Search results

What presumes you're operating in a permissive environment against dudes in manjams. A peer enemy could deny or degrade your connections to those other sensors. When you have the required sensors integrated into the ship, the only way for the enemy to deny or degrade you sensors is through...

If you ignore that France and the UK operate carriers and SSNs, and Iceland isn't that far away...

This is the rational that led to France and the UK not intervening when Czechoslovackia was annex by Germany... It was in "their best interests" to let a democratically elected leader threaten, then annex a soverign nation. Not too long after they learned a very costly lesson about...

Deportation can be done without resorting to NKVD style raids... Nobody is arguing that not enforcing immigration rules is good. People are arguing that the manner in which ICE is conducting the deportations is bad.

Joe Rogan was pretty Left, before the Left went extra hard on speech and such....Just like Bill Maher. The only people who think the way ICE is acting is correct are hard MAGA folks, and instigators.

This is an asinine response, but I'll play... (1) Given that Greenland has been Danish for a few hundred years, I think they have done quite well for themselves there. Nobody wants to invade, or conquer Greenland apart from America., so you are right in a way. Only America can prevent America...

That might have worked at the start, but that's not what they did, and it's too late now. The people of Greenland have made it clear that they don't want to be American, and they are never going to trust a massive US military build-up on their soil now. Greenland is already protected by being...

You're right, nothing about Trump acting like a buffoon makes the plan to annex Greenland illegitimate. The simple fact that the US is threatening to annex a sovereign nation's land makes the move illegitimate without need for any extra silliness. Probably based on what? The fact the one...

I jave read the same, using wooden poles as "gun barrels" so it wasn't obvious that they had no real counter to a surfaced U-Boat apart from ramming.

A miracle... Even in the depths of WWII, when navies were far larger and ships far less complex, no navy could keep the entire fleet at sea at once.

Canada settled on 15 RCDs when the world seemed a lot safer. Seems like the solution in a more dangerous world isn't cutting your bare minimum number of world class destroyers... I get what you're trying to propose, but it just doesn't make sense for the RCN to lose capability just to add a few...

Just a minor point, the number of VLS cells matter les than the capability of the sensors to detect and target what you want to engage. What are the Mogami class giving up to have more launchers, less expense, and less crew?

Yeah... Take a shot of any Canadian military member in a gabardine and you have the same comparison. ICE has it's issues, but it's green and very American uniform isn't one of them.

This is a weak and ignorant excuse for what is happening. The entire premise of "Western" civilization is that everybody gets fair process, otherwise it's just a winner-take-all race to the bottom. Nobody wins in that scenario, which is why both sides of the political spectrum need to start...

So three for a TG and two others for all the other tasks, mission, exercises, etc... That seems pretty minimal to me. A bit... They also made the Hunter into a monster that not even the RCD is expected to become. They did to Hunter what the Americans did to the Constellation. We have already...

We have two fleets, so we need ships ready to go in both fleets for other commitments, while also sending a TG. There is no real reason to cut RCDs to have CDCs, apart from Canada not being a serious nation. If we are planning for that, just cut the whole lot and spend the money on UBI. It will...

To have 3-4 RCDs available, we need 15. Cutting RCD numbers before a project to get CDCs even exists is just a cut to capability at a time when we needs to increase capability in all elements of the CAF.

It's as though his cronies lack any understanding of "cause and effect", or unintended consequences... Constant threatened annexation of a sovereign ally's territory is more damaging to NATO than Hungary and Turkey's constant foolishness combined.

Maybe it could be like Int Op or Int O, segregated by element but one occupation.

That ignores some realities of operating at sea. Destroyers are larger, but also more capable because of the sensors and weapons carried. Naval weapons and sensors are big, and they need big platforms to carry them. There is also the problem of weather. Wind doesn't make the ground move, but...