Chinese Carrier Deployed in Exercise in South China Sea

archive.fo/5mWqW
navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2018/03/28/chinese-flotilla-transits-south-china-sea-satellite-imagery-shows/

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1200x628 270.19 KB, 1.22M)

Other urls found in this thread:

lefigaro.fr/international/2018/03/29/01003-20180329ARTFIG00386-la-france-envoie-des-renforts-au-kurdistan-syrien.php
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramjet_programs#Russia
nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-t-72-tank-over-40-years-old-still-the-backbone-the-23280
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1200x838, 1.02M)

In B4.
2 carriers at the sea, 1 in construction and possibly another prep work under way.
Yet we continue to pretend that the PLA isn't lying when they say they will only have ONE in 2025!

Oh wait slash that.
TWO are in construction and the THIRD is expected to go into sea trials soon…
Type 001: Liaoning (Ex soviet-Varyag) active, used as a school ship.
Type 001A: Shandong, sea trials or active (the one in the pic) 1:1 copy of the Varyag.
Type 002: About to be ready for sea trial. A bigger version, no ski ramp, steam catapults.
Type 003: in construction. Even bigger, with EMALS.

Don't be fucking ridiculous, USN tonnage is greater than the combined tonnage of thirteen next largest nations, China included.
Even if every shipyard in the world, American included, built warships nonstop to donate to China it still wouldn't be able to reach parity in six years.

At best they can reach parity in the South China Sea, but then all USN has to do is assign another CVGB to that area.

probably be a medium sized conflict like Korea or Vietnam fairly soon

Attached: МиГ-31_с_гиперзвуковой_ракетой_«Кинжал».jpg (1920x1029, 78.06K)

The USN has (active + building) 96 reel surface combatant (22 Tico, 3 Zum and 71 AB, 11 carriers.
And two dozens of LCS that are as big as frigates but armed as gunboat/cutters…

China has (active + building) 57 frigates, 34 destroyers, 7 cruisers, 4 carriers.
And a gazillion of corvettes/gunboats (like 200).
And that's the minimum they will definitely have in 2020.
Because for example the cruisers? they have one but they're building them 6 PER 6.
The first one took them a year and half to complete and since they've a put out new hull around every three months. So they will have 6 in 2020 but nothing is there to stop them making another batch, and since they will probably make production gains they might cut 1y, 6m to 1y, 3m.
Same shit with the carriers, the Type 002 is almost done, once it's pen is free nothing is there to stop them making another one…

That's what mass production actually looks like, China put a class hull out at seas essentially every quarter.

So USN has the fleet size of 13 largest fleets combined, and is building more and larger ships than China… but somehow China will have parity?

In what fucking world…

Or a torpedo from a sub.

Why not both?

Missile carries torpedo, drops it in range of target, both missile and torpedo simultaneously.

Attached: mTl1tbi.jpg (850x320 14.86 KB, 14.79K)

So how long till the US accidentally rams it with a cargo ship?

Is there any advantage to this over firing a full spread of torpedoes?

Torpedos have a range of a dozen kilometers or so and are very slow. Flying them over gives far more range and speed.

Having a second threat in the missile also means the ships crew is distracted and may not respond in time to the torpedo.

Even with current production numbers, China won't have parity. But current production numbers are a bubble, propped up by a devalued currency, below-market wage prices, and various other economic fuckery on the government's part. The growth China is experiencing is not sustainable, and it will collapse on its own before too long.

No they don't.
Ok Type 055 cruisers are a bit smaller than Zumwalt (and bigger than Ticonderogas) but have actually more firepower since they mount more VLS than even an AB.
Hey remember the stale meme on how China doesn't have the supply ships for long projection, well since last time we had this conversation (a few months), 2 Type 901 fast combat support ship have come out (with 6 more in construction). At 55kt they're the biggest ship of their class dwarfing the four Supply-class of the USN (at 50kt). (BTW 2 of those are in reserve because the USN estimate it will not engage more than one CSG in combat operation in the Pacific… and China is gonna have 8 of those).
Speaking of projection after years of preferring multipurpose Amphibious Transport Dock and Mobile Landing Platform (for obvious reasons tied to local geography) and LSL that are mostly operated by the army and therefore fall of the map (like those 10kt coast guard ships), the LHD they're making (a bit late, once done they make 3 more probably so they won't be there for 2020 but 2025) is about the same size as a Wasp.
And the type 003 aircraft carrier they've started to laid down in January is designed as a 100 000t, nuclear powered with electromagnetic catapults vessels…

Or so people have said for the last 10 years and yet the Chinese shipyards keeps vomiting hulls at a pace not seen since WWII and the tech for them is growing at about the same pace.

That's how Keynesian booms work, there's an artificial period of growth followed by a crash. The immense growth that China is seeing (which is also the funding used for its military, through taxes) is in nonproductive ventures that don't have long-term potential. If it wasn't for the retarded US economic policy of more regulations, higher corporate tax, etc., continuing to keep us uncompetitive compared to China, the crash would have happened sooner.

How significant could the contribution of the USN reserve fleets be to this balance of naval power?

There are 22 ticonderogas, whereas 0 of these ships in service.

Sure Chen, it's all in my head.

ITT:
"Frog" trusts Chinese numbers

You're missing the point, by a LOT.

I'm not. The Chinese are downplaying it as fuck.

No you are you say they have 0.
I post a vid of the first launched last summer, when we're speaking of the insane rate the pop out ship.
They have one at sea and 6 in construction, as in hulls laid down workers working on them 24/7.
Also you don't realize how fucking obsolete and old the Ticos are.
The Obongo admin slashed their upgrade early on meaning only 8 received a mid-life upgrade (10+ years ago…).
They're slated for retirement NEXT YEAR, with the USS Bunker Hill in January and one every 6 months after that leaving only the few that were upgraded. The USN is trying to get 4 and upgraded right now, but it's not officially on the budget, to be able to keep 11+1. If they fail to do so the USN will simply have no more cruisers on a short term.

So right when Chinese prod' will start to kick in the deliveries, the Chinese fleet will grow of 2 cruisers every time the US loses 1.
Meaning that by 2020 you will have 18 Ticos and 7 type 055 but by 2025 the USN will have maybe 11 Ticos (8 sure) and the PLAN anywhere from 7 to 21.

But hey everything is great, there is nothing to worry about.

I said they have 0 in service, and they don't. They launched one and are constructing a few.

And will they construct twenty of them by 2025? You are starting to grate on my nerves.

Oh so you're not actually asian, just retarded.
The one they have, they made in 18 month, which isn't even that fast.

They made the Shandong, a fucking aircraft carrier, in 25 months.
Ticos were made in 15 months (13 towards the end, because the more you make the faster you go). But Ticos were made in 3 slots and they made 27 in 11 years.

If you have 6 slots at 18 months, how many can you make in 7 years?

A shitload.

IS the US navy complacent as in need a good busing on their nose?

They launched 1, are making 5, and 8 is the total planned for this class of ship. Oh also they're the equivalent of Arleigh Burkes not Ticonderogas, we have 65 of those. The number 65 is much larger than the number 8.

Your pipe dreams just won't happen.

It's a wholly Russian design, and they gutted all the things that make this design viable. As it stands it might not even be as capable as a Wasp LHD.

Factoring in ineptitude I'd say even if there was 1:1 ship parity between the two the US would still come out on top.

The entire US military is, user. We regularly embarrass ourselves trying to fight goatfuckers in a desert, what do you think is going to happen if an actual war breaks out?

Don't kid yourself. China has enough cargo ships to sink the entire Burger navy.

Is the US even psychologically ready for a major war against a non-guerrilla army?
By the increasing number or PTSD cases among rank and file soldiers during the latest desert skirmishes I'd say no but then again I'm no expert so if someone's got any input on this I'd love to hear it.
Also the friendly-fire rates during Desert Storm are worrying to say the least.

Attached: 64.jpg (1890x2840, 4.79M)

We'll definitely suffer in the beginning, as decades of feminist infiltration of the training doctrine, and Lockheed incompetence and overspending take their toll, but once the extraneous bits are cut off, and what remains is tempered in the fires of war, I think the US will turn out okay in the long run. We've got a more than ample supply of blind patriots who will volunteer for the military the moment war breaks out, and that should serve to replace the casualties of the initial incompetence. Wartime will cause the competent to get promoted once again and will drive the political generals out. Once Lockheed's iJets™ start falling out of the sky, the newly-promoted competents will give them the boot, and we'll see the contracts for new materiel become a little more honest. It will take time, and we'll suffer at first, but the military that comes out of that fiasco will be up to the task.
Or maybe I'm being far too optimistic and the initial bloat and incompetence causes all of us to lose and die horribly. Either way at least the F-35 will be gone.

Where will the factories come from though? This isn't 1940 where the US had the world's largest stock of mass production firms.

The US still has a pretty strong manufacturing base. Although we import a fair amount, we still have the second-largest export sector after Chyna. And while the productivity of it has been diminished somewhat by mass regulation, our export sector is based far more on real wealth and a free market than the chinks's, which is propped up by devalued currency and government-stimulated malinvestment.

The only problem I see with that is that I don't think the war would last long enough for those reforms to take place, considering at may last months or even weeks. Obviously this is just speculation but the current track record of 21st century warfare implies that year/s long wars will be a rarity in the near future.

Attached: DA-SC-87-04677.jpeg (2999x2017, 1.33M)

That's what they said about the last two world wars.

Im skeptical the war would go on long enough for the military to straighten itself out like you would think.Even if it did go on long enough im skeptical we would make the necessary changes in time to not be defeated. A Vietnam type situation in Korea or Iran cold almost certainly mean defeat for the US.

Military technology and doctrine, as well as people's receptiveness towards long wars has changed since then, Vietnam being the prime example.

Hence the spoiler. We might just end up like the frogs in WWII.

But we're speaking of major powers getting at each other, not little states and guerrilla fighters.

I smell cold war II wafting in, does anyone else?

Lad if you are just now smelling it I hope for your sake your house never catches on fire you won't have a chance.

Are Argentinians usually this stupid?

Yes. Blacks typically have a very low IQ.

Pic for some inexplicable reason unrelated.

Why haven't the Russians modified some of their MiG-31 for anti-vessel role? Mach 3 anti-ship missiles with mach 3 aircraft would do a good combo and unlike its predecessor, the MiG-25, the MiG-31 has also top-notch low level penetration speed at mach 1.3.

In the same world where they own the Piraeus port I guess.

Didn't Ukraine or Syria tip you off? You should've recognized this by 2016, at the very latest. Judging by historical precedent, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump roped all of us into a shooting war with Iran or Lebanon to secure a second term.

lol

Attached: colorrevs3.png (907x476 38.68 KB, 23K)

Yeah, ok you're retarded, to the ignore list you go.

Not a cold one.
Our propaganda machine is preparing public opinion to a war against Russia for some time now, Russia and China have been shoring up their economies infrastructure wise (SWIFT, etc), Russia is heavily preparing for a land war and meanwhile China is preparing for a maritime war, both with immense efforts while under budgetary strain and are literally in quasi-war time production mode to try to close in what is seemed as the most urgent gaps.

Because it's the Su-24 job which is infinitely cheaper than a MiG-31? And also the job of the Tu-22M that can properly do a saturation strike?

I'm sorry, the correct answer was Turkey.

lefigaro.fr/international/2018/03/29/01003-20180329ARTFIG00386-la-france-envoie-des-renforts-au-kurdistan-syrien.php

I doubt the ability to do any meaningful maneuver at that speed, not its ability to survive the g-load of such maneuver.

Do you have a reason for this doubt or just doubting it for fun?

Any sort of meaningful maneuver becomes "high g" at that point.

No shit, I'm not talking about Macross style maneuvers, this is the real world.

It was shown doing slalom around several picket ships with interception missile ranges ~100-200km, essentially avoiding interception. Which at that speed would be around 50-100g continuous (minutes), this is not an instantaneous turn.

(3430^2)/100000=78g

It has nothing to do with nukes.
It has to do that all the "West" armies, at the end of WWII when countless combat veterans (that did make most of the volunteers forces send by Europeans/Commonwealth countries) were available and an insane disparity of firepower (the Far Eastern Air Force Bomber Command stopped bombing operation several times because they literally couldn't find anymore shit to blow up), simply couldn't win against NK + Chinese literal hordes starving peasants.
Nothing has changed, if anything the insane manpower qualitative edge and the great firepower advantage the UN enjoyed at the time has been seriously reduced.
Maybe if NK didn't had nukes we could do a limited airstrike thing (and watch Seoul burn), but we simply don't have the power to deal with NK + Chinese reinforcements.

Attached: kg of HE per km² per h.png (640x618, 683.69K)

It's so incredibly beautiful.

To what degree is this still an issue genuinely curious? China has already said they'd sever ties with the norks if they attacked anyone (but would defend them if they were attacked), to me it seems like the only reason they're maintaining ties at all is to save face in a sort of contrarianism against the West. If this is in fact the case, why would the Chinese send anything more than a token amount of support to Best Korea, just to show they haven't given them up, before de facto writing them off? North Korea has been a strain on Chinese diplomacy, and a constant drain on resources for decades now. Why not take this opportunity to allow the West to get rid of this problem for them?

They key word is attack. If the other side fires the chinks don't have a problem defending their satellite state.

also
Its just going to be chosin but with 20mm vulcans instead of quad .50s. How much money are you getting payed to post this horse shit in every thread?

Sure, but how far will they go? I don't doubt they'd do something, if for no reason to save face with their rivals in the West, but just because they'll do something doesn't mean they're going to commit a sizable portion of their military to the defense of North Korea. Like I said before, China's relationship with NK has only cost them resources over the years, with negligible return. Diplomatically, it almost always causes complications, and even when it doesn't cause complications, it's never a boon to the Chinese, it just fails to be a detriment. Because this relationship has no practical benefit besides saving face with the West, there's no need for the chink's defense of North Korea to be a fully-committed, win-this-at-all-costs defense. It seems a lot more sensible to me that, should the norks be attacked, it goes something like this: Publicly, China decries NATO's aggression and makes a big fuss about defending their allies. Privately, they give NK the bare minimum aid to look like they're doing something, when in reality every soldier sent in aid has already been written off as a casualty. They only sent anything at all to keep up appearances, and see the NATO/UN action as a way to get rid of an "ally" that's been nothing but a liability to them.

They'd go as far as to keep NATO off their borders much like the last time around.

So NK does serve a purpose to the Chinese in that it's a buffer state preventing NATO from establishing direct access to any Chinese borders. All right, that actually makes a fair bit of sense. Same reason, broadly speaking why Russia seized Crimea after NATO tried to expand into the Ukraine.

A democratic state can't play chicken with a totalitarian dictatorship. They are capable of going ridiculously harder in war than our own country, because our people would never allow that kind of behavior. The Chinks can deploy chemical and biological weapons on civilians, and all we could do is huff and puff in response.

The nuking of hiroshima and nagasaki was a fluke because the public didn't know about nukes yet. If it had, 90% of the population would lose their shit and demand the politicians who suggested be fired, the politicians would then lose their spine…. and nothing would happen. The only way we'd use nukes is in a secret first strike no one knew about… and if the politicians weren't worried about repercussions because:
A) their term was up anyway
B) they managed to create a position for a dictator of NATO, and placed themselves in that position, right before abdicating as president
Granted the second option is a nightmare scenario, but it is possible. In fact I think Obama was trying to do that, rather ineptly, before being kicked out.

Could you be any more Russian?

Well I could be eating borscht right now, but I'm eating salty grits with sour cream.

How do you explain his installing tsars in every position, placing hundreds and hundreds of people loyal to him in unelected, unaccountable bureaucratic positions, and last of all interfering in the presidential election and even an elected presidents administration!

Crimea was more of a fuck you to NATO in regards to Kosovo not to mention Ukraine was being a fucktard over muh gas prices.

I don't think you understand the fucking fury the American people are capable of when we are attacked directly. The public would have nuked the japs without a second thought because of Pearl harbor. We fucking killed all the Iraqis who had nothing to do with 9/11 because of 9/11. If an American installation is attacked, there will be hell to pay.

You don't think keeping a friendly port in the Black Sea out of NATO hands played a major factor?

Well considering their ground based anti ship and anti air missiles now cover that stinking pond and not a single of our ships or aircraft can overfly it…. I'd say it had a say in their decision making process.

Chem weapons are used in Syria and neither the government nor rebel forces have WMDs to fend us off with. So why exactly haven't we punished them with nukes? It's not going to happen in North Korea either, they can contrive some "Southern aggression" and freely nuke the Sorks and no one here will have the courage to strike back.

Your government won't do shit when Turkey pushes east of Manbij and "accidentally" kills US personnel shielding the Kurds, and we both know it.

Attached: Smug Turkroach.jpg (338x438, 30.33K)

Because the people that got gassed weren't Americans or a sovereign American ally you fucking retard. If south Korea is attacked we have an actual TREATY that says we will defend them. Unlike random sand niggers.

Will you do anything? Of course not. You are just another retard who will screech at us to do something about someone killing someone else and then scream at us for intervening. I'm pretty sure the fact that we aren't assisting Turkey in their little incursion would tell them that we definitely wont forgive them killing US troops.

That sounds like a massive cop out, especially after all those red lines.

Korea isn't a NATO member, there is no way we'd risk a war with China over them. Even if we won, we'd lose all our industrial production capacity which is in china, and we'd lose a CVBG or two as well. It's morally wrong to do that to America, it's tactically stupid, it's politically unacceptable, and as for strategy… the entire CVBG strategy hinges on a massive bluff, that the carriers are undefeatable. Showing they're not would basically make our navy useless, the largest and most expensive branch, just as we're undergoing a depression that makes the Great Depression look like a recession.

It's not going to happen.

Sounds like you're running scared from the roaches to me.

Attached: Trump Retreats.png (761x643 566.93 KB, 537.94K)

Situation in Turkey is a bit delicate.
Obama tried to assassinate the Turkish president and carry out a coup, to place a Muslim Brotherhood plant in power.
Trump is desperately trying to keep Turkey in NATO right now, so killing a few CIAniggers is acceptable.

Oh you.

Attached: 4d638cd20ef54d243988d840ace0fcf30a9b4f9728b8de94ca8c2dd914f0d772.png (466x496, 229.54K)

On a serrious note. Chinese CAGs are going to get slaughtered if they operate between Japan an Mainland China. Mainly cause many of the new craft be built for long area denial and not actually air superiority.

At least the chairforce has fought in an actual war.

Considering all of the problems that the US military has in general, and especially when you look at the US Navy. I hate to think about how dreadful the situation would be the minute that we're dragged into any kind of war with the other superpowers.

Speaking of allies, if that thought isn't bad enough, I'd hate to think about how the Bongs would cope. From I've heard their Royal Navy is completely fucked and their military, in general, is currently operating on a shoestring budget, at least from what I've heard. I wonder how Japan's "military" is shaping up to be?

Attached: 26bcc38a8b0d5db47b2e9cb6893b9f29022b62334d33064ea5b4f75699616581.jpg (1280x960, 193.54K)

To be fair, all the PLAN needs to do is deploy cargo ships and the USN is fucked. For those few vessels this masterful ruse doesn't work on, buzzing them with SU-24s will force the crews to surrender pretty quickly.

Attached: Best Sailors On Earth.jpg (1580x1000 107.87 KB, 243.49K)

You imply the PLA knows what it's doing. They dont.

Most of those factories that have been closed down can be reopened/repurposed in as little as 3 months probably an average of about 7 months if the job isn't rushed/botched. I know the steel mill the next city over has security/scrubbers through all the time because they're just waiting for the prices to skyrocket enough to justify reopening the facilities, not abandoning it.

Which is why we never did it, dumb frog.

Norks serve a purpose as a satellite nation. You should interpret the Chinese as having said "we will take them over ourselves if someone else if gonna do it, but we're not just gonna let anyone take them over unless they have an internationally legal reason to do so."

The militaries of all the major powers are pretty fucked, the US more than others because of the sheer size and expense of it. If actual war breaks out there will be a lot of pain felt on each side as their multibillion white elephants are knocked out by missile swarms, and there will in turn be much kvetching from Northrop-Grumman and Lockheed as militaries realize the entire military needs drastic changes in doctrine and equipment in order to be remotely functional. For this reason there's never going to be a full-on war, just more low-intensity conflicts where we waste trillions ineffectively lobbing cruise missiles at goatfuckers in tents, while the lugenpresse makes sure everyone back home is aware of what a massive threat these illiterate goatfuckers are to them, and why it's absolutely necessary to spend more money developing weapons that fail to kill them. Fuck, next thing we'll probably see is honest-to-god Floating Fortresses.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1059x832, 625.96K)

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (800x600, 968.24K)

I don't think any of you fucks actually realize how much worse off the rest of the world is militarily. But again you are just following the same lemming trend of "If its a western piece of tech then its automatically the worst thing ever" and "If its made by MUH BASED COLLAPSED COMMIE EMPIRE then it HAS to be real and live up to all of its stats!" despite every single time we have seen NATO equipment fight pact equipment it has been a completely one sided slaughter with the pact getting their ASSES handed to them. Russia lost big time in Afghanistan to US made stinger missiles. China lost big time to Vietnam despite the NVA getting nearly wiped out by their disastrous Tet offensive. Russia lost an entire motor rifle brigade in Chechnya and resorted to sinking their last functioning Kara class cruiser in the Ukraine to block off the harbor BECAUSE IT DID NOT FUNCTION. Meanwhile all's you have to say is "LE CARGO SHIP MEME! XDDDD" and "LE SERBIAN F117 SHOOT DOWN!" despite the fact that pact military disasters in peace time are the Kursk fucking exploding and killing everyone on board because their DSRV was a piece of garbage that couldn't dock to rescue the survivors.

We have a treaty that specifically states we will assist south Korea, Japan and Taiwan in the event of an attack. Sitting by and letting China do anything will destroy any credibility we would have anywhere in the world, this committing suicide. China would be committing suicide by attacking any of those three countries because they REQUIRE the US to buy their plastic crap or else their ENTIRE ECONOMY AND COUNTRY will collapse overnight.

And as for the CONSTANTLY parroted "carriers are obsolete because of muh mach six gorrillan super missiles" line I hear in every single thread and always spoken by retards that always seem to fucking forget that one: aircraft carriers have AIRCRAFT that FLY AROUND CONSTANTLY. And two: THAT YOU NEED TO LOCATE THE FLEET BEFORE YOU CAN HIT IT. They always assume that there is no AWACS, no combat air patrol, and that the redfor fleet automatically knows the position and bearing of the carrier at all times. You can have the biggest, fastest warp 10 lizard missiles ever known to man, but they are WORTHLESS if you cannot locate the fleet AND live to launch them which are things that constant AWACS and combat air patrol make very difficult.

Each and every one of you idiots are ether being payed as members of the 50 cent army to spew this obvious misinformation, or just have a retarded rape/cuckold fantasy about being "liberated by muh glorious reds!"

Attached: 55940.jpg (320x240 350.44 KB, 5.48M)

You do realize that post-cold war we found out we couldn't pen some soviet (supposedly).
nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/russias-t-72-tank-over-40-years-old-still-the-backbone-the-23280
I'm hesitant cause there's only two sources. Last I checked the Air to Air missles in Soviet BVR engagements were much better than the US but not anymore.
Your argument of the Chinese economy being collapsed overnight is not really going to happen. However, a offshore blockade is much more effective as the oil supply in China is only three days in reserve.
You also forgot to mention that Chinese media claims the type90A can pen a Abrams Which is bullshit cause the US would be rushing to replace those tanks then
We are forgetting to discuss the doctrinal issues/ production present within the Chinese systems to the US one. The USN originates from the era of wooden ships and we've been fighting with Carriers as long as they've existed. The PLAN was actually just a bunch of swimmers and fucking bamboo rafts in originality. Have you wondered why China hasn't made anything larger than a destroyer aside from these three carriers? They can't. At least we can fucking build ships we need. I guarantee you that the other carriers in production are going to have major issues that make the F-35 look good in comparison. Hell, the Chinese build missles better than fucking aircraft and ships cause they've been doing it longer!

No shit. That's what the cultural revolution(tm) does to your army when you have no QC and the NCOs can't read a fucking map and use a compass.

What killed the Soviet union wasn't the shitty military. What killed it is that as communists, somehow they forgot that the most important battle is the economic one. Even in the 60-70 where I believe Soviet Deep Battle was to a degree more effective assuming we don't go zhukov battering ram style the reason they lost was Breshnev's parity in arms fucked the Soviet economy over.

YOU CANNOT WIN A MODERN WAR IF YOUR NATION CAN'T FEED YOUR OWN PEOPLE

It's possible to be aware of the shortcomings of a powerful military as it slowly slips into decadence without immediately assuming that empire's rivals must be militarily superior. Most people are aware that late-stage Roman military was a joke compared to the height of the empire, but few of them use this information to assume that this must have been because the barbarians tribes encroaching from the north were master logisticians with a perfectly-designed military.

Most arguments have some awareness of this and assume you're firing massed AShMs instead of making just a single 360noscope shot.

A fair point, but this is true of any vessel, not something unique to carriers. No one's suggesting that all supercarriers in the world are going to be instantly targeted and shot by AShMs the moment war breaks out. Just that, ceteris parabus, a large, slow target like a carrier is going to be far more vulnerable and far more difficult to replace than a greater number of smaller, more nimble units. This isn't even unique to carriers, it's a rule that applies over nearly all aspects of the military because offensive capability has scaled much faster than defensive capability since the Middle Ages. Modern advances in materials science are making this a little less one-sided but the overall trend is still very much the same. As such, building small and fast units works out better; not only does evading being hit work otu much better than slapping on thicker armor, it's far easier for an industrial economy to churn out large numbers of smaller vessels to replace losses than invest ludicrous amounts of resources into a few slow-ass sitting targets.

Even the Turkroaches are laughing at (((Trump))) now, and this is the best you can do? Pathetic.

Attached: Right Proper Shitposter.jpg (662x393, 68.76K)