View Single Post
Old 07-24-2010, 04:05 PM  
Vendzilla
Biker Gnome
 
Vendzilla's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: cell#324
Posts: 23,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by theking View Post
How many times must I repeat myself...do they have the capability to do damage...yes. Can they take out a carrier group...no. A carrier group is always escorted by subs. Subs armed with conventional cruise missiles as well as subs armed with missiles with multiple nuclear warheads on each missile...with the capability of virtually destroying most countries on this earth.

I will remind you yet again that the U.S. has multiple carrier groups...anyone of which has the capability of virtually destroying most countries on this earth.
The newer subs have Harpoons, Subrocs and Tomahawks, not a good thing to try to piss off, thats the fast attacks, then you look at the boomers, they have ICBM's with multiple nuclear warheads that spread out over a huge area
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_ View Post
you know, i have heard this before.. IRAQ right

take a look at the scud missile problem during the iraq war.. they never really solved it, just buried the reports as the missiles were useless anyway. That isn't the case anymore.

also, i hear the nuclear armed iranian subs are working just fine
LMAO, um, I was a submariner in the Navy and that's just too funny, never bring a sword to a gun fight

Quote:
Originally Posted by theking View Post
Iran does not have any nuclear armed subs...period.
Nope, nor the tech to guide them
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_ View Post
sorry, i understand what you're trying to say, but it just isn't possible to annihilate an entire country. Even with multiple nuclear attacks, which would utterly destroy whatever reputation the states has left, it still would leave millions of pissed off moderate iranians who would never forget.

and lets create a hypothetical situation. lets say you're iranian, and you know for a fact any sort of confrontation with any of the very angry world powers directly would result in 'game over'

what would you do? would you develop a military that would meet anything punch for punch? or would you develop a military that would cause as much damage and heartache in as little time/cost as possible, while maintaining 'reputation' by not using anything non-conventional?
You've never heard of a trident submarine have you, it can take out half the continent, the power they have is fucking scary

Quote:
Originally Posted by _Richard_ View Post
err nuclear-powered, was typing fast

actually not sure about the iranian sub capability, but i know it's operational
NO it isn't they have old tired soviet diesel submarines, they can only stay underwater for maybe 6 hours tops
__________________
Carbon is not the problem, it makes up 0.041% of our atmosphere , 95% of that is from Volcanos and decomposing plants and stuff. So people in the US are responsible for 13% of the carbon in the atmosphere which 95% is not from Humans, like cars and trucks and stuff and they want to spend trillions to fix it while Solar Panel plants are powered by coal plants
think about that
Vendzilla is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote