline incompetent.
The soft dealing of North Korea have given Iran the belief that if she explodes a device, she would be given more respect ( and possibly she will be ). It was a bad precedent to set.
ante_climaxYou don’t even need to continue after this nonsense… Nobody except few nations thought it was the right thing…. and even those few nations only expressed stances of their respective governments, not the population.
My country, for example, too, belonged to the ‘Coalition of the willing’, guess what was the REAL support of its population for this war? Less than 20%…
I only meant majority in America. Bush’s approval rating was very high, the move had congress approval and partisan support, even liberal media bought the WMD claim.
As for the other coalition members and smaller nations, there is a price you pay to be a part of a coalition and that price is to act on the whims of the dominant partner. 🙂
I do not believe that there was any WMD in IRAQ, I do believe that Americans will benefit from the war in future. Just my personal opinion the latter.
Sign In
