As are our very capable minesweepers. Would rather we don't send half a billion pounds worth of equipment and park if off the coast of Iran, the USN could lose an entire carrier battle group and still destroy any navy on the planet.
Armada of British naval power massing in the Gulf as Israel prepares an Iran strike
- Thread starter LateX'Dog
- Start date
As are our very capable minesweepers. Would rather we don't send half a billion pounds worth of equipment and park if off the coast of Iran, the USN could lose an entire carrier battle group and still destroy any navy on the planet.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 12,957
Our Type 45 destroyers, and Astute Class Subs have impressed the American's a lot. Believe me, they are spectacular.
The American carriers are amazing. I do like how the article tries to make the British component sound more spectacular than it is. New powerful destroyer etc
Oh and
To be fair, the Type 45 is probably the best in the world at what it does. It alone could bring down most of the Iranian Air Force.
Israel prepares pre-emptive strike against Iran. Plain to see who the aggressor and TERRORISTS are here.
Again NO definitive evidence of WMDs/ Nuclear weapons.
UK/ Saudi/ USA are more worried about OIL?! Surely you should be telling Israel to chill the **** out or putting sanctions on Israel?!
Again NO definitive evidence of WMDs/ Nuclear weapons.
UK/ Saudi/ USA are more worried about OIL?! Surely you should be telling Israel to chill the **** out or putting sanctions on Israel?!
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 5 Jun 2003
- Posts
- 91,806
- Location
- Falling...
In my last job I was asked to go to Israel... I told them I wouldn't go. I'm pro-Palestinian, and I'm sure they know that and wouldn't let me into Israel if I wanted to go anyway.
Typical Israel being ***** as far as I'm concerned.,
If russian build quality and maintenance holds then there's a moderate chance a kirov is more dangerous to itself then anything else afloat, half there nuclear sub fleet is rotting on the sea bed below the moorings. Photos on board the admiral kuznetsov show a ship which looks 70 years overdue for scrapping and a crew of conscripts some of whom cant even speak russian trying not to get killed by it.
LMAO - where are all the pictures and 3d tv coverage...i am disapoint.
While I don't agree at all with the way Israel treats the Palestinians (in fact it's often despicable and completely counterproductive), I have to say that I understand their position on any of their neighbors getting nukes. In Israel's position they simply cannot let that happen. People can grumble all they want but - realistically - nobody in their position would act differently.
Once the US elections in November are over....all hell will break loose. Although, I suspect Iran will just have to take it and move on. If they retaliate directly they will get obliterated. That's not to say there won't be consequences though.
Once the US elections in November are over....all hell will break loose. Although, I suspect Iran will just have to take it and move on. If they retaliate directly they will get obliterated. That's not to say there won't be consequences though.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 2,377
- Location
- Surrey
Man, don't you know the master plan is to use up the rest of the world's oil first, and then the USA is sitting pretty with boatloads of oil right there in their backyard? Alaska is their Ace-in-the-hole, and when the rest of the world needs oil, they will have to buy it from the USA. They're thinking long-term man.
The cars I see people driving around America, and the trips they are doing... America could easily use 1/2 of the gasoline it does now. People driving 8 mpg "Land Yachts" around the country for a holiday. People driving commercial pickup trucks as their office job commuter vehicle, and lifting and putting on ridiculous tires so it actually gets even LESS mpg. And it never sees a speck of mud or a scratch in the bed.
The USA spent $3 trillion on invading a country that only produces 5% of it's oil, and $X billion on apparent CIA psy-op campaigns in places like Syria, so it's citizens could retain the ability to drive these things to Stabucks??
The USA spent $3 trillion on invading a country that only produces 5% of it's oil, and $X billion on apparent CIA psy-op campaigns in places like Syria, so it's citizens could retain the ability to drive these things to Stabucks??
well without oil we can't grow food, transport food or keep your clean drinking water running.
We can, it is just much cheaper to use oil.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2004
- Posts
- 12,957
Iran have the capability to retaliate directly. They are within striking distance of any Israeli city.
No they didn't because that just doesn't make any sense does it. The 'they invaded Iraq to get the oil' argument has many times been shown on this forum and by sensible non conspiracy theorists to be a load of nonsense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Iraq#2009_Oil_services_contracts
That's not to say it should have happened though.
They invaded for an excuse to spend money if anything. I hate to say it because I'm a fan of the military, but it's basically welfare for "jocks". Pay them money to blow stuff up and kill people, pay companies to build the weapons, then pay other companies to rebuild everything.
Voila thousands of government created jobs.
Then when they come back home they can spend their enlistment bonus on a truck like I posted above and stimulate growth in General Motors.
Voila thousands of government created jobs.
Then when they come back home they can spend their enlistment bonus on a truck like I posted above and stimulate growth in General Motors.