Obama: US Launches Military Action Against Libya

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jiro said:
USA :cool2:
Click to expand...

Have fun with Elmer Fudd.

PatrickBurns-1296.jpg
 
Jiro said:
nice try



be gone, gnat :lol:
Click to expand...

But seriously, what does test have to do with maintaining the economy of a war machine? If you don't use your missiles, you can't generate demands to replace the armaments. That's what Alex is getting at. It doesn't matter if $60 million went down the drain, the workers down at the gritty factory lines will get paid to build replacements.
 
Alex said the use of the tomahawks was a waste - and it sounds like he meant both cost and reason.
Reba said it didn't cost as much as he thought it did.
Jiro said practice was necessary.
I said that annihilation is how you get it done.

Everyone stays on the island.
 
souggy said:
But seriously, what does test have to do with maintaining the economy of a war machine? If you don't use your missiles, you can't generate demands to replace the armaments. That's what Alex is getting at. It doesn't matter if $60 million went down the drain, the workers down at the gritty factory lines will get paid to build replacements.
Click to expand...

I think it was the calling of it unnecessary that tipped Jiro off, not the war machine mindset. He separated the two.
 
souggy said:
But seriously, what does test have to do with maintaining the economy of a war machine? If you don't use your missiles, you can't generate demands to replace the armaments. That's what Alex is getting at. It doesn't matter if $60 million went down the drain, the workers down at the gritty factory lines will get paid to build replacements.
Click to expand...

Exactamundo.
 
souggy said:
But seriously, what does test have to do with maintaining the economy of a war machine? If you don't use your missiles, you can't generate demands to replace the armaments. That's what Alex is getting at. It doesn't matter if $60 million went down the drain, the workers down at the gritty factory lines will get paid to build replacements.
Click to expand...

TheWriteAlex said:
Exactamundo.
Click to expand...

yak yak yak.
 
TheOracle said:
I think it was the calling of it unnecessary that tipped Jiro off, not the war machine mindset. He separated the two.
Click to expand...

What he quoted as "unnecessary" was my post about test missiles, which had nothing to do with how I feel about war or missiles in general, but on the cost of such military production and how consumerism ties into that.

If he has beef with my calling these specific missiles being launched at Libya unnecessary, then he should have quoted THAT post, and I'd be happy to engage in that debate.
 
TheWriteAlex said:
What he quoted as "unnecessary" was my post about test missiles, which had nothing to do with how I feel about war or missiles in general, but on the cost of such military production and how consumerism ties into that.

If he has beef with my calling these specific missiles being launched at Libya unnecessary, then he should have quoted THAT post, and I'd be happy to engage in that debate.
Click to expand...

Yes, I understand what you are saying. But just because an industry is bloated and spoon fed by the government doesn't mean that that industry can't produce invaluable (necessary) equipment.

So perhaps he thought about the missiles themselves, not the excess production of them?

beats a me ah. Jiro is too busy looking at midget porn to respond to this thread. :naughty:
 
TheOracle said:
Yes, I understand what you are saying. But just because an industry is bloated and spoon fed by the government doesn't mean that that industry can't produce invaluable (necessary) equipment.
Click to expand...

That's a different debate for a different thread. Let's stay on task here, which is what I've been trying to get through Jiro's thick skull since his first post on this thread.


So perhaps he thought about the missiles themselves, not the excess production of them?
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm sure that's what he thought, but that's not what I was talking about. So his argument became a logical fallacy.


beats a me ah. Jiro is too busy looking at midget porn to respond to this thread. :naughty:
Click to expand...

Don't be judgmental! lol.
 
At least he's not derailing the conversation by making it about cheating.:giggle:

Still, I see his point (if that was his point). Perhaps it was just a matter of context and tone, but now that it is cleared...how come he's not sharing the porn??
 
They had a beat up box trucks travelling through Libya painting targets. Inside these trucks are the most sophisticated surveillance equipment in the world.

I was wondering why it was taking so long. I forgot the targets had to be painted.

Some targets can be painted/observed by satellite ... but not all of them.
 
Steinhauer said:
They had a beat up box trucks travelling through Libya painting targets. Inside these trucks are the most sophisticated surveillance equipment in the world.

I was wondering why it was taking so long. I forgot the targets had to be painted.

Some targets can be painted/observed by satellite ... but not all of them.
Click to expand...

Can't they do that with spy planes?
 
TheWriteAlex said:
I know you were in the Navy, but did your experience give you access to this sort of information? If not, please provide your sources.

Those Tomahawks are propelled by jet engines and contain many highly advanced technical components that are all necessary to make it cruise and maneuver, but not necessary to make it blow things ups. Seems to me that the explosive aspect of the missile is only a fraction of the overall cost?
Click to expand...

I am Reba's source. Since I was on WWII destroyers starting in 1972, we started out with ASROC. An early Anti-Submarine Rocket launcher system. Deployed active duty ships carried the missile with nuclear warheads available and reserve ships conventional warheads. We only fired one at a target downrange. A GMM (Gunner's Mate Missle) sailor said the launcher had not been used in over 5 years.

At the same time the newer ships used the SM-1 and 2 (standard missile) for use against aircraft primarily. They were inexpensive to use so exercise firings were common.

Later still, the A/U/RGM-84 Harpoon and BGM-109 Tomahawk were the norm. The Harpoon was developed in the late 1970's as the first cruise missile. The Tomahawk developed in the 1980's is more accurate and powerful.

We were partially sailing with a deployed task force in 1989, the Harpoons were already retrofitted onto many cruisers and submarines. I got to see them up close on the Hydrofoils (PHM) out of Key West. Now all new ships and fast attack submarines are equipped with Tomahawk VLS (Vertical Launch System). They take up much less space.

Exercise firings with a "dummy" are infrequent because once a ship/submarine's equipment is test fired, there is no need to continually test as they work as designed.

Occasionally, obsolete ships are used as targets but only by other weapons such as an aircraft or MK-48 submarine torpedo.

For example, exercise missiles are not usually used near places such as North Korea or China. It sends the wrong message. :mad: Akin to me firing my pistol in the air near a robber. Never shoot unless you shoot to kill.

But hey, how do we keep the defense contractors in business? :hmm:
 
TheWriteAlex said:
Can't they do that with spy planes?
Click to expand...

unmanned drones can't tell if civvies or the enemy are near the targets.

wikileaks was all over that - even released the combat footage of a reporter getting killed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top