Discussion about hot topics trending today

[SoulReaver]

How could he? He, she or it is an anarchist.

says he/she/it/them the collective Government-worshipers

Nowadays? Our saving grace would be that we would see an upswing in hardware construction in the EU

unlike the days of WWII & Eisenhower you're now led by the military-indu$trial complex

and you don't get a say in this

Unless we use nukes, that is.

any non-nuke war between 2 "nuculer" countries would inevitably turn to a nuke one right? the losing country being the first to use them

[Gatefan1976]

Pfft! Would only take one carrier group.

Now is not the time for your American arrogance,
Or better yet, perhaps it is. You think you could take Australia with one carrier group?
Thanks for showing of your lack of political, geographic, and military knowledge.

Oh, and if you actually cared about your economics, why have 5 carrier groups instead of just one or two?
Sounds like a governmental waste of money to me.

More seriously, the military is sworn in as follows:

So is the president.

Further, the US Code of military justice has things to say about lawful orders.

First, note that "defend the constitution" is listed first and foremost, and the President & chain of command come second.
So, the military doesn't HAVE to obey, but if someone decides not to obey, they better have a damn good reason or their arse is in an iron sling.

What is your president doing to defend the constitution?
He is defending HIMSELF, not the constitution, and you are paying for it.

I mean, suppose the commander of that carrier group got some bad 'roo meat at The Outback* & decided to take out Australia. Probably be a good idea if his 2nd in command squashed that idea.

So, the "deep state" resistance, is actually doing what it is designed to do?
I love it when you torpedo your own BS, it shows exactly what you care about.

*"The Outback" is a chain of Australian themed restaurants in the U.S.)

It's probably as crap as the Texan "lone star" ones we have here.

[Annoyed]

Now is not the time for your American arrogance,
Or better yet, perhaps it is. You think you could take Australia with one carrier group?
Thanks for showing of your lack of political, geographic, and military knowledge..

Quite handily. Park it some place out of range of Australia's weapons and pound the snot out of it with missiles & air power.

I forget the details, but back around the time of the 2nd Gulf war, some thinktank did an analysis of relative military power (nuclear weapons excluded). Turned out that just one US carrier group was in 4th place among all nations.

[SoulReaver]

oh and GF not that I wanna take this offtopic but I'm really curious as how thef you managed to do this

DEFINATELY.

in all caps at that
more so than it's easier to type 2 I's in the first place

was it deliberate? I mean I know there's a lot of uneducated trumpets & neocons out there but you don't have to go that far out of your way just to be in their good books :/

[SoulReaver]

Quite handily. Park it some place out of range of Australia's weapons and pound the snot out of it with missiles & air power.

I forget the details, but back around the time of the 2nd Gulf war, some thinktank did an analysis of relative military power (nuclear weapons excluded). Turned out that just one US carrier group was in 4th place among all nations.

what makes you think your missiles have superior range to those of all other countries

[Annoyed]

what makes you think your missiles have superior range to those of all other countries

Because many other countries are using our old stuff? We do sell that crap, you know.

[SoulReaver]

Because many other countries are using our old stuff? We do sell that crap, you know.

not talking about 3rd world

[Gatefan1976]

How could he? He, she or it is an anarchist.

So, that makes him incapable of playing a game?

60 years ago, starting position wouldn't have mattered too much, the end was a forgone conclusion.

No, it wasn't, and that's more American ego talking. You are detached from Europe, same as we are from Europe. If the US was actually part of Europe, you would not have had the time, or ability to be the producer of war material, same as Australia if it were in the same boat.
If we had your population, and you had ours, we wouldn't be talking about America, we would be talking about Australia being the "decisive influence" in WW2
But we don't, so we can't.

Nowadays? Our saving grace would be that we would see an upswing in hardware construction in the EU and elsewhere, and be ready with an overwhelming response if the EU did try a strike, possibly a preventive response. With no warning, it could go either way.

Unless we use nukes, that is.

So, nukes are your answer?

[Gatefan1976]

Quite handily. Park it some place out of range of Australia's weapons and pound the snot out of it with missiles & air power.

I forget the details, but back around the time of the 2nd Gulf war, some thinktank did an analysis of relative military power (nuclear weapons excluded). Turned out that just one US carrier group was in 4th place among all nations.

You DO realise that if you can reach us, we can reach you, right?

Aside
Do you also realise that Australia is the ONLY country that has supported you in every war you have ever fought in as well, yes?

The reason you would need two carrier groups is not a question of firepower, it's a question of landmass. Australia, like the USA is simply too large for one group to cover. If you had a carrier on the left and right coasts however, you could easily crush us.
You have power, but you don't understand how to use it.
Neither does trump.

[Annoyed]

You DO realise that if you can reach us, we can reach you, right?

Aside
Do you also realise that Australia is the ONLY country that has supported you in every war you have ever fought in as well, yes?

The reason you would need two carrier groups is not a question of firepower, it's a question of landmass. Australia, like the USA is simply too large for one group to cover. If you had a carrier on the left and right coasts however, you could easily crush us.
You have power, but you don't understand how to use it.
Neither does trump.

Didn't I say that attacking Australia wasn't a good idea? This is just mental war games.

And back to the game... If it's a serious fight, does Australia have nuclear weapons? If push comes to shove, game over before it begins. You don't think a carrier has nukes?

But nukes aside. I just googled this quickly, but according to https://militarywatchmagazine.com/forceapp/countries you guys are at # 27 worldwide. One of our carrier groups was about 4th place 20 years ago.

[Gatefan1976]

Didn't I say that attacking Australia wasn't a good idea? This is just mental war games.

Ones you have failed.

And back to the game... If it's a serious fight, does Australia have nuclear weapons? If push comes to shove, game over before it begins. You don't think a carrier has nukes?

We have the most nuclear materiel of any country, your nukes are built on Australian uranium.
How quick do you think we could shift our production to nukes if the US got aggressive?
About as quick as you shifted yours to respond to pearl harbour?
No, even quicker.

But this is not the point.

But nukes aside. I just googled this quickly, but according to https://militarywatchmagazine.com/forceapp/countries you guys are at # 27 worldwide. One of our carrier groups was about 4th place 20 years ago.

Try checking on what your diplomacy is worth now.

In a flat out war, the US wins, no question and I never contested that. I just said you would need two based on landmass, a statement you have handily omitted from your response.
Perhaps it's not just about power eh?

Addendum
Why are NK and Iran still a problem for the US? They have even smaller populations than us, and you are still struggling with them.

Do we NEED to start building nukes so our ALLY doesn't attack us?
I don't even recognize the US anymore.

[Annoyed]

I'll just leave this here.

[aretood2]

Didn't I say that attacking Australia wasn't a good idea? This is just mental war games.

And back to the game... If it's a serious fight, does Australia have nuclear weapons? If push comes to shove, game over before it begins. You don't think a carrier has nukes?

But nukes aside. I just googled this quickly, but according to https://militarywatchmagazine.com/forceapp/countries you guys are at # 27 worldwide. One of our carrier groups was about 4th place 20 years ago.

There's one problem with nukes....



The thing is, nukes are a nonstarter. Attacking Australia is a fools errand. We can win the fight, but not without great effort and loss of life and, if we have someone idiotic enough to use nukes, the end of the world as we know it. Do you really think the Russians and the Chinese would just sit back and allow the US to use nukes without any repercussions?

[Annoyed]

There's one problem with nukes....



The thing is, nukes are a nonstarter. Attacking Australia is a fools errand. We can win the fight, but not without great effort and loss of life and, if we have someone idiotic enough to use nukes, the end of the world as we know it. Do you really think the Russians and the Chinese would just sit back and allow the US to use nukes without any repercussions?

This was just a theoretical strategic discussion about how the US could attack Au. Not a real desire to do so.

And I don't think Russia or China would sit idle if we attacked Au. with just conventional weapons, either.

[Annoyed]

Milk it for all its worth department...

Apparently, someone has been posting racist graffiti at Syracuse University as of late.
And the students are understandably upset about it, are staging sit-ins and making demands.

https://www.syracuse.com/syracuse-un...h-3-edits.html

Among their demands: Additional financial aid for students of color.

What the hell can possibly justify that? I thought the idea was equality and equal treatment?
Don't they realize that trying to set up special benefits for any specific group only serves to breed more racism?

Another demand: Punishment, including expulsion, for any student involved in racist incidents including perpetrators and bystanders.

So, someone who just happens to be in the area when a racist nut job does something someone considers to be racist is subject to punishment & expulsion? That's absurd.

Even the rest of their demand are unreasonable. After all, it is not school policy to act in a racist manner. The school shouldn't have to acquiesce to what is essentially a wish list.

Certainly, the student(s) or people who posted the racist crap should be apprehended, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

But as for the rest of it, the school should just tell them to get back to class and shut up. It's not the school's fault.

[Annoyed]

Ok, this is is rich. If the "enviros" are so sure of themselves, why are they suing someone who publishes views in opposition to theirs?

Seems that the National Review published an article that disagreed with them, so one of them sued the NR.


Supreme Court weighs lawsuit pitting climate scientist against skeptics

Scientists hail Mann’s lawsuit as a necessary defense against efforts to erode public confidence in the scientific consensus that climate change is an urgent threat, while free speech advocates have rallied around the iconic conservative publication.

SCOTUS is going to throw this out so far it lands on Europa.

Next June or so, whenever the SCOTUS announces its decisions for this term is certainly going to be an interesting time.

[aretood2]

Milk it for all its worth department...

Apparently, someone has been posting racist graffiti at Syracuse University as of late.
And the students are understandably upset about it, are staging sit-ins and making demands.

https://www.syracuse.com/syracuse-un...h-3-edits.html

Among their demands: Additional financial aid for students of color.

What the hell can possibly justify that? I thought the idea was equality and equal treatment?
Don't they realize that trying to set up special benefits for any specific group only serves to breed more racism?

Another demand: Punishment, including expulsion, for any student involved in racist incidents including perpetrators and bystanders.

So, someone who just happens to be in the area when a racist nut job does something someone considers to be racist is subject to punishment & expulsion? That's absurd.

Even the rest of their demand are unreasonable. After all, it is not school policy to act in a racist manner. The school shouldn't have to acquiesce to what is essentially a wish list.

Certainly, the student(s) or people who posted the racist crap should be apprehended, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

But as for the rest of it, the school should just tell them to get back to class and shut up. It's not the school's fault.

You are the same though, just on the opposite side of the same coin. This is a symptom of the demand for extreme ideological purity in political beliefs. You have to be either left or right in the correct way. If you aren't right wing the "correct" way you are a flaming liberal who hates America. You are no different than those people pushing for ideological purity on the left in some of those ivy league universities.

Ok, this is is rich. If the "enviros" are so sure of themselves, why are they suing someone who publishes views in opposition to theirs?

Seems that the National Review published an article that disagreed with them, so one of them sued the NR.


Supreme Court weighs lawsuit pitting climate scientist against skeptics



SCOTUS is going to throw this out so far it lands on Europa.

Next June or so, whenever the SCOTUS announces its decisions for this term is certainly going to be an interesting time.

It's a defamation lawsuit. Did you read the article? It's not a particularly strong case but it's about the alleged defamation against Mann. Btw, Trump is in favor of making it easier to sue for libel, slander and defamation and making those definitions broader and lightening the burden of evidence.

[Womble]

I leave this place alone for a few months, and come back to discussions of nuking Australia. Are you guys okay?

[Gatefan1976]

I leave this place alone for a few months, and come back to discussions of nuking Australia. Are you guys okay?

It was more about my assertion you would need two carrier groups to maintain control of Australia based on landmass.
Annoyed brought nukes into the picture.

BTW, nice to see you back Womble

[Annoyed]

I leave this place alone for a few months, and come back to discussions of nuking Australia. Are you guys okay?

No. Australia is still here.